Eight States Publish Action Plan To Sell 3.3 Million EVs By 2025

MAY 30 2014 BY STATIK 19

8 US States Look To Sell 3.3 Zero Emission Vehicles By 2025

8 US States Look To Sell 3.3 Zero Emission Vehicles By 2025

A new “Multi-State ZEV Action Plan” has been released today that would see  California along with  Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont work together to get more zero emissions vehicles on the road over the next 10 years.

The 8 State Action Plan Would See More Promotion Of Workplace Charging Along With More Uniform Public Charging Signage

The 8 State Action Plan Would See More Promotion Of Workplace Charging Along With More Uniform Public Charging Signage

In total, the 8 state group which already accounts for 1 in every 4 new car sales looks to sell 3.3 million (cumulative) zero emission vehicles by 2025, of which California has previously committed to 1.5 million.

Not just fully electric vehicles are included in this action, also involved are plug-in hybrids and hydrogen-powered fuel cell electric vehicles.

The release notes key actions in three main areas:

Build the market

  • Promote the availability and effective marketing of ZEVs
  • Encourage private fleets to acquire ZEVs
  • Promote planning and investment in ZEV infrastructure
  • Increase the number of ZEVs in government vehicle fleets

Provide consistent codes, standards and tracking

  • Remove barriers to charging station installation
  • Provide clear and uniform signage
  • Track and report progress toward the 3.3 million vehicle goal

Improve the experience

  • Promote workplace charging
  • Provide consumer incentives for the purchase of ZEVs
  • Remove barriers to retail sale of electricity as vehicle fuel
  • Promote access and compatibility for charging networks

Check out the entire 8 state “Action Plan” at ARB’s website here.

 

Categories: General

Tags:

19 responses to "Eight States Publish Action Plan To Sell 3.3 Million EVs By 2025"
  1. kdawg says:

    The only direct route they have to their goal is this one; “Increase the number of ZEVs in government vehicle fleets”.

    How about some plug-in school buses, mail trucks, cop cars, etc..

    Also, I get concerned about “ZEV” in the title. This excludes PHEVs which are a big part of the solution.

    1. pjwood says:

      Unlike NJ’s rebuke of the i3, this “ZEV” definition appears to be more accommodating.

    2. Assaf says:

      Actually Kdawg, installing L3 stations is another very direct way to bolster BEV sales (I know you’re a Volt guy, but still…).

      Right now California north of Sacramento/Santa-Rosa, and between Monterrey and Santa Barbara, is an L3 desert (not to mention trying to go east to AZ/NV with a limited-range BEV).
      Rhode Island has yet to install any L3, in NY there are none outside the NYC metro region (2-3 stations in Long Island can enable worry-free travel of <100-mile BEVs across the entire island!), and Vermont is hardly any better.

      And the i3 sales can also be greatly helped by an emerging network of multi-standard L3s.

      I really don't see why states cannot help fund L3 stations. It's literally a drop in the bucket of transportation budgets, and takes weeks at most to install.

      So… that 8-state thing has been going on for a while. Is it all talk or will we see some action?

      1. HVACman says:

        +10. If CA took the $40 million they planned to spend on a handful of hydrogen fuel stations and spent it on 100 L3 stations, they could have every state highway covered from Mexico to Oregon and the coast to Nevada/AZ with FCDC chargers every 75 miles max. In-state range anxiety would be a thing of the past for EV’s with over 100 miles range and EV sales could soar.

        1. Dave R says:

          40M would build a lot more than 100 QC stations.

          That’s $400k a pop!

          A single QC at a single location typically costs around $60k to install. Best case, around $30k, worst case around 80k.

          Tesla has estimated around 200k to install one of their typical 6-8 plug SuperCharger locations.

          I’d be happy if 2-4 QC stations were installed at 200 different locations around the state, with conduit to supply 4-10 stations so more can be added with ease. At least 2-4 L2 stations should be installed, too, with conduit run for more.

          1. Assaf says:

            Yup, good eye on the math.

            Who’s ICEing us right now are not the occasional individual trespassers onto charging spots, but state governments that are big on words but too cheap to make BEV road trips a reality, at a time when both the technology and the vehicles are already here.

            Washington state, I’m talking to you too. The $100/EV you are currently charging on our tabs, should be enough to build quite a few additional L3’s already.

  2. MDEV says:

    Virginia is missing, in 50 years we’ll think about it.

    1. TomArt says:

      Yep, when I buy my Tesla (eventually), I’ll have to go to DC or MD, pay their sales tax, then register it in VA and pay sales tax again to the damn state that won’t let me buy the damn thing to begin with. Real smart, we are…maybe the Democratic administration will be able to do something…start putting the brakes on fracking, get off the brakes on solar and wind, etc.

      1. sven says:

        You don’t pay sales tax in the state where you purchase a car; you pay sales tax in the state where you register the car. The DC or MD dealer will give you a temporary license plate for a nominal fee so that you can drive the car back home to Virginia. When you register the car in Virginia you’ll pay Virginia’s sale tax and be issued a Virginia license plate.

        1. Ocean Railroader says:

          Oddly the number of pure EV sightings has gone up in Central Virginia were I see more Teslas then volts and C maxes combinded. Also last week I saw my very first Mitsubishi i-Mev on the highway.

  3. Assaf says:

    Of course, all 8 are blue states. In terms of EV adoption it’s more like “California and the 7 dwarfs” (ok, ok, California, Oregon and 6 dwarfs).

    I’ll wonder aloud again, like I did the 1st time this consortium made press releases: why aren’t two other blue, heavy-EV-adopting states joining in? The two are Washington and Hawaii. Actually you could throw DC into the mix as well.

    Are they not invited? Are they refusing the invitation? Or is this all just window-dressing?

    1. pjwood says:

      ^More like curtain-dressing, when you look at a map.

      The L3 news is making me wish the B-class Merc accepted it.

      1. Assaf says:

        What L3 news? Did I miss something?

        1. pjwood says:

          The L3 news is buried in the articles being published today, on MA. 15 Fast-DC chargers. On interstates. They could do I-90 and 495, and cover most bases. Fast-DC reaches 90kw.

    2. TomArt says:

      Yeah, I can’t figure that out, either…there are, what, 10 States that adopted Cali’s CARB requirements? Where are the other two in this collaboration?

    3. evnow says:

      WA apparently doesn’t want to join because these states don’t go far enough.

  4. MDEV says:

    Finally clear and uniform signage the end of ICEd as we know it.

  5. Ocean Railroader says:

    I think something like this with getting three million EV’s on the roads will work itself out on it’s own. In that right now the biggest thing holding EV’s is there limited 80 mile ranges. Such as I know a lot of people are supportive of EV’s but the EV’s can’t help them right now in that they live in rural areas that’s 40 and 50 miles from were they work at. If they came out with say a 120 mile Mitsubishi i-MEV for the same price as the existing one then it would open the flood gates of EV sales on it’s own.

    A thing I do notice about Virginia is that is is somewhat the reality that EV’s face. Such as the EV’s have limited ranges the prices are somewhat steep and there is no charging stations so EV’s remain a niche. But as one or two of these factors change they could take over like the Prius did in conquering Virginia.

    1. QCO says:

      It’s an interesting conundrum…..

      BEV manufacturers must have a dozen studies that say 80 miles is the right range, and therefore most BEVs are around that number.

      But consumers, especially enthusiasts found on this site, consistently say something around 120 miles is needed to inspire range confidence. I wonder if it is true, or just a natural desire for more that what’s available.

      One thing is for sure, you won’t get 120 miles for an 80 mile price without some significant cost reductions that have yet to appear.