CHEAPR Rebates – The Doldrums Continue

Given the after-effects of the change in rebate parameters, the numbers seen in the graph were not a surprise. This information dates through the end of February, which is the latest that has been released on the CHEAPR stats page.

The detail for the month is below:

February saw low rebate numbers, continuing the trend from January and Q4, due to the lack of improvements in the CHEAPR rules. The economic impact of COVID-19 has yet to be visible in this timeframe

The balance tipped slightly to BEVs because Bolt rebates increased while both Ioniq PHEV and Prius Prime rebates decreased. Tesla remains at a very low level since all but the most basic trim level of the Model 3 are now excluded. Deliveries of the Model Y have begun, though we don’t know how long it will be before volume ramps. That vehicle runs a few thousand dollars more than the Model 3 so we don’t expect it will qualify for rebates.

Last we heard, the new CHEAPR board was not completely filled, but they have a quorum. All that’s been done has been to extend the same parameters that were in effect in Q4 2019 into 2020. One-quarter of the way into the new year, there is still no news on promised revisions or on used EV purchase incentives.

As can be seen on the screenshot from the CHEAPR stats page, there was a total of $45,500 in rebates that were disbursed. This works out to $546,000 annually on a straight-line basis, against a budget of $3 million.

It is likely to be a difficult road ahead for at least the next few months. We can’t rule out the possibility that federal aid meant to counteract the impact of the recession on state finances will be inadequate. Early signs point to that being the case, as evidenced by what Governor Cuomo of NY had to say at a recent press conference. Budget cuts are inevitable and we wonder if CHEAPR will fall victim to that.

Plummeting Oil and Gas Prices

Part of this environment is plummeting gasoline prices. This is a recent chart from Gas Buddy and, well, you get the idea. The blue line is national and the red line is Bridgeport, CT.

Gas prices, or more specifically, the price per barrel of oil, are falling not only because of reduced demand from a recessionary economy exacerbated by social-distancing measures but also because of a price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia. Either one of those things would have caused this, but in this instance, demand began to fall, OPEC wanted to implement production cuts, Russia did not go along with it, and now Saudi Arabia is aggressively cutting prices, presumably to pressure Russia. This has accelerated the fall in the price per barrel. Absent some interim mediation, the next OPEC meeting is in June.

This could have knock-on effects for American (and other) shale oil, which according to Investopedia, has a floor price of anywhere from $40 to $90 per barrel. (This could be part of why Russia wants to do this.) Below is a chart of oil price trends. Shale oil is a heavily leveraged industry, so the impact could conceivably be felt in the bond market.

This blog is not a fan of shale oil. Fracking is environmentally destructive and produces a tremendous amount of natural gas, most of which is being flared at the well, spewing greenhouse gas emissions.

This week we also had the news of the administration formally implementing the rollback of phase 2 CAFE, though the question of whether the CARB states can return to a separate standard is still being litigated. This move will please the fossil-fuel industry. The rest of us lose. Even the automakers are less than enthused. It will accelerate carbon emissions, cause more sickness and death from air pollution, and, according to a report in the NY Times, and based on the administration’s own data, it will impose an economic cost on society as high as $22 billion.

Opportunity, Should Policy Makers Choose to Make Something of it

Despite the headwinds, there is likely more stimulus to come and this could be an opportunity. The first packages rightly focused on stanching the bleeding with unemployment insurance and support for small businesses. When the outbreak wanes, there will still be a need for fiscal stimulus. It is an opportune moment to craft such legislation so that it includes renewable energy infrastructure and purchase incentives. Wouldn’t it be nice to replace lost shale oil production with renewables and stationary storage?

Renewables and energy efficiency measures were a successful aspect of the 2009 stimulus legislation. And from that previous experience, it follows that there are data. They know what worked. This could help policy-makers to understand how to best incorporate long-term climate change objectives within short-term stimulus needs. Also, the energy-efficiency part of the 2009 stimulus did not include building infrastructure to better defend against severe storms and rising sea levels, which have now become a fact of life. This supports both resiliency and job creation. If this administration does not have the foresight to understand this, then perhaps we’ll have to wait and see if there’s a new sheriff in town in 2021. The passing of more legislation will almost certainly continue into next year.

In the meantime, it falls to us to accelerate EV adoption, one person at a time.

Utility Demand Charges Keep Level 3 Charging Stations Dark

We have quite a few posts addressing range-anxiety in its various forms. Even though most EVs have enough range to get you through your typical day, we all have occasions where we drive to a destination that exceeds the range of the vehicle. Without the certainty of being able to charge en-route, there is the danger of the battery turning into a very heavy brick. This possible low frequency, but high impact, event is enough to give pause for many folks considering an EV purchase.

A particular CT flavor of this can be found at rest areas on I-95 and the Merritt Parkway. For example, the I-95 southbound rest area in Darien and the Merritt Parkway northbound rest area in Greenwich have CCS and CHAdeMo level 3 chargers that aren’t working. (Presumably, this is the case at other rest areas that we haven’t been to). These charging stations are not broken. They are just turned off.

The reason is simple: demand charges.

What are demand charges

Utilities build out their infrastructure to handle anticipated peak demand. Demand charges are what pay for that. For non-residential classes of clients, the utility imposes demand charges based on their peak power usage and they are substantial. Whereas a residential user pays a cost per kilowatt-hour charge typically of approximately 17 – 20 cents, demand charges could be over $13 per kWh, plus a higher distribution fee. If you would like to see for yourself, here is the (complicated) rate structure used by Eversource.

Demand charges have been around for around 100 years, since the early expansion of electric service throughout the country. Aside from paying for infrastructure expansion, they are intended to spread demand into non-peak usage times in order to lessen the need for that expensive infrastructure.

Electric vehicle charging stations obviously draw current, especially the level 3 DC fast chargers that are needed along the Interstates to facilitate a long drive. The power-draw required to obtain an 80% charge in 15 – 30 minutes is sufficiently high (especially if multiple chargers are in simultaneous use) that the threshold for demand charges may kick-in. Our information is that the companies that run the food and gas service at the rest areas did not install the chargers, and it was a shock (electricity makes for way too easy puns) to them when they saw what demand charges were doing to their electric bill. So they turned them off.

Why Demand Charges for EVs Require Rethinking

While demand charges have served a purpose, it is time to rethink how these are handled with respect to EVs for a few reasons.

• Lack of charging infrastructure is a major barrier to EV adoption, and EVs are an important factor in mitigating climate change. In this sense, an inability to charge undercuts a social good.
• Utilities are the new fuel stations. They stand to reap a tremendous amount of business with widespread EV adoption. With EV charger demand charges, they are working against themselves.
• EVs will stimulate use in off-peak hours. Most charging, over 80%, is done at home, and most of this is done at night. In other words, EVs bring load-management benefits to the utilities. If there were a more robust time-of-use rate card available in CT, this would be even more true. Also, at a presentation done at DEEP in January 2019, Dana Lowell of M.J. Bradley Associates stated that the excessive (for want of a better term) net revenue resulting from EVs in this heavily regulated industry would be returned to the ratepayers. In the EV nirvana of 2 million EVs registered in the state, he estimated it would amount to $150 annually per household.
• This is speculative at this point, and a little off-topic, but it is technically possible for EV batteries to be bi-directional, also

  

  referred to as V2G (vehicle to grid). At times of peak demand, the energy residing in charged EV batteries could be tapped to fulfill demand, and then be recharged when demand subsides. The part of this that is on point is that there needs to be a lot of battery capacity out there to make this a viable strategy. A pilot study intended to test the bi-directional technology, underwritten by Con-Edison, is being run in Westchester County with electric school buses.

The bottom line is that EVs come with more ramifications with respect to the grid, and more opportunities for society as a whole, than a factory or commercial building. Other states are further along than CT in bringing innovation to approaching this dilemma.

To be sure, demand charges are just a single piece of the larger EV policy puzzle. It is a subset of what is referred to as “rate-design.” DEEP produced a 71-page “Draft EV Roadmap” that does a good job of covering the waterfront in terms of all related policy areas, though the language in this document, released in October 2019, is worded in terms of evaluation or investigation. In other words, there is still a long way to go. The section on demand charges is on page 44.

Tesla Chargers

There are Tesla chargers on the Interstates and these do work. That is because Tesla takes responsibility for them. They may be carrying a contingent liability, but their forward-thinking decision to install their own charging network and not wait for the rest of the world to catch up means that Tesla drivers have a wider array of charging options.

Waiver

There is an Eversource program to grant a demand charge waiver for independently metered charging stations that are open to the public, but that the waiver is temporary. It substitutes average per kWh charges. We don’t have a sense that this has been promoted aggressively. The waiver was for 3 years, but the clock has been ticking and it is currently closer to 2 years. A temporary waiver doesn’t really accomplish much unless there is something in place to address the underlying problem when it expires.

There are options other than an outright waiver to address this. We reached out to Eversource and were advised that the Public Utility Regulatory Authority will review the rate after the 3 year period ends and decide if changes are needed to the rate structure.

Numerous Events Canceled

If you have looked at the event calendar, it becomes very apparent that due to public health precautions, all of our EV showcase events, at least through the end of April, have been canceled. We are in touch with local and state officials and will be following the guidelines that are issued.

April and May are normally the two busiest months for showcases outside of the National Drive Electric Week period in September. Hopefully, before then, we’ll all be back online. But at this point, hope is all it is. As of this writing on March 15th, there is still very little testing and, therefore, little hard data about the infection curve of COVID-19.

We offer best wishes to our EV Club colleagues around the country. Until then, bon chance.

Bargersville, Indiana, Tesla Model 3 Police Vehicle

The exciting news from Indiana is that there is really no news. The Model 3 police vehicle performance is meeting or exceeding expectations. And, yes, it is quiet.

Our Facebook page received an update today (March 9) regarding Indiana, where the Bargersville Police force acquired the first Tesla Model 3 to be put to use for police duty. This is the progress report.

Glad to hear this report from a test vehicle that’s in service a few months longer than Westport. Their expectations are in line with Westport.

Bargersville is a small town – population 9,000, located 20 miles or so from Indianapolis. They have stated to the press that they hope to add 4 more Teslas and use the savings to add another officer to their force, which currently stands at 12.

Updated Track of CHEAPR Rebates – Data through 1/31/20

We have been keeping watch on rebate activity since the most recent change made to the CHEAPR rebate parameters, which lowered both incentives and price cap. The lower level of rebates continues as portrayed in the chart atop this post. The chart tracks the number of rebates by month from January 2017 (the program began in May 2015) through January 2020, which is the latest published data. CHEAPR usually updates their data about 4 weeks after the fact, so we are a few weeks from seeing February data. Although you don’t see it in the chart, the breakdown of rebates continues in its shift to PHEVs, which accounted for 57% of the rebates in January.

CHEAPR has posted an announcement on its website that they are reviewing the parameters and we should expect a change later this year. It is a very general update and we do not know what changes they are considering or when they will be implemented. The announcement also notes that they are looking into a rebate for used EVs, but again, no specifics.

The enabling legislation that was passed in 2019 established a $3 million annual allocation for CHEAPR beginning January 2020 through 2025 and authorized the development of the used EV incentive. The funds come from the clean-air surcharge on automobile registrations.

CHEAPR Structure

The other part of the announcement that we found interesting was that even though the program began in 2015, it had been considered to be a pilot all this time. Who knew! Now it has a more official status as noted in Public Act 19-117. As part of this structural modification, CHEAPR is getting a board of directors. This board is in the process of being filled. To our knowledge, there has only been one meeting so far this year. This nascent process seems to be part of the slow speed of change.

This organizational transition may cause delays in processing rebates.

This is a link to Public Act 19-117. It is a lengthy document and most of it has nothing to do with EVs. The part about CHEAPR begins on page 115.

Possible Data Conflict

The CHEAPR website shows rebate detail. If you toggle the slider, it reports 47 rebates for January. The website also offers an Excel file for download, which is what we used to create the chart. This file has two date fields: date of application and date of sale. We used the date of sale. Both numbers differ from the HTML feature. The date of application count is 57 and the date of sale count is 44. I guess that means your mileage will vary.

Run Rate

Based on the January data (and we would like to point out that there is a small difference in the data in the visual that is on the CHEAPR website and the Excel file that we downloaded to create the chart), the run-rate is about $500,000 annually. January has typically been a somewhat slow month for EV sales, generally speaking, but if the parameters are not revised, the allocated funds will not get spent.

There is one other factor to note that may indirectly affect rebate volume, which is that General Motors phases out of the federal tax credit as of March 31. There were 7 Chevy Bolt rebates in January. This car has been a tepid seller, to begin with, but losing the federal tax credit won’t help.

We eagerly await further news regarding their specific plans.

A Lot Had to Happen to Get Us Here

The Westport Police Tesla Model 3 police cruiser is in its third week of service as of this writing. It has become an international sensation and the introductory splash doesn’t show signs of abating any time soon. The Westport Police Department is still fielding inquiries. The car will be exhibited at the New York International Auto Show from April 10 – 19. It will be seen at the Westport Maker Faire and there will be an open house and press event in April. (Update: The NY International Auto Show has been canceled for 2020. Maker Faire is canceled. The status of the open house is TBD. This is due to taking precautions regarding COVID-19.)

This post takes a look back on some of the hurdles and questions that had to be faced in order to get to this point, some of which could have scuttled the project.

Politics

Westport Police Chief, Foti Koskinas, has made it a point to thank the First Selectman Jim Marpe and town officials for their support. We want to pause here for a minute because this is not just an obligatory shout-out. Chief Foti was very clear that because of this support, he was spared jumping through bureaucratic hoops with multiple boards. The town was supportive of taking this step, knowing that they were incurring a certain level of risk. The community has ambitious goals to lower emissions and become net-zero. Town leadership understands it is time for action. The fact that there is considerable support in this environmentally-minded community also helps.

Foti told the club that he is aware of police chiefs in a number of municipalities that would like to do the same thing, but they gave up because of the process. It can be hard to overcome inertia.

Requirements

This was easy. The Tesla exceeds the minimum requirements for safety and performance.

Engineering

There were a number of challenges and questions that flow from this one word.

Would Tesla be cooperative from an engineering perspective? Without their support, the best that Westport and its vendors could hope for would be to muddle through, if it would even have been worth the trouble. Foti stated that at first there were challenges. Tesla was initially unresponsive. But they came around to embrace the project, which has obvious upside for them. Having made it through that, Foti now characterizes them as a great partner.

These are the specific tasks we are aware of:

Integrate Tesla headlights and taillights so they can be used as part of police emergency lighting. Tesla recoded for this.

Access the Sentry cameras for use as dashcam and license plate readers. Tesla worked with the WPD vendors and this is happening. The police can now avoid purchasing new cameras, which they normally have to do. And the Tesla cameras are superior.

Wire the electric accessories such as lights, siren, and radio into the 75kW battery (a.k.a. the large battery). The alternative would have been to add another 12-volt battery, an inelegant solution that could also have scuppered the project. The law enforcement accessories that are powered by the large battery have had only a de minimus impact on range.

Use the Tesla computer. This is a work in progress and the outcome is still not known. There has to be airtight security for both parties. Foti is cautiously optimistic. For now, they have installed a ruggedized tablet.

One of the questions to be addressed by the test is how well the battery holds up. Tesla has advised WPD to expect 1 – 1.5% degradation per year. Tesla is monitoring the batteries. That level of degradation would not interfere with the ability of the car to be used for many years. After 10 years, the battery would still be 85-90% of what it was on delivery.

Cost. Of course, cost.

Even though replacing a car that gets 16 MPG (on paper, anyway – in actuality, it’s lower) with a zero-emission vehicle makes all the sense in a world where climate change represents an existential threat and air pollution is responsible for thousands of deaths each year and billions in added health care costs, the town, and taxpayers, nonetheless, have to pay for it.

In the reporting at the time of the acquisition, it was noted that the cost of the Tesla was $52,290 versus $37,000 for a Ford Explorer and that the savings on fuel and maintenance would make up the differential in less than 3 years. That is all true, except it is more complicated than that.

The new Tesla actually will have cost less to acquire. “Huh?” you say.

Police cruisers require a lot of customization and that is expensive. None of the off-the-shelf parts would fit this new vehicle. This includes the wiring of the accessories into the battery, lights, gun rack, etc. The firms that Westport uses, major players in this particular market niche, are Whelen Engineering and Fleet Auto Body, the latter company doing the installation. Both of these companies provided their services to outfit the Tesla for free. It was R&D for them. And once they made that offer, it essentially eliminated any financial risk for the town, barring the car being a complete failure and having to be written off. The cost of paying for a one-off customization would have been prohibitive. It wouldn’t have happened. Going forward, the cost of the customization will have to be figured into any future purchases, though the cost will be the standard market rate for such a project. And depending upon how much of the native Tesla tech will be repurposed, these costs could be lowered significantly.

Not having to buy cameras saves around $3000. Incorporating the Tesla lights into the police emergency lights helps. If the Tesla computer can be tapped, there would be an additional savings of $3-5000, making the differential in capital costs practically disappear.

Model 3 – Going Forward

It is not uncommon for the actual performance to differ from the officially rated metrics. In the case of the Ford Explorer, while it is rated for 16 MPG, the performance under police-use conditions with all the idling and sudden acceleration is 8-10 MPG.

According to Foti, the Tesla Model 3 has “hit all its marks” during the brief period that it has been in service. So color us optimistic. The performance is there. The officers like it. The range has been adequate. Tesla is monitoring the battery. It is hoped that the life of the vehicle will exceed the service life of conventional police vehicles.

We now enter the period of gathering data. By definition, that will take some time. And we’ll be here to report it when that time comes.

The Tesla Model 3 police cruiser was the star of the EV Club meeting

Westport Chief of Police Foti Koskinas brought the new, fully customized Tesla Model 3 police vehicle to the EV Club meeting this week to exhibit to a group of roughly 30 attendees. He applauded the support the police received from First Selectman Jim Marpe, Sustainable Westport, the EV Club of CT, and many residents. This car is a tangible step toward the town’s objective of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050.

The police department continues to field inquiries about their experience and process to this point from countries all over the world. The chief referenced recent inquiries from Istanbul, Turkey, and New Zealand.

Chief Foti is shown here speaking to the club. He is drinking Pepsi, folks, although he has also drunk the Kool-Aid as evident in his enthusiasm about the Model 3. The vehicle has only been in service for two weeks, which is not much time to gather data, but Foti told the crowd that it is performing as advertised. He looks forward to gathering more data as the department accumulates more experience with it to further analyze the use case.

A police vehicle is normally kept for around 120,000 miles. But those are driving miles and the vehicle will have spent 30,000 hours idling during its time in use. In the stories about the Tesla acquisition that have been published in various outlets, some commenters expressed negative sentiment about police spending time idling in general. For the record, it is required. The computer needs to be kept running, and the officers have to be in a position to respond instantaneously. The combination of the driving and idling equates to 300,000 driving miles, per Chief Foti. The police electronic equipment is being wired directly into the 75 kW Tesla battery. Problem solved with respect to emissions, but it is hoped, and we won’t know for a while, that the Tesla will have a longer service life. Tesla is monitoring the battery and advises the police to expect 1% to 1.5% diminishment per year, meaning the vehicle can remain in service a long time without worrying about a battery that becomes meaningfully compromised.

Chief Foti also discussed how the mileage stats that are on paper about a car don’t mean a lot with respect to actual performance. The 16 MPG that is the rated performance of the Ford Explorers is closer to 8 – 10 MPG due to the nature of its use for police work. But, that said, and in the service of gathering data, the department is also working with Ford to test a conventional hybrid Explorer police vehicle. The hybrid would see a gain in rated mileage from 16 to 28 MPG, and would somewhat mitigate the use of the engine while idling.

The Model 3 is not the department’s first experience with a plug-in vehicle. It owns two plug-in Priuses, which are used for parking enforcement and mostly run in electric mode.

The Model 3 has been deployed to traffic, where its ability to accelerate quickly from a standing start is valuable from the perspective of officer and public safety, described in more detail in an earlier post here. Chief Foti put more specific numbers to it at the meeting.  The police Model 3 will go from 0 to 60 in 3.2 seconds. The faster the police vehicle can accelerate to overtake a speeder and the shorter the distance to catch up to the offender, the lower the risk. Describing the safety issue as “huge,” he states that he may only have to drive at 65 MPH with the Tesla instead of 85 MPH, and travel two-tenths of a mile rather than six or seven-tenths of a mile.

Traffic is a big issue locally. There is plenty of it. The department receives numerous complaints of dangerous driving from residents. Chief Foti described Westport as a “cut-through” town, given that  I-95 and the Merritt Parkway cross the town, not to mention Route 1 and the two train stations. When there is a backup (which happens all the time), the map apps direct traffic onto local roads. There is a lot of speeding, distracted driving, and incivility.

The Model 3 is being used for either one or two shifts per day, every day. Even if the car has been on duty for 16 hours, there is still plenty of time overnight to fully recharge the battery.

This particular patrol car is not a “black and white.” It is dark gray with police decals, a design that “doesn’t stick out until you want it to stick out.”

Custom Model 3 Equipment Spec

Whelen engineering developed a lot of custom equipment for this car due to its being the first of its kind project. They didn’t charge the town since they view it as a pilot. In order to show their work to other prospective municipal customers, they have purchased their own vehicle. They spent about 200 hours working on this customization, but once this is in regular production, that is expected to be reduced by 80 to 90 percent. This vendor already has another order, though it is for a fire chief’s car.

BMW i8 Cabriolet

The Tesla wasn’t the only interesting vehicle to make an appearance. Club member Joe Stroll brought his gold BMW i8 Cabriolet.

Interesting Approaches to EV Incentives in Neighboring States

This blog has published a number of articles about the recent changes in the CHEAPR program and how they have impacted rebates. Our feeling is that these changes were misguided and have sub-optimized the program’s effectiveness. We were told by DEEP that there was a concern about depleting funds in Q4 2019. We respect the concern but still feel that it was not managed well. And it has gone away for the near-term with the replenishment authorized by HB 7205, though the earlier levels have not been restored as of this update in late February 2020.

The changes in the MSRP cap from $50,000 to $42,000, along with reductions in the size of the rebates, caused a steep falloff in the number of rebates and total dollar amount rebated, such that they are pacing well under the current allocation.  The vehicle most impacted was the Tesla Model 3, though there were significant declines among the Chevy Bolt and Nissan Leaf as well.

As of this writing, we still await an announcement with respect to used EVs. A used EV incentive was authorized in HB 7205, but DEEP, which has been in the process of standing up a new board for CHEAPR, has not yet acted, nor posted anything on their website about when it might. When it does, this post will be updated.

Impact on Efficiency

All state incentive programs tinker with incentive levels and rules. Technology changes, and, of course, funding streams vary in size. Focusing on the former, the point of changing the parameters to keep up with the technology is intended to incentivize a longer electric range equating to lower emissions. Unfortunately, recent changes in CHEAPR have had the opposite effect. From the period January 4 to October 2, 2019, the weighted average electric range of incentivized EVs was 219 miles. Post incentive change, October 28 to December 31, 2019, this number declined to 176 miles. This happened because the changes hit BEVs much harder than PHEVs. This calculation does not normalize for incentive levels which were slashed across the board, and which would cause the dollar amount per electric mile to decline even though BEV rebates and efficiency got crushed.

So what are the highlights in New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts?

Beginning with max MSRP, all of these states have caps that are at least as high as CT used to have.

NJ – $55,000

NY – $60,000

MA – $50,000

NY has a little extra spin, which is that, even though the base level incentives don’t apply over the cap, the state still offers a $500 rebate for any EV with a cost higher than $60,000.

Efficiency

New Jersey goes at efficiency head-on. The rebate is directly tied to the range: $25 per mile, up to $5000. (That’s 200 miles for those who don’t have calculators handy.) It is the most generous of the incentives in this region at the top end and it doesn’t get more linear than that.

MA has made ineligible PHEVs with a range of under 25 miles. This seems like a sensible adjustment at this point in our EVolution. There is also an incentive for used EVs. It is offered through the TMLP and MGED utilities and only applies to their territories. There is no gradation, just a $900 incentive with a purchase price cap of $15,000. The price cap was set relatively low because the used EV incentive is intended to target less affluent buyers. It was felt that this cap is low enough that they don’t have to get involved with burdensome income-verification procedures.

Dealership Data

A distinguishing feature of NY is that they publish rebates by dealership. That is a great idea! The dealership landscape is still fraught for EVs. The recent Sierra Club EV Shopper Study reported that 74% of dealers do not have a single EV on their lot. Our club did a lot of the fieldwork (dealer visits) for the Sierra Club in CT, and some interviewers reported that even where dealers are selling EVs, the salespeople would push them toward ICE vehicles. That said, some dealerships do make the effort to sell EVs, and we try to support them. We have people come to us for dealer recommendations, and we help them when we can, but data such as this show objectively and comprehensively which dealerships are walking the walk.

We think that raising the MSRP cap should be the top priority. That, along with adopting a rebate scale that better incentives efficiency, along with providing dealer transparency, would be a big improvement.

UPDATE: MARCH 1, 2020

This is a notice that has been posted on the CHEAPR website, so perhaps they are acting on one or more of these points.

Electric Vehicle Test Track at the New York Auto Show

UPDATE: This show has been postponed due to COVID-19 and is now scheduled for August 28 – September 6, with press days Aug. 26, 27.

Con Edison, the New York utility, is sponsoring the Electric Vehicle Test Track, as well as booth space for non-profit EV organizations from the tri-state area. Drive Electric Long Island is spearheading this, along with some of its coalition partners. The EV Club of CT has been invited to participate.

There will be a lot of EVs present and we look forward to the chance to speak with some of these companies about their plans and exchange experiences and ideas with other EVangelist groups.

A ticket to the auto show costs $17 for an adult. Club-members who volunteer for a shift at the booth will get a free ticket to the exhibition.

Tesla Model 3 Police Vehicle Appearance

The Tesla Model 3 police vehicle, as has been reported previously, has drawn an unbelievable amount of attention, whether at the CT Conference of Municipalities, inquiries from around the world, or local interest. It is safe to say that the Westport Police, supported by town leadership, have gotten way more than 75 kWh worth of mileage as a result of their innovative move. We have learned that the Police Model 3 will be making an appearance at the NY Auto Show. Tesla is covering the cost. We’ll publish more detail when available.

The show runs from April 10 through 19th, from 10 AM to 10 PM at the Jacob Javits Center on 11th Avenue in New York City.

Open for Business – Tesla leasing in Milford

Tesla held its official kickoff of leasing vehicles directly to customers from its service center in Milford, CT.

The festivities opened with Mayor Ben Blake of Milford touting that the town has more EV charging stations than any town in CT and is the supercharger capitol of the state.

Bruce Becker, president of the EV Club of CT, moderated the event, noting that Tesla accounts for the majority of the increase in EV registrations year over year.

There were also speakers from CT DEEP, The Sierra Club, and the CT League of Conservation Voters.

Prospective leasing customers are permitted to take a test drive.

It is technically called a demonstration drive, and the wording in the liability release is a little different reflecting the fact that it is in the service of a prospective lease, but it’s a test drive.

The first step to direct sales?

Tesla is still not permitted to sell directly to consumers, unlike in our neighboring states of New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and, for that matter, the majority of the country. What prevents Tesla from doing so are the so-named dealer franchise laws that were written decades ago to protect the dealerships from their own affiliated manufacturers. Those old laws did not address leasing which didn’t exist. Nonetheless, Tesla was careful, making sure they were legally buttoned up before taking this step. To be sure, this is only a first step, a foot in the door toward changing the law to permit direct sales. With other EV companies preparing to sell directly to consumers, if we in CT want to make a significant impact on emissions reduction, if consumers are to be given choice, it is only a matter of time.

Further coverage can be found in this article in the New Haven Business Journal.