With more options than ever, driving an electric vehicle has never been more affordable. As new EVs hit the market, the lease deals are heating up. Here are all the EVs you can lease for under $300 a month this September.
A record 330,463 electric vehicles were sold in the US in the second quarter. According to Kelley Blue Book, EVs accounted for 8% of total new vehicle sales in Q2, up from 7.1% in the first three months of 2024.
The growth was driven by the influx of new models, massive discounts, and higher leasing rates. A big factor behind leasing is the ability to pass on the $7,500 federal tax credit to lessees.
Most automakers are slapping the $7,500 on top of additional incentives like lease bonus cash, conquest, and loyalty offers. In total, the savings amount to over $10,000 in many cases.
According to Motor Intelligence, Kia’s new three-row EV9 SUV sold with an average discount of over $19,700 in July. The Honda Prologue and Volkswagen sold with an average discount of $7,035 and $13,015, respectively.
Kia EV9 GT-Line (Source: Kia)
EVs you can lease for under $300 a month in September
As the discounts continue to pile up, several EVs are available to lease for under $300, even $200 a month this September. According to an analysis from online auto research firm CarsDirect, here are some of the best electric vehicle lease deals this month (find deals in your area at the bottom).
For smaller (subcompact) SUVs, the 2024 Kia Niro Wind EV is listed at $169 for 24 months. With $3,999 due at signing, it has an effective cost of $336 per month.
Kia Niro EV (Source: Kia)
Although that may sound intriguing, other electric models are available at even more affordable monthly rates.
For example, the 2024 Honda Prologue EX at $269 for 36 months. With only $1,999 due at signing, Honda’s electric SUV can be leased for an effective rate of $325 a month.
2024 Honda Prologue Elite (Source: Honda)
The Prologue EX also has a range of up to 296 miles, compared to the Niro EV, which has an EPA-estimated 253-mile driving range. Despite the Prologue’s higher starting price ($47,400 vs $39,600), Honda offers more incentives, including a loyalty (or conquest) bonus.
Volkswagen’s ID.4 is available for $219 for 36 months. With $3,499 due at signing, the 2024 Volkswagen ID.4 Standard has an effective cost of $316 per month.
Electric Vehicle
Monthly Rate
Term (months)
Due at Signing
2024 Kia Niro Wind EV
$169
24
$3,999
2024 VinFast VF 8
$199
36
$894
2024 Kia EV6
$209
24
$3,999
2024 Hyundai IONIQ 5
$209
33
$3,999
2024 Volkswagen ID.4
$219
36
$3,499
2024 Honda Prologue
$269
36
$1,999
2024 Hyundai IONIQ 6
$299
33
$3,999
EVs for lease under $300 per month in September 2024
After unveiling the updated US-built 2025 model, Hyundai’s IONIQ 5 is one of the best EVs to lease in September.
The 2024 Hyundai IONIQ 5 SEL RWD is listed at $209 for 33 months. With $3,999 due upfront, you can drive off in a new IONIQ 5 for $330 a month.
2024 Hyundai IONIQ 5 (Source: Hyundai)
Hyundai’s electric fastback, the IONIQ 6, is listed at $299 for 33 months. The 2024 IONIQ 6 SEL RWD, with $3,999 due at signing, has an effective cost of $420 per month.
Its third EV, the Kona Electric, is slightly more expensive at $362 for 24 months. That’s for the 2025 Kona SEL EV with up to 261 miles range. With $1,991 due upfront, the Kona EV costs $445 a month.
2024 Kia EV6 (Source: Kia)
Kia’s EV6 is another top EV lease option this month. The 2024 Kia EV6 Light Long Range RWD is listed at just $209 for 24 months. Kia states that $3,999 is due at signing, amounting to a $376 monthly rate.
After Kia introduced a new Tesla Conquest Cash discount, Tesla drivers (buyers and lessees) can score an extra $1,500 off the EV9 and $1,000 off the EV6.
With the discount, Kia’s EV6 is even cheaper to lease than a Soul at just $179 per month ($346 effective rate) despite costing more than double.
Although not on the list, the Subaru Solterra is also a steal in September. The 2024 Subaru Solterra Premium starts at $329 per month (36 months) with no money down.
Ready to save big? We can help you get started. Check out our links below to find deals on EVs in your area.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The new version is extremely disappointing as it is $9,000 more expensive than the Cybertruck RWD was supposed to be, and while it has more range than originally planned, Tesla has removed a ton of features, including some important ones.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Here’s what you lose with the Cybertruck RWD:
You get a single motor RWD instead of Dual Motor AWD
You lose the adaptive air suspension
No motorized tonneau, but you have an optional $750 soft tonneau
Textile seats instead of vegan leather
Fewer speakers
No rear screen for the backseat
No power outlets in the bed
The last one has been pretty disappointing, as it can’t be that expensive to include, and Tesla is basically removing $20,000 worth of features for only a $10,000 difference with the Dual Motor Cybertruck.
But the automaker appears to have come up with a partial solution.
Tesla has launched a $80 ‘Powershare Outlet Adapter’ on its online store:
When combined with Tesla’s Gen 3 Mobile Connector plugged into the Cybertruck’s charge port, it gives you two 120V 20A power outlets.
Tesla describes the product:
Powershare Outlet Adapter allows you to power electronic devices using Mobile Connector and your Powershare-equipped vehicle’s battery. To use this adapter, plug Mobile Connector’s handle into your Powershare-equipped vehicle’s charge port and connect the adapter to the other end of your Mobile Connector. You can then use this adapter to plug in any compatible electronic device you want to power.
For now, Tesla says that this only works for the Cybertruck and you have to buy the $300 mobile charging connector, which doesn’t come with the truck.
Electrek’s Take
I guess it’s better than nothing, but I’m still super disappointed in the new trim. It makes no sense right now.
Not only you lose the 2x 120V, 1x 240V outlets in the bed, but you also lose the 2x 120V outlets in the cabin. Now, you can can pay $380 to have a “Macgyver” solution for 2 120V outlets in the back.
I’m convinced that Tesla designed this trim simply to make the $80,000 Cybertruck AWD look better value-wise.
It looks like Tesla took out about $20,000 worth of features while giving buyers only a $10,000 discount.
It’s just the latest example of Tesla losing its edge.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The International Maritime Organization, a UN agency which regulates maritime transport, has voted to implement a global cap on carbon emissions from ocean shipping and a penalty on entities that exceed that limit.
After a weeklong meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the IMO and decades of talks, countries have voted to implement binding carbon reduction targets including a gradually-reducing cap on emissions and associated penalties for exceeding that cap.
Previously, the IMO made another significant environmental move when it transitioned the entire shipping industry to lower-sulfur fuels in 2020, moving towards improving a longstanding issue with large ships outputting extremely high levels of sulfur dioxide emissions, which harm human health and cause acid rain.
Today’s agreement makes the shipping industry the first sector to agree on an internationally mandated target to reduce emissions along with a global carbon price.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
The agreement includes standards for greenhouse gas intensity from maritime shipping fuels, with those standards starting in 2028 and reducing through 2035. The end goal is to reach net-zero emissions in shipping by 2050.
Companies that exceed the carbon limits set by the standard will have to pay either $100 or $380 per excess ton of emissions, depending on how much they exceed limits by. These numbers are roughly in line with the commonly-accepted social cost of carbon, which is an attempt to set the equivalent cost borne by society by every ton of carbon pollution.
Money from these penalties will be put into a fund that will reward lower-emissions ships, research into cleaner fuels, and support nations that are vulnerable to climate change.
That means that this agreement represents a global “carbon price” – an attempt to make polluters pay the costs that they shift onto everyone else by polluting.
Why carbon prices matter
The necessity of a carbon price has long been acknowledged by virtually every economist. In economic terms, pollution is called a “negative externality,” where a certain action imposes costs on a party that isn’t responsible for the action itself. That action can be thought of as a subsidy – it’s a cost imposed by the polluter that isn’t being paid by the polluter, but rather by everyone else.
Externalities distort a market because they allow certain companies to get away with cheaper costs than they should otherwise have. And a carbon price is an attempt to properly price that externality, to internalize it to the polluter in question, so that they are no longer being subsidized by everyone else’s lungs. This also incentivizes carbon reductions, because if you can make something more cleanly, you can make it more cheaply.
Many people have suggested implementing a carbon price, including former republican leadership (before the party forgot literally everything about how economics works), but political leadership has been hesitant to do what’s needed because it fears the inevitable political backlash driven by well-funded propaganda entities in the oil industry.
For that reason, most carbon pricing schemes have focused on industrial processes, rather than consumer goods. This is currently happening in Canada, which recently (unwisely) retreated from its consumer carbon price but still maintains a price on the largest polluters in the oil industry.
But until today’s agreement by the IMO, there had been no global agreement of the same in any industry. There are single-country carbon prices, and international agreements between certain countries or subnational entities, often in the form of “cap-and-trade” agreements which implement penalties, and where companies that reduce emissions earn credits that they can then sell to companies that exceed limits (California has a similar program in partnership with with Quebec), but no previous global carbon price in any industry.
Carbon prices opposed by enemies of life on Earth
Unsurprisingly, entities that favor destruction of life on Earth, such as the oil industry and those representing it (Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the bought-and-paid oil stooge who is illegally squatting in the US Oval Office), opposed these measures, claiming they would be “unworkable.”
Meanwhile, island nations whose entire existence is threatened by climate change (along with the ~2 billion people who will have to relocate by the end of the century due to rising seas) correctly said that the move isn’t strong enough, and that even stronger action is needed to avoid the worse effects of climate change.
The island nations’ position is backed by science, the oil companies’ position is not.
While these new standards are historic and need to be lauded as the first agreement of their kind, there is still more work to be done and incentives that need to be offered to ensure that greener technologies are available to help fulfill the targets. Jesse Fahnestock, Director of Decarbonisation at the Global Maritime Forum, said:
While the targets are a step forward, they will need to be improved if they are to drive the rapid fuel shift that will enable the maritime sector to reach net zero by 2050. While we applaud the progress made, meeting the targets will require immediate and decisive investments in green fuel technology and infrastructure. The IMO will have opportunities to make these regulations more impactful over time, and national and regional policies also need to prioritise scalable e-fuels and the infrastructure needed for long-term decarbonisation.
One potential solution could be IMO’s “green corridors,” attempts to establish net-zero-emission shipping routes well in advance of the IMO’s 2050 net-zero target.
And, of course, this is only one industry, and one with a relatively low contribution to global emissions. While the vast majority of global goods are shipped over the ocean, it’s still responsible for only around 3% of global emissions. To see the large emissions reductions we need to avoid the worst effects of climate change, other more-polluting sectors – like automotive, agriculture (specifically animal agriculture), construction and heating – all could use their own carbon price to help add a forcing factor to drive down their emissions.
Lets hope that the IMO’s move sets that example, and we see more of these industries doing the right thing going forward (and ignoring those enemies of life on Earth listed above).
The agreement still has to go through a final step of approval on October, but this looks likely to happen.
Even without a carbon price, many homeowners can save money on their electricity bills today by going solar. And if you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
In the Electrek Podcast, we discuss the most popular news in the world of sustainable transport and energy. In this week’s episode, we discuss the new Tesla Cybertruck RWD, more tariff mayhem, Lucid buying Nikola, and more.
As a reminder, we’ll have an accompanying post, like this one, on the site with an embedded link to the live stream. Head to the YouTube channel to get your questions and comments in.
After the show ends at around 5 p.m. ET, the video will be archived on YouTube and the audio on all your favorite podcast apps:
Advertisement – scroll for more content
We now have a Patreon if you want to help us avoid more ads and invest more in our content. We have some awesome gifts for our Patreons and more coming.
Here are a few of the articles that we will discuss during the podcast:
Here’s the live stream for today’s episode starting at 4:00 p.m. ET (or the video after 5 p.m. ET):
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.