California’s new building codes will require EV chargers in most new overnight parking spots starting in 2026, going a big way towards solving the only actual problem with EVs.
One of the main benefits of an electric vehicle is in the convenience of owning and charging the car. Instead of having to go out of your way to fuel it, you just park it at home, in the same place it spends at least 8 hours a day, and you leave the house every day with a full charge.
But this benefit only applies to those with a consistent parking space which they can easily install charging at – like a garage or a driveway, or perhaps a charger at work. When talking about owners who live in apartment buildings, it can sometimes get more complicated.
While certain states have passed “right to charge” laws to give apartment-dwellers a solution for home charging, apartment charging is nevertheless a bit of a patchwork solution so far.
But in California a fix is about to come, in the form of new building codes with sweeping EV charging requirements, ensuring that a huge percentage of new parking spots in California will have to be ready for EV charging.
New building codes mean huge increase in charging points
California building codes already required a lesser percentage of units to be “EV ready,” depending on the size of the development. But now, the new rules require at least one charger per unit, in most cases.
For any new unit with a parking space in a multi-family development (apartments/condos), at least one of the parking spots must be “EV Ready.” An EV Ready space is defined as having at least a 240V/20A outlet or charger for EV charging, either with a standardized outlet (NEMA 6-20, 14-30 or 14-50) or a J1772 or J3400 (NACS) charger.
However, EV ready spaces are allowed to share power between them, as we saw in one recent condo project we highlighted, as long as the system can provide a minimum of 3.3kW simultaneously to each unit. That project happened with a final cost of $405/space, though that was after a $2k/space incentive from the utility – still, quite cheap to wire up an entire apartment complex.
If the parking space is the unit’s own space, the new rules say it should be on a separate circuit wired to that unit’s electrical panel “when feasible” (a phrase that will likely do some heavy lifting in power-sharing situations). If the space is shared, then at least one EV ready space needs to exist per unit. If there are more parking spaces than there are units, at least 25% of the excess need to be EV ready (and there are options for individual cities to increase this requirement).
But the rules go on from there – beyond multi-family developments, they also apply to hotels. A new hotel or motel must have 65% EV-ready parking spaces, with an option for cities to increase that requirement to 100%.
Even non-residential parking lots have new EV requirements. 20% of spaces in any commercial, office or retail lot must be EV ready, with an option for cities to increase the requirement to 30% or 45%. In these cases though, property owners can install DC fast charging to get “extra credit” and reduce the number of lower-powered spaces required.
Presumably, this will incentivize an increase in the number of public DC charging spaces, which should make DC charging on the road just that much easier (even though it’s already pretty easy in California).
Finally, the rules don’t just apply to entirely new developments, but to any added parking on an existing development. Any time a parking space is added or altered in a way that requires a building permit, that space must be EV ready.
This last point is important – not only do new developments get covered by the codes, but we’ll gradually see older developments having to add EV charging as time goes on and they make renovations or improvements. This includes new solar canopy parking projects, which are required to add chargers, but doesn’t include retrofits of existing parking lots that add level 1 charging – they’re exempted from the minimum 240v/20a/3.3kW service requirements.
A positive reaction from advocacy groups
We spoke to a number of organizations about these changes, and everyone seems quite happy. Peninsula Clean Energy, a utility in the SF Bay Area, said the new rules are a “HUGE win,” highlighting how the success of local building codes (like Bay Area Reach Codes) helped push the state to ramp up from its previous incremental approach in setting regulations.
PCE highlighted that the “advocacy community” pushed hard for these regulations – namely, the EV Charging for All Coalition, who were the first to bring this news to our attention. EVCAC consists of EV advocates and environmental organizations who realized that building codes were a relatively underfocused area where a lot of progress could be made, and started pushing the state to accelerate improvement of its codes.
We talked to Sven Thesen, one of EVCAC’s co-founders, who highlighted that a “small group of dedicated individuals” were able to stand up against the glacial pace of change and resistance from the building industry “to get something much faster out there that needed to be out there. And it’s a win-win for everybody.”
Thesen highlighted that while this is a strong goal, it’s not excessive – the focus was on right-sizing installations, allowing for lower-power Level 2, power-sharing, and Level 1 retrofits to ensure that everyone has a charging option, but that systems aren’t oversized.
The new rules were finalized in a unanimous vote Tuesday, and will go into effect at the start of 2026 – just over a year away. And all of this can’t come soon enough – given that California also wants to ensure that all new cars have a plug as early as 2035, building codes like these need to be in place ahead of time so there’s time for them to percolate through the housing stock and make sure those EVs will have a place to charge.
In that story, I said “and, frankly, we also need legislation/building codes to hop in and require this sort of thing.” And here we are, two weeks later, and I got exactly what I asked for. Well ain’t that just a Merry freakin’ Christmas!
One note on cost: while I’m rarely sympathetic to the desires of big residential developers, who seem pathologically opposed to any sort of minimum guidelines for construction and always looking to cut corners (often putting them at odds with the state of California), it is true that California is an expensive place to build, and that’s not a problem we want to contribute more to.
But what’s great about these codes is that while they do require minimum standards, they seem open to allowing some flexibility on feasibility. A strict requirement of a certain amount of power per unit, each set up on a separate circuit, would likely still be a drop in the bucket for new developments in already-expensive California – but making lower-power installations possible, especially for existing developments without triggering new-build requirements, is a great middle ground.
So I’m in agreement with Thesen from the EVCAC that these codes strike the right balance of ensuring minimum standards for EV charging while also keeping costs reasonable and not unduly burdening multi-family developments – which are something that California desperately needs. There’s a lot of low-density, car-dependent areas in California, and we don’t want to make it too hard to build higher density neighborhoods, so we can hopefully start working towards more walkability and less car dependence.
But the codes also include some measures to help in that respect – by adjusting requirements for bicycle parking. Instead of basing bike rack requirements on motor vehicle traffic, the rules now base them on square footage, which helps to decouple these rules from their current car-centric mentality. It also eliminates an exception which allowed developments to get out of offering bike parking.
Between these two moves, it should go a long way towards solving the one real problem with EVs.
But if you *do* have your own garage and roof, consider charging your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
New car buyers like to talk about the latest tech and resale value, but most people don’t buy new cars. The used car market is 3x bigger than new, and if you’re content to let the last guy take that big depreciation hit by scoring a great deal on a reliable, low-mile used car you could save thousands on your next EV.
But looking into the data shows trends that are much closer to the kind of think you’d expect to see before COVID, with high-end luxury models like S-Class Mercedes that trade on being new and shiny taking massive depreciation hits and more mainstream offerings from brands like Toyota and Honda that trade on economy and reliability holding strong.
That usual luxury brand hit seems like it’s being compounded over at Tesla, where Elon Musk’s highly publicized political leanings have polarized support for the brand, and alienated a huge portion of the market. Demand for new and used Tesla vehicles has plummeted, and iSeeCars reports that the Tesla Model S suffered the biggest percentage price drop of all makes and models over the last twelve months, showing the pioneering electric sedan’s average price in June 2025 at $46,700, nearly 16%, or $8,800 lower than it was 12 just months earlier.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
This isn’t a post about Tesla, though (not intentionally, at least). Instead, it’s about those EVs that have lost the most value since they were first sold new five-ish years ago. So, if you’re looking for a great deal on a pre-loved EV, you could do a lot worse than the list, below, presented in order from biggest “loss” of value.
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.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The Fiat Topolino Vilebrequin is a new beach town cruiser that captures the elegance, glamour, and relaxed vibe of the French Riviera. More significantly, the updated EV also heralds Stellantis’ plans to double EV production at its Kenitra Assembly Plant in Morocco.
Closer to a Mercury Villager Nautica or Ford F-150 Harley-Davidson than a new model on its own, the new Topolino Vilebrequin features colors and fabrics inspired by the French surfwear brand, and is based on the Dolcevita version of Stellantis’ electric microcar. With its open sides, a soft rollback roof, and turtle-tastic fabric prints, it’s ready to whisk you off on a carefree summer adventure in France or Italy – which are, coincidentally, the only two markets the “collector’s edition” Vilebrequin Topolino is currently available in.
“This encounter between the Fiat Topolino and our iconic sea turtle gave rise to a high-quality, lower-impact, and perfectly whimsical design,” says Roland Herlory, CEO of Vilebrequin. “(It is) the definitive summer toy, and the perfect witness to sun-soaked memories still to come.”
Like the standard Topolino, the new Vilebrequin model remains electronically limited to a top speed of 45 kph (just under 30 mph), and is equipped with a 5.5 kWh battery pack that ensures up to 75 km (about 45 miles) of electric range. Prices start at €13,490 ($15,810), and if you don’t want one you’re dead inside.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Fiat Topolino Vilebrequin
The Vilebrequin Topolino is just the latest version of Stellantis’ electric microcar platform that underpins the Citroën Ami, Opel Rocks-e, and Fiat Topolino. Annual production of the little EVs has grown from 20,000 units and is reportedly on track for 70,000 in 2025.
Now, Mopar Insiders is reporting that number is about to get even bigger. Stellantis’ Chief Operating Officer (COO) for the Middle East & Africa (MEA) region, Samir Cherfan, announced plans to more than double the production capacity at the company’s Kenitra Assembly Plant in Morocco, from some 230,000 vehicles per year to more than 530,000.
The factory was opened in 2019, and the planned €1.2 billion ($1.4B) expansion is expected to add around 3,100 new jobs to the factory’s employee roster.
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.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Electric bikes are a menace. They go almost as fast as a car (if the car is parking), they’re whisper quiet (which makes them impossible to hear over the podcast playing in your headphones), and worst of all, they’re increasingly ridden by teenagers.
By now, we’ve all seen the headlines. Cities are cracking down. Lawmakers are holding emergency hearings. Parents are demanding bans. “Something must be done,” they cry at local city council meetings before driving back home in 5,000 lb SUVs.
And it’s true – some e-bike riders don’t follow the rules. Some ride too fast. Some are inexperienced. These are real problems that deserve real solutions. But if you think electric bikes are the biggest threat on our roads, just wait until you hear about the slightly more common, slightly more deadly vehicle we’ve been quietly tolerating for the last hundred years.
They’re called cars. And unlike e-bikes, they actually kill people. A lot of people. Over 40,000 people die in car crashes in the US every year. Thousands more are permanently injured. Entire neighborhoods are carved up by high-speed traffic. Kids can’t walk to school safely. But don’t worry – someone saw a teenager run a stop sign on an e-bike, so the real crisis must be those darn batteries on two wheels.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
It’s amazing how worked up people get over a few dozen e-bike crashes when many of us step over a sidewalk memorial for a car crash victim on the way to the grocery store. We’ve been so thoroughly conditioned to accept car violence as part of modern life that the idea of regulating them sounds unthinkable. But regulating e-bikes? Now that’s urgent.
To be clear, this isn’t about ignoring the risks that come with new technology. E-bikes are faster than regular bikes. They’re heavier, too. And they require education and enforcement like any other mode of transport capable of injuring someone, be it the rider or a pedestrian bystander. But the scale of the problem is what matters – and the scale here is completely lopsided. Let’s take New York City, for example. It’s got more e-bike usage than anywhere else in the US, and there are still only an average of two pedestrians per year killed by an e-bike accident. That number for cars? Around 100 per year in NYC. It’s not complicated math – cars are 50x more lethal in the city.
And yet, the person on the e-bike is the one getting the stink eye.
We’ve become so numb to the everyday destruction caused by automobiles that it barely registers anymore. Drunk driving? Distracted driving? Speeding through neighborhoods? It’s just background noise. But the moment someone on an e-bike blows through a stop sign at 16 mph, it’s front-page news and a city council emergency.
Here’s an idea: If we want safer streets, how about we start by addressing the machines that weigh two and a half tons and can hit 100 mph, not the ones that top out at 20 or 28 and are powered by a one-horsepower motor the size of an orange.
But we don’t. Because cars are familiar. Cars are “normal.” Cars are how we built our entire country. And so we turn our attention to the easy target – the new kid on the block. The same old playbook: panic, overreact, and legislate the hell out of it.
Sure, an e-bike might startle you on a sidewalk. But a car can climb that sidewalk and end your life. Which one do we really need to be afraid of?
This isn’t a strawman argument, either. Cars are literally used as mass casualty weapons. It happens all the time. It happened last night in Los Angeles when a disgruntled car driver deliberately plowed into a crowd outside a nightclub, injuring over 30 people. And that wasn’t the only car attack yesterday. Another car rammed into pedestrians on a sidewalk in NYC yesterday morning, leaving multiple pedestrians dead. These aren’t exceptions. This is the normal daily news in the US. It’s depressing, but it bears repeating. This is normal. These are everyday occurrences. Twice a day, yesterday.
While we’re busy debating throttle limits and helmet rules for e-bikes, maybe we should also talk about how tens of millions of drivers still routinely speed, blow stop signs, or scroll Instagram at 45 mph in a school zone. Or how car crashes are the number one killer of teenagers in America. Or we can continue to focus on the kid who forgot to put his foot down at a red light while riding an e-bike to school.
This isn’t satire anymore – it’s just sad. It’s a collective willingness to avoid a real, genuine threat to Americans while simultaneously scapegoating what is, by comparison, a non-threat.
The truth is, electric bikes aren’t the menace. They’re a solution. They’re one of the few glimmers of hope in a transportation system drowning in pollution, congestion, and daily tragedy. They make mobility cheaper, cleaner, and more accessible. And yet we treat them like an invasive species because they disrupt the dominance of the automobile.
It’s time to stop pretending we’re protecting the public from some great e-bike emergency. The real emergency is that we’ve accepted cars killing people as a fair trade for getting to Target five minutes faster.
So yes, let’s make e-biking safer. Let’s educate riders, build better bike infrastructure, and enforce traffic rules fairly. Those are all important things. We absolutely SHOULD invest in training programs to educate teens on safe riding. We absolutely SHOULD cite and fine dangerous riders who could threaten the lives of pedestrians. But let’s stop pretending that e-bikes are the problem when they’re clearly a symptom of a much bigger one.
If you’re really worried about the dangers on our streets, don’t look for the kid on the e-bike. Look for the driver behind them, sipping a latte and going 20 over the speed limit.
Now that’s the menace.
Image note: The first and last images in this article were both AI-generated, and represent everyday car/bike interactions
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.