There is a lot to consider here (sorry if this rambles).
@craze1cars mentioned the historically low gas prices, which is sort of true, but it was much cheaper (roughly by $1 of today's $) through most of the 90's and part of the 2000's. Many/most current commuters probably didn't endure the '80 - '85 price spike due to the oil embargo, but would remember the recent spikes in the past 8 years, which have subsided quite a bit.
https://www.advisorperspectives.com...asoline-volume-sales-and-our-changing-culture
https://i1.wp.com/inflationdata.com...5/01/Inflation-Adjusted-Gasoline-Jan-2016.jpg
But his point is still valid - a spike <<$1/gallon will not be a big crisis.
But another aspect I find interesting to consider is how much these market forces will not only affect EV/PHEV sales, but also what will the end result be with more EV/PHEV cars on the road. Does driving more efficient cars have the perverse effect of people driving more, and thus offsetting the gains. This aspect can fall under the broad topic of 'adaptive behavior'.
[off topic...]
This is easy to see on the topic of risk such as wrt driving. There have been so many innovations such as air bags, seat belt legislation, ABS, daytime running lights, crumple zones, blind spot notifications, etc., but the death rates still hover around 35K/year in the US. So one could conclude that as the risk gets reduced, people drive a little more carelessly ('moral hazard', 'Peltzman Effect'). When Sweden decided to have people switch to driving on the opposite side of the road, the death rate plummeted for 2 years and then went right back to where it was before the switch. On the other hand that high US death figure conceals the fact that there are many more miles driven per year, and so the deaths per mile driven has really dropped over the decades.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:..._VMT,_per_capita,_and_total_annual_deaths.png
Another reference to driven miles vs gasoline cost:
https://www.advisorperspectives.com...raveled-another-look-at-our-evolving-behavior
As with regards to energy, the same kind of scenario is argued by some. They say that as efficiency innovations are made it will reduce demand for energy and the costs will drop and people will actually end up using more energy than they did before the innovation ('Jevons Paradox'). I believe there is a certain amount of truth to that scenario but it only amounts to a fraction of the overall saving due to the efficiency. If you want to geek out on the Jevons Paradox:
https://xenetwork.org/ets/episodes/episode-86-is-transition-worth-it/, or just watch a brief summary:
To me it makes sense that the efficiencies with these new technologies more than make up for any subsequent rebound effect as she said, but it is interesting to think it through.
Sorry if all this is considered OT - I think they are all interrelated in terms of the effect of outside circumstances on consumer behavior. I guess I find the paradoxes of moral hazard, Jevons paradox, etc. very interesting to consider, and I tend to geek out on some of these tangential topics...