We Need More Electric Vehicles, But Extending Regulatory Incentives For EVs Is A Bad Idea
Originally published by Union of Concerned Scientists, The Equation.
By Dave Cooke, Senior Vehicles Analyst
A recent New York Times article noted that the Biden administration will be looking to use vehicle efficiency standards to boost electric vehicles sales. Our analysis shows that strong standards are the best way to accelerate toward an electric future and that we need exactly what President Biden called for: “Setting strong, clear targets where we need to go.” However, if the administration is using voluntary agreements with automakers as the basis for its proposal, as reported, we could be in for continued delay in that transformation.
Automakers continue to push for extra credit for the small number of EVs they do sell, just like the voluntary California agreements. Previous standards have already included a number of incentives for electrification, so it’s worth examining both their historical impact and their significance moving forward. This is especially important with the Biden administration set to propose new vehicle standards later this month.
What regulatory incentives are there for EVs today?
Under EPA’s vehicle emissions program, EVs are credited as having zero emissions (emitting 0 grams CO2 per mile [g/mi]). While EVs are cleaner than gasoline-powered vehicles virtually everywhere in the U.S., ignoring the emissions from the grid powering those vehicles means that every electric vehicle sold can actually reduce the global warming emissions benefits of the program in the short term because it allows automakers to sell higher emitting gasoline vehicles than they would have otherwise.
In addition to ignoring grid emissions, for model years 2017–2021, each sale of an electric vehicle is given extra credit — for example, every EV sold in model year 2017 was counted as TWO vehicles, for the purpose of compliance. These credit multipliers lead to reductions on paper towards compliance, ostensibly encouraging automakers to invest in and sell electric vehicles, but don’t actually bring down real-world emissions. Similar to ignoring grid emissions from EVs for regulatory compliance, credit multipliers allow manufacturers to sell higher-polluting gasoline vehicles the more EVs they sell.
There are additional, somewhat comparable incentives under the fuel economy program that are more complex, but the bottom line is this: these EV incentives built into the regulatory standards were intended to support early electric vehicle sales to help with long-term emissions reductions, at the cost of some additional emissions in the short term. The question now is whether this tradeoff is worth continuing.
State EV policies are a key driver of EV adoption
The complicating factor about federal regulatory incentives to spur EV adoption is that states are already leading the way. California set the first zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) sales requirements in the country, and ten states have since adopted those ZEV requirements (with more on the way).
Unsurprisingly, the states with ZEV requirements see more EV models and greater EV adoption. While complementary policies and differences in local demography may play a role, the data is clear: manufacturers preferentially distribute and sell EVs in states with ZEV policies. As a result, while so-called ZEV states make up less than 30 percent of the new car buying market, consumers in those states purchase nearly two-thirds of all EVs.
While a 2017 change in federal policy was supposed to incentivize EV sales around the country, states with zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) sales requirements are leading the way in EV adoption. Data comparing EV sales before and after those incentives show that, if anything, state ZEV policies are now doing even more to drive adoption, with ZEV states making up a larger share of EV sales since EPA’s EV multipliers took effect. Nearly 2/3 of all EVs sold are sold in ZEV states, despite them making up less than 30 percent of the total U.S. new vehicle market. And this number has increased over time, with the elimination of flexibilities like the “travel provision” and with new states like Colorado adopting ZEV standards.
The EV market is growing
While ZEV sales requirements are driving sales upwards in those states, EV sales around the country are on the rise. Are EV credit multipliers helping to drive that boost? The data raises doubts.
Apart from Tesla’s sales, which skyrocketed beginning in 2017 with the releases of the Model 3 and Model Y (which now make up more than half of all EV sales annually), EV sales have grown steadily, consistent with the pace of growth required by state ZEV policies. While there may be some additionality from federal regulatory incentives (after all, EVs are not sold exclusively in ZEV states), there has been no proportional jump in sales in response to the additional EV incentives. For automakers other than Tesla, sales have remained proportional to the number of vehicle offerings, a number which is also related to increasing state ZEV requirements (since many of those models can only be found in ZEV states).
For Tesla, it is likely that federal EV incentives have helped support growth, since the sale of overcompliance credits to EV laggards like Stellantis (fka Fiat-Chrysler) and Mercedes helps improve profit margins on their EV offerings. However, such credits are reducing the incentive for those companies themselves to invest in electrification, so it is not clear how much of a win even Tesla’s bonus credits are, on net.
EV sales in states like California which require manufacturers to sell EVs track those requirements, indicating that at most federal policy is serving to facilitate the remaining 30-35 percent of EV sales. However, that spillover to the rest of the country is largely just proportional to the number of EVs offered, a feature which is also related to increasing ZEV requirements. While Tesla saw a large spike in sales nationwide with the release of its mass market Model 3 and Model Y, no other substantial increase in sales is observable resulting from the change in EPA EV incentives in 2017. (Note: State ZEV policies are based on complex credit accumulation, so the “ZEV obligation” represents an estimated annual sales requirement taking into account the average number of credits per vehicle and flexibilities in the regulation regarding non-EV sales.)
Growth in EV sales predominantly coming from Tesla and from sales in ZEV states indicates that federal emissions regulations (applicable to all states) are not a primary driver of EV sales. So if EPA’s incentives are not driving additional sales, overcrediting EVs act simply as a windfall to manufacturers for responding to other policies and incentives. This is especially important to reflect upon when manufacturers like GM clamoring for more of those credits are doing so to undermine the state programs helping to drive adoption.
This means the so-called incentives act only to weaken the federal program, and they are doing so at a significant environmental cost. Since 2011, manufacturers have reduced lifetime fleet emissions by nearly 1 billion metric tons by responding to strong standards set under the Obama administration — however, an additional 66 million metric tons of extra EV credits were used for compliance, resulting in a relative increase in emissions and fuel use of nearly 7 percent over where we’d be without those incentives. (To the extent that the grid continues to get cleaner with time, the long-term impact will be reduced somewhat, but the broader point remains.)
EV regulatory incentives can actually REDUCE overall EV sales
While EPA’s incentives appear to have little positive impact thus far, extending those incentives could be much worse. A recent economic analysis presented at a conference on energy and economic policy noted the potential hazards of overcrediting as EV technology improves:
- Pairing an EV multiplier with a lack of accounting for grid emissions for charging EVs directly, and significantly, reduces the stringency of a standard.
- Automakers have an incentive to sell less-efficient gasoline-powered vehicles under regulations which include a higher EV credit multiplier.
- EV incentives can increase EV adoption rates when sales are small and/or technology costs are high.
- BUT as soon as electric vehicles approach being priced competitively with conventional vehicles, extra credits become likely to decrease EV market share because fewer EVs are needed to comply.
While those first three points are all reasonably intuitive, it is that fourth point which has the most impact as we look to the next generation of fuel economy and emissions standards to help drive the industry towards our climate goals — offering extra credits for EVs could actually reduce the incentive to sell more of them.
UCS modeling shows that setting strong federal standards without specific EV incentives would save consumers tens of billions of dollars more than the type of credit-heavy proposal offered by industry, protecting lives, increasing jobs, and leading to more electric vehicles in the process. (For more details, see this blog.)
This data is consistent with our own analysis, which showed that extending EV credit multipliers would lead to fewer EVs on the road. As both analyses show, any EV sales with all these extra credits drastically reduces the overall stringency of the standard a manufacturer must meet — this reduction in stringency reduces the need for technology deployment to meet the standard (it’s easier), allowing for manufacturers to increase sales of gasoline-powered vehicles at the expense of more EVs.
On top of this, those remaining internal combustion engine vehicles are less efficient than they otherwise would have been, which is particularly problematic when EVs are still a small (but growing) share of the overall new car market. While this may be a gold mine for automakers, it’s disastrous for the environment. Clearly, we need a new direction.
The best way to get more EVs nationwide is setting strong standards
EVs are on the cusp of cost parity, and manufacturers are offering more and more models, including in popular vehicle classes like crossovers and pick-ups. This puts the industry poised to accelerate the transition to electrification. But as we move through that transition, we need to be driving emissions down in our gasoline-powered cars and trucks as well.
The best way to maximize emissions reductions as we move towards a more sustainable fleet is to set standards that are based on the real-world performance of these vehicles and ensure emissions are being reduced across the entire new vehicle fleet. The types of bonus credits manufacturers have asked for push us in the wrong direction, undermine emissions reductions, and are counterproductive for electrifying the transportation system.
Vehicles sold in the next few years will remain on the road for nearly two decades, impacting the climate for many more years to come. As the current administration moves forward to right the wrongs of the previous administration, we need to learn from the data and develop strong policies that will drive the industry forward, not policies with the kinds of hand-outs that have repeatedly delayed climate action. While we need to electrify passenger cars and trucks as quickly as possible, it is critical that our fuel economy and emissions standards not just help accelerate that transition, but do so while driving continued improvements in gasoline-powered vehicles as well.
Disney’s Autopia ride has been making headlines recently, after a park spokesperson told the LA Times that the park is “evaluating technology that will enable us to convert from gas engines in the next few years.” But activists want to put the pressure on to ensure that Disney goes all-EV with the ride, and fast.
The news was reported in many outlets suggesting that Disney is going all-electric with Autopia, but unfortunately, Disney’s statement is a little noncommittal and open on that front. We’ve seen a lot of automakers call 100% gas-powered hybrids as “electrified,” and given that Disney was nonspecific about both its timeline and powertrain source, there’s still room for pressure to ensure that Disney goes with an all-electric choice.
Autopia is a classic ride in Disneyland’s “Tomorrowland” area, but given the EV world we’re living in, its stinky gas-powered cars certainly don’t seem too futuristic.
Until 2016, Autopia vehicles were noisy, polluting two-stroke engines. Two-stroke engines differ from four-stroke in that they can create more power in small formats, but are much dirtier because the combustion process is less complete in a two-stroke engine, and thus exhaust contains ~30x higher levels of particulate emissions (for example, running a two-stroke gas leafblower for one hour can make as many poisonous emissions as driving a passenger car 1,100 miles).
The emissions from these engines cause smog and harm the health of those who breathe them – so putting them directly in front of small children isn’t the best idea. But the ride was sponsored by Chevron from 1998-2012, and that company is pretty dedicated to poisoning small children anyway, so it was apt.
Thankfully, in 2012, Disney attracted a new sponsor, Honda, and in 2016, Honda upgraded the engines to small four-stroke engines, reducing noise and pollution significantly. However, the cars still create exhaust, which is still poisonous to the children riding behind these polluting engines. It’s also poisonous to employees, to the point where Disney pays hazard pay to employees who are assigned to staff the ride.
2016 was also notably after EVs had proven themselves in the automotive realm. So upgrading to an old technology seems a little inappropriate for “Tomorrowland.” But Honda themselves have been behind the ball on the EV transition as well.
Tomorrowland is the section within Disneyland which was meant to show visions of the future. It first opened in 1955, and offers a time capsule of what a 1950s vision of the future might have looked like.
Needless to say, in the seven decades hence, things have changed somewhat. To the point where the original designer of the Autopia cars, Bob Gurr, who is now 92 and was interviewed by the LA Times, said “get rid of those God-awful gasoline fumes.”
It’s certainly ironic that in California, where EVs keep setting sales records and where you can’t even buy gas-powered “small off-road engines” anymore, a Disneyland parkgoer might drive to the park in a clean EV, only to show their children a vision of the past with a poisonous, low-performing gas engine on one of the admittedly more-fun rides in the park. Just imagine how much more fun the ride could be if it were electric.
And Disney could do a lot more to update Tomorrowland with actual visions of the future, rather than an old-timey time capsule. The original Tomorrowland featured a “Carousel of Progress” show of futuristic efficient home appliances, and the Monorail and PeopleMover which both still exist. Disney could showcase more public transport or other post-car mobility options, ideas for futuristic city planning, induction cooktops and more.
But for now, making Autopia electric seems like incredibly low-hanging fruit. Electric go-karts are nothing new, and while Disney’s commitment to move away from gas in the “next few years” is good to hear, it’s been a long time coming, and now isn’t the time to wait.
To this end, local EV advocates and Plug In America are hosting a “Dump the Pump” rally this Sunday, April 21 at 10am at Walt Disney Studios in Burbank. Not a bad way to spend Earth Day weekend, perhaps after attending one of the LA-area Drive Electric Earth Month events the day before (and one of the founders of Drive Electric Week, Zan Dubin-Scott, is organizing the Burbank rally).
Given Disney’s 2030 net-zero pledge (which is ambitious compared to many companies), it’s about time they ditch gas at Autopia – and not just in the “next few years,” but maybe before next Earth Day rolls around. How about it?
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Another affordable electric car is set to be unveiled later this year as Nissan looks to boost EV sales. Nissan will unveil a new Micra EV as its newest low-cost electric car.
Nissan has been teasing an electric Micra successor for several years now. The new EV was previewed as part of the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi alliance.
Over two years ago, the company claimed, “This all-new model will be designed by Nissan and engineered and manufactured by Renault using our new common platform.”
The entry-level EV was part of the Alliance’s plans to invest 23 billion euros ($24.5 billion) over a five-year period to kick off its EV offensive. Nissan unveiled its own business update last month as it looks to cut costs and introduce affordable EVs.
Nissan’s new “Arc” business plan aims for “significant next-generation EV cost reduction” through its partnerships and technology.
The automaker is preparing to launch five new electric cars soon. In November, Nissan revealed an up to £3bn ($3.8B) investment to build three new EVs at its Sunderland factory, including an electric Juke, Qashqai, and its LEAF successor.
Nissan Micra EV to arrive as a new low-cost option
However, Nissan will kick things off with the Micra EV, which will be unveiled later this year. It will be Nissan’s latest low-cost electric car as it looks to satisfy growing demand.
Although Nissan has yet to reveal full details, it’s expected to ride on the same AmpR Small Platform used to power the Renault 5. The Renault features up to 249 miles range from a 52 kWh battery, and the Nissan Micra EV is expected to boast similar numbers.
It could also offer smaller battery options, like 40 kWh, good for 186 miles range, at a lower price point.
According to Auto Express, the Micra EV will be the first of Nissan’s new electric car lineup. The new low-cost EVs’ design is expected to be closer to that of the Ariya, as sources have also indicated with the new LEAF.
Nissan said it aims to reduce the costs of its new electric models by 30% by developing “EVs in families, integrating powertrains, utilizing next-gen manufacturing, group sourcing, and battery innovations.”
The automaker expects that by focusing on these areas, its electric cars will achieve price parity with gas-power vehicles by 2030 (if not sooner).
Nissan also plans to introduce new EV batteries, such as all-solid-state, to gain a competitive advantage. It kicked off construction on its new all-solid-state EV battery pilot line this week.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Washington State’s energy board cut the size of what would have been the state’s largest wind farm in half yesterday – here’s why.
Wind farm controversy in Washington State
The $1.7 billion, 1,150-megawatt (MW) Horse Heaven Clean Energy Center combines wind, solar, and battery storage. The original plan was for the project to feature 244 wind turbines across 24 miles of hills, and three solar farms over 5,447 acres south of the Tri-Cities, near the Oregon border.
But Horse Heaven has been stuck at the permitting stage with the seven-person Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) for the last three years. Yesterday, the EFSEC voted 5-2 in favor of a rule stating that new wind turbines could not be located within two miles of the nests of endangered ferruginous hawks.
The ferruginous hawk is classified as a Priority Species whose habitats need protection, and its nests can be found throughout the planning area. The nests often sit empty, but North America’s largest hawk is known to return to its nests after years pass.
The Audubon Society – which states on its website that it “strongly supports wind energy that is sited and operated properly to avoid, minimize, and mitigate effectively for the impacts on birds, other wildlife, and the places they need now and in the future” – supports the EFSEC’s decision.
So that decision effectively cuts the number of Horse Heaven’s wind turbines in half. Understandably, Horse Heaven’s developer, Colorado-based Scout Clean Energy, isn’t happy. But the company can appeal the decision to the EFSEC. If that fails, then the case goes to Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA), who will make the final decision.
With 3.4 GW of capacity, wind power is the second-largest contributor to the state’s renewable electricity generation, behind hydroelectricity, which supplies 60% of Washington’s total electricity net generation. In 2023, wind provided almost 8% of the state’s power.
Washington State is No 3 in the US for renewable generation overall, behind California and Texas. But natural gas is the second-largest in-state source of net generation, fueling about 18% of Washington’s total electricity generation in 2023, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA).
By 2045, 100% of all electricity sold to Washington State customers must come from renewable or non-emitting sources.
Electrek’s Take
The EFSEC wanting the number of turbines reduced to protect an endangered hawk seems like a fair decision. The Audubon Society is very pro-wind power – they know that wind turbines aren’t the things that kill the most birds. No 1 is cats, No 2 is windows, and ultimately it’s climate change. So its support of the Horse Heaven decision carries weight.
The Yakama Nation isn’t in favor of the wind farm, either, citing damage to the hills’ cultural and historical significance. So it will be interesting to see what Inslee ultimately decides.
Washington is legally committed to achieving net zero by 2045, so they’ll ultimately have to figure it out.
Read more: Washington passes bill to target all EV sales by 2030 – for real this time
To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to 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. They have 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 you share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports1 year ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Environment11 months agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports6 months agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Technology3 years ago
Game consoles were once banned in China. Now Chinese developers want a slice of the $49 billion pie
-
Politics2 years ago
Have the last few wobbly weeks seen a turning point for Johnson as PM?