May 13, 2021

Electrification Coalition Support of SB 127 Comes from National Security Perspective

The Electrification Coalition supports SB 127. Its mission statement states: “Accelerate the adoption of plug-in electric vehicles to improve our national and economic security.” Several prominent retired military leaders, including Admiral Dennis Blair, are affiliated with the organization because of the national security benefits of reducing our country’s dependence on oil. Admiral Blair made the following remarks in testimony before Washington legislators on the subject of direct sales of electric vehicles:

“Our group has long seen electric vehicles, and specifically the domestic EV industry, as the most promising solution to break oil’s monopoly over the transportation system. And as the world shifts from gasoline to EVs, China’s dominance of the entire EV supply chain makes scaling up the U.S. market even more urgent.

“As has been made clear in state after state, direct sales is one of the most effective and powerful policy levers to enhance EV deployment.  Some 80% of EVs sold in the country are through direct sales, and states that are open to direct sales see adoption rates of up to 5 times the rates of states that are closed—even in the absence of other direct incentives.”

–         Admiral Dennis C. Blair, Former Director of National Intelligence and Commander In Chief, U.S. Pacific Command

Dealers Pressure Plug In America to Back Away From Direct Sales

Plug In America (PIA) has up until now played an important advocacy role in the effort to pass SB 127 in Connecticut and similar direct sales laws in other states. They acted as a clearinghouse for a lot of information from economists, academics and others that supported our arguments for EV Freedom, and did a lot of coordinating between the numerous parties involved, including the EV Club, manufacturers, environmental organizations, lobbyists, among others.

As of now, however, the coordination Zooms have stopped and the content has been removed from the PIA website. We had copies of some of the content, and what we have is now posted on the EV Club website.

PIA has a business called PlugStar. It is a training program to help dealerships become more effective at selling EVs. The dealers pay for this and it is a meaningful revenue stream for PIA. The dealers threatened to terminate their arrangements with PlugStar unless PIA stopped supporting direct sales. The board of PIA has caved and directed that the ongoing advocacy efforts in this area cease. This is not just a CT thing.

Needless to say, those of us in the EV community were gobsmacked by this “pulling the rug out from under” move at a critical time. And we’re surprised the organization doesn’t have bylaws in place to provide separation and deal with what seems an obvious potential for conflict. We blame PIA for compromising their principles, but, of course, it was the dealers that put them in this position. They show their colors that competition is good for everyone except themselves.

This is from the PIA website:

Plug In America is a non-profit, supporter-driven advocacy group. We are the voice of plug-in vehicle drivers across the country.

It is clear that the position they are taking runs counter to their mission and that they have now become the voice of entrenched interests blocking progress.

Our club would like to see dealers up their game when it comes to selling EVs, but we don’t agree with the franchise laws being used to stifle competition. The majority of EV sales, both nationally and in CT, are from direct sales.

To the extent that club members and readers of this blog donate to PIA, we recommend sending those funds to other organizations instead. You can find a long list of worthy options in the CT Electric Vehicle Coalition.

The EV Club has also filed a Freedom on Information Act Request to obtain the relevant backup documents underlying the decision.

This Bill is Pro EV and Pro CT

Rebates Spike in March, but Program Still Underspent

Rebates awarded under the state EV purchase-incentive program spiked to 151 in March, double that of the (slightly restated) number of 75 for February. This was part of the standard monthly update by DEEP.

There were increases across the board, which could be reflective of the economic recovery, but certainly, something to watch.

The most rebates again went to the Toyota Prius Prime with 33, up from 22 in February. This was followed by the Tesla Model 3 with 31, up from 2. The Model 3, as we’ve seen before, is volatile since only the base trim level is eligible. The only other vehicle to hit at least 20 was the Chevy Bolt at exactly that number. Most of them were the 2020 Bolts which GM has been heavily discounting.

The other vehicles in double digits were the Toyota RAV4 Prime (18), Hyundai Kona (15), Nissan Leaf Plus (11), Tesla Model Y (10). The Leaf Plus is the longer-range Leaf. The appearance of the Model Y is ephemeral as the standard range option is no longer being made available by Tesla. That may change, but we have no information on whether that will definitively happen or what the timing may be.

There is still no word on the implementation of the new CHEAPR program with higher rebate levels and new, income-limited incentives. We have been advised that the board has not been able to sync schedules for a meeting to review the new material, nor do we know if the consultant has finished with the software development. We asked DEEP if they could give us a rough estimate, but have not received a response.

Spend Level Remains Low

It has been our expectation that the program would underspend again in 2021 and that was when we expected the new program might be live by early April. After 1 quarter, the spend is $310,500 against a statutory pace budget of $750,000, and an actual pace budget (including the rollover of unspent 2020 funds) of $1,300,000.

Some Stellar Performers; Many Also-Rans

We obtained an updated dataset of CHEAPR rebates by individual dealerships from the program’s inception through the end of 2020. It is all pasted below, but a couple of observations first.

There are a small number of dealers that really do great work. Unfortunately, they are not representative. If great work is defined as 100 or more rebates over this duration, these are the 6 companies that have achieved that level.

• A-1 Toyota – 167
• Richard Chevrolet – 126
• Honda of Westport – 126
• Karl Chevrolet – 122
• Lynch Toyota – 117
• Ingersoll Auto of Danbury – 101

This project originally began due to member complaints about poor dealership experiences, followed by a request: Please make a recommendation. I had anecdotal reports of dealerships that do a good job, but nothing systematic or statewide. This approach uses CHEAPR data as a proxy for EV-friendliness.

There are a few considerations to bear in mind. Not all dealers sell CHEAPR-eligible cars. The parameters of the CHEAPR program have changed over the course of the program’s life. In particular, the lowering of the MSRP cap in October 2019 causes the exclusion of some vehicles, for example, from BMW and Volvo, that were formerly eligible. The offerings of manufacturers have changed over time. The cancellation of the Chevy Volt caused a slowdown in the number of Chevrolet rebates. Hyundai has become more aggressive recently about introducing EVs. The Honda Clarity got off to a good start when it was introduced, but Honda then stopped sending it to the state (which may be changing). The new Toyota RAV4 Prime is showing some early promise.

It is for that reason that I have displayed the rebates sorted highest to lowest within make. That way, for example, it can be seen that Danbury Hyundai has a strong record with a make that was barely selling EVs before 2019.

The file that was provided did not have the specific vehicle model for which a given rebate applied. There are some dealerships that sell multiple makes that have CHEAPR-eligible vehicles. I made a judgment and assigned the dealer to the brand with the most rebates. Note to self – work on getting that next time around. Also, in a couple of cases, there may be more than one line for a dealership because the file did not have a consistent naming convention. I cleaned it but may have missed a couple.

This is all of it (except Tesla). If a dealership had zero rebates, it will not appear in the tables below.

It would be best, of course, if DEEP were to publish this information as part of its regular CHEAPR reporting. It is done in other states and would remove the burden for both of us of going through the Freedom of Information Act process.

Finally, this has relevance for the EV Freedom Bill. One of the arguments for the bill is that the conventional dealership model is antithetical to selling EVs, that EVs come into tension with the legacy ICE business. There is more nuance to it than that, but the data largely illustrate this point. It seems like it is a lot harder for a dealership to embrace EVs or more of them would have effectively done so and there wouldn’t be such large differences between the top performers and the laggards.

For those dealerships that are making an effort to sell EVs, if SB 127 passes, they’ll be fine. For the others, it will be a shot across the bow to wake up or risk being left behind.

A poll released by the Electric Vehicle (EV) Club of Connecticut shows that a significant majority of Connecticut residents support direct sales from Electric Vehicle companies. 83% of respondents support direct sales of electric vehicles to consumers, and only 17% oppose it.  Support for direct sales is bipartisan, broad, and deep across many different demographics and all sections of Connecticut.

Support for direct sales is growing throughout the state of Connecticut and nationwide. Last week, two letters were released—one from a broad coalition of 27 interest groups representing environmental, free-market, pro-innovation, labor, and consumer protection;  another from 75 leading academics—both urging state governments to remove restrictions on direct sales and service of electric vehicles. Among the academic signers of the letter were 7 former chief economists of the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice, and one Nobel Laureate.

Transportation Committee Chair Senator Will Haskell stated, “This poll is astounding. It turns out that the Connecticut State Capitol is the only place where selling Electric Vehicles directly to consumers is controversial. It’s time for the legislature to listen to the will of the public, pave the way for 21rst Century jobs, and give consumers a choice as to where they buy their next car.”

Barry Kresch, President of the EV Club of Connecticut noted, “These results, while overwhelmingly favorable, are not a surprise. This is exactly what I hear all the time on a more informal basis. It is reflected in the fact that everyone who testified at the public hearings who was not associated with a dealership was in favor of the bill. I get asked all the time why we force people to go out of state to buy the EV of their choice. It’s time we listen to consumers, accelerate EV adoption, and embrace innovation.”

“The poll conducted by GQR is proof positive that Connecticut consumers believe in the freedom to choose how they wish to purchase their vehicles,” said James Chen, Vice President of Public Policy at Rivian Automotive. “Senate Bill 127, which would allow the direct sales of electric vehicles in the state of Connecticut would be an obvious win-win for Connecticut drivers, the free-market, and the state’s environmental goals.”

GQR conducted a survey of 500 likely 2022 general election voters in Connecticut from April 16-18, 2021. The survey was conducted via cell phones using a text-to-web platform. The margin of error is +/- 4.4 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence interval; the margin of error is higher among subgroups. Electric Vehicle (EV) manufacturers Lucid Motors, Rivian, and Tesla sponsored the poll.

This is the question wording: “As you may know, the Connecticut General Assembly is considering a bill to change existing laws related to vehicle sales. This bill will allow electric-vehicle manufacturers such as Tesla, Rivian, and Lucid to open their own brick-and-mortar stores in the state, where they can sell vehicles directly to consumers rather than going through traditional car dealerships. Do you support or oppose this bill to allow direct sales from electric-vehicle manufacturers in Connecticut?”

About GQR: “For almost four decades, we have used innovative polling and opinion research to help leading candidates, parties, government leaders, corporations, and advocacy groups across the United States and around the world.”

Transportation Committee Vote Moves Bill to Full Chamber

The Transportation Committee, by a vote of 26 to 10, moved SB 127 to the full chamber.

There were several legislators who voted in favor of the bill, but who specifically said they have not definitively made up their minds with respect to the upcoming vote on the floor of the chamber. We will publish some of the questions and objections when we update this post.

Transportation Committee Chair, Senator Haskell, deserves our thanks for his leadership in picking this up and moving it forward, after his predecessor on the committee had decided to set it aside. We also thank Rep. Steinberg who has been a consistent advocate for years in favor of this measure.

This is the final roll call.

What I inferred from the hearing today reinforces what I watched/read during the public testimony period. Legislators are hearing from dealers, of course, who oppose the legislation. They are also hearing from constituents and constituents are supporting the legislation. There is no negative sentiment among the public about this bill.

We don’t take anything for granted. When we have updates with respect to further negotiations around the bill or voting in one or both chambers, we will post them (among other things).

Tesla is keeping its “Engage” page live for ease of contacting your legislators.

Club Member Marshall Breines Takes Delivery of First CT VW ID.4

With much of the club’s recent efforts to support the passage of SB 127, allowing for direct sales of EVs in CT, we don’t want to overlook numerous EV launches planned for 2021.

The Volkswagen ID.4 is a critical piece of that company’s plan to revive itself following the Dieselgate scandal that has cost the company billions of Euros in fines and reputational damage. This is the first EV for the American market to be built on VW’s new Modular Electrification Toolbox platform. (VW introduced a smaller model, the ID.3, in September to great success in Europe but is not bringing that vehicle to the USA.)

As batteries get more efficient, EVs are beginning to move into the segments comprised of larger vehicles, such as EUVs (Electric Utility Vehicles), which is what the ID.4 is, and pickup trucks (and heavy-duty commercial vehicles).

The vehicle pictured above is a “first edition,” a fully-loaded, limited production model. It was sold out on its first day of accepting orders. These are the only versions of this vehicle arriving in this country for the time being. We expect deliveries of the standard version of the model to begin arriving in 3-4 months.

Marshall gives his ID.4 a strong review, “A great example of building a really well done SUV with lots of room, comfortable ride, and great fit/finish with well-done info system and all the tech needs one wants. You don’t think it’s an EV! Highly recommend for people first getting into an EV.”

The ID.4 is EPA rated for 250 miles of range. Marshall reports that his early experience slightly exceeds that in mostly local driving.

For a more in-depth review, Larry Thompson interviews Marshall in this video.

More photos of the ID.4 taken by Paul Braren:

Press Conference on March 22 for SB 127

The office of CT Senator Will Haskell is organizing a press conference for Monday, March 22. It will be held outdoors at the Westport Train Station (New Haven-bound side) at 10 AM.

UPDATE: LUCID VEHICLE (pictured above) EXPECTED TO BE BROUGHT TO THE PRESS CONFERENCE.

All EV owners are invited to join us and spread the message that consumers should be able to buy the EV that fits their lifestyle and budget, and be able to do so in CT.

SB 127 would allow manufacturers of exclusively EVs that do not have a franchise dealer network to open stores in CT, which is one of a handful of states that currently prohibit this. Check out this video made by Will Cross of the CT Tesla Owners Club.

Even if you can’t join us, please write to your state senator and representative and tell them you support this bill.

Tesla has put up a page that enables one-click contact for your rep. (You may need to create an account.)

This is an earlier post that goes into more detail about the details of why we support this.

Post by Barry Kresch

Estimates of EV Fleet Composition by Make Within City

This is something we haven’t published in a while. Not that we don’t find it interesting, but the DMV broke apart the geo from the vehicle data and has been giving it to us in a separate file. So we lost this. Their reason was that it was too close to the line of a privacy violation, that if we were to cross a low-volume vehicle with the city, someone could deduce who the owner might be. (We don’t get any personal information in our files.) While I respect their concerns, it never created any issues back when we did have it.

So I took a shot at knitting the information together and here it is. So remember: blame me, not the DMV. I was able to do a little bit of cross-referencing with the Westport Grand List and what I saw lined up nicely.

The chart at the top of the post color-codes the different makes within each city. It is easy to guess which part of the bar is Tesla, but beyond that, it can’t really be seen in a screenshot. This is now a page in the dashboard (page 19 – scroll down for page nav) and there is full interactivity. Slicers are there for both city and vehicle make. Hovering over a chart element will display the make and the count. And the profile changes quite a lot when sliced by city or make as a different socio-economic profile will be reflected in a different vehicle composition.

The two most widely registered Marques are Tesla and Toyota. Here is an excerpt of the Tesla profile:

And here is how it contrasts with Toyota, where there is less Fairfield County and more larger cities:

Sometimes it appears as if the profile could be influenced by a single dealer. Dealers are often a pain point in the EV landscape, but that is not the case for all of them. This excerpt is Audi, which, overall, has a fairly low volume. Of course, people can buy their vehicles from someplace other than where they live. But it sure seems like New Country Audi in Greenwich might be making a difference.

The same seems like it could be true of an even lower volume make, Jaguar, where Westport is over-represented. There are Jaguar dealers in Fairfield and Darien. The Fairfield dealer has been a sometime attendee at our meetings and they could be the ones making an effort with the i-Pace.

Finally, this is a close-up of a single city, in this case, Greenwich, which has the most EVs of any city in the state. The green represents the 651 Teslas there. The second most-widely registered vehicle make is Porsche with 69 EVs. This is the purple band a couple of places below Tesla. There are 969 total EVs in Greenwich, an increase of 105 over the final 6 months of the year, or 12.2%, which outpaces the rate of increase for the state as a whole.