One-quarter of participants in a study of Australian home life said they couldn’t afford the costs of owning an electric vehicle, from the purchase price to maintenance and charger installation. Income shaped who could join the energy transition: just 4 per cent of people earning less than $40,000 said they used or intended to own an EV, compared with 22 per cent of those earning more than $241,000.
Liza, from Tasmania, put it plainly: EVs were a great idea, but “they’re so bloody expensive.” A new electric car sat beyond her financial reach. Wendy, from the ACT, said, “I feel like saying Canberra is the Tesla town … People here may be able to afford electric cars, but I don’t know, well, I can’t, but how are people going to afford these new technologies?” Electricity generation and delivery may be changing, but access to the technology remains sharply divided by income.
Who Can Afford the Transition
The Foresights for Future Australian Home Life report drew on 49 participants from varied backgrounds across the country. Monash University researchers carried out the study over three years. It found that solar adoption also rose with income. Households earning under $80,000 were more likely to say they had no intention of installing solar.
One in three Australian homes has rooftop solar, and about 300,000 systems go in each year. Yet some participants said they felt shut out of the energy transition, including EV and solar purchases, because the technologies seemed aimed at more affluent groups.
The Electric Vehicle Council said Australia was selling an electric vehicle every 100 seconds and projected EVs would account for almost one-quarter of all new car sales that year. About one-third of households that owned or planned to buy an EV or plug-in hybrid wanted affordable charging options, including solar power or off-peak electricity tariffs. People want cheaper access. The price barrier remains.
Ravi, from Victoria, said, “We would love to charge at home. We don’t want to go outside and wait for hours.” He added, “It’s better to … if we have that, we’ll get it charged at home.” Home charging appeals to participants. Not every household can afford it or make it work.
Home as Workplace and Support
Half of the surveyed households had one member working from home at least once a week. Jane, from Victoria, said working from home meant she didn’t have to worry about traffic or a cancelled train. She also said she has a disability and public transport isn’t viable for her much of the time.
Andrew, from South Australia, said working from home let him drop off and pick up his children, leave to attend to something at home such as an electrician, and keep working without rescheduling his whole life. Participants described fitting an office area alongside other parts of the home, scheduling work and childcare around one another. Their accounts show how control over space and time matters in everyday life.
Flexible Rooms, Unequal Options
Professor Sarah Pink said people pictured their next home with more space for a dedicated work-from-home room. University of Sydney associate professor of building science Jungsoo Kim said new homes could instead use space more efficiently, with flexible areas or spatial separation for work alongside other household activities.
Kim said adaptable rooms or zones could offer visual and acoustic separation when needed, as well as daylight, ventilation, thermal comfort and access to power. Some people need privacy for concentration, meetings or confidential conversations; others work effectively in shared, open areas, he said. In smaller homes, flexible spaces for living and working could be more practical than a dedicated office. Movable screens, curtains, compact furniture, good storage and task lighting could create separation without an extra room.
“The cost-of-living crisis is an important dimension [in the energy transition],” Professor Pink said. She said one participant imagined possibly living in their car in the future rather than being able to purchase an electric vehicle. Researchers are studying how people will live at home and use energy. The price figures and participants’ accounts mark the fault line: new technologies and better-suited home spaces are possibilities, but income determines who can reach them.