Electric buses (e-buses), e-vans, and e-trucks have the potential to improve both affordability and sustainability in transportation. With their higher annual kilometers traveled (AKT), these vehicles can significantly reduce emissions. Additionally, converting conventional motorcycles (CMs) to electric motorcycles (EMs) can directly lower the number of CMs on the road. However, studies on the total cost of ownership (TCO) of these types of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) remain limited in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Our study fills this gap by comparing the TCO of BEVs with their equivalent internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles across ASEAN countries. We calculate the TCO by summing the equity, loan installments, and operational and maintenance costs, then subtracting the vehicle's residual value. The cost inputs vary by country, depending on factors such as tax regulations, energy prices, incentives, interest rates, and other specific costs. Results show that e-buses generally have higher TCOs than ICE buses, except in Singapore. For e-trucks, the TCO remains higher due to the initial purchase costs. In contrast, e-vans typically have lower TCOs than ICE vans, except in Brunei Darussalam, where fuel prices are the lowest in ASEAN. Additionally, the TCO for converted EMs is lower than that of CMs. Our study also explores the potential for battery leasing and offers policy recommendations to improve cost competitiveness of BEVs. These insights provide valuable guidance for policymakers and stakeholders in advancing BEV adoption in ASEAN.

Buildings are key in supporting human activities and well-being by providing shelter and other important services to their users. Buildings are, however, also responsible for major energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during their life cycle. Improving the quality of services provided by buildings while reaching low energy demand (LED) levels is crucial for climate and sustainability targets. Building sector models have become essential tools for decision support on strategies to reduce energy demand and GHG emissions. Yet current models have significant limitations in their ability to assess the transformations required for LED. We review building sector models ranging from the subnational to the global scale to identify best practices and critical gaps in representing transformations toward LED futures. We focus on three key dimensions of intervention (socio-behavioral, infrastructural, and technological), three megatrends (digitalization, sharing economy, and circular economy), and decent living standards. This review recommends the model developments needed to better assess LED transformations in buildings and support decision-making toward sustainability targets.