Photo: Barry Kresch

A direct sales bill did pass the legislature, just not the one we wanted. Connecticut residents now can buy pot, but not a Tesla.

Emerging from the smoke, we can see for the dealers what selling EVs looks like. They prioritize politics over actually selling EVs, protectionism over innovation. The one who loses is the consumer, as most EV buyers are forced to go out of state for their vehicle, and the citizenry at large, as we live with higher levels of pollution and the planet fries. CT dealers sold an average of 1.3 EVs each in 2020 (as reported in Treehugger.com). That level of ineptitude and disingenuousness means that we can watch as the goal the state has set for itself of 500,000 registered EVs by 2030 recedes over the horizon. At this point, it is less a question of whether CT will hit that goal, than by how much we will miss it. It is fine to sign a memorandum of understanding, as the state did to much fanfare with the MultiState Zero Emission Vehicle Action Plan MOU, but without adequate legislation and policy, nobody should be surprised when there are no results.

This legislative session was pretty much a bust when it came to environmental legislation. Not only did the EV Freedom bill fail, so did the Transportation Climate Initiative, and the authorization for DEEP to look at implementing California standards for medium and heavy-duty vehicles. Even in a state that thinks of itself as progressive, entrenched interests can still act against the public good.

In the case of the EV Freedom Bill, SB 127, which was the one the club devoted much of its efforts to support, the bill passed out of the Transportation Committee by a 25-10 vote, but then stalled in the Senate. Had it passed the Senate, an equally contentious adventure loomed in the House.

We were told that our efforts fell just short in the Senate. Legislators, Tesla, and Rivian all said that the grassroots effort made a difference. But we’re obviously not quite there.

If there is anything good to be said of this effort, it is that the various advocacy groups we worked with, from the Tesla Club to the members of the EV Coalition, collaborated really well together. And we found some new partners in the Electrification Coalition, the IBEW (electrical workers union), and new manufacturers, Rivian and Lucid.

Senator Haskell plans to introduce the bill again in January. His task was made more difficult this year by the fact that he did not become chairman of the Transportation Committee until halfway through the session. His advice for next year is similar to this year: Contact your representatives. It is fine to do this out of session. If you can build a personal relationship, so much the better. They need to hear from constituents.

This bill has overwhelming public support. And there are more of us every year.

New Rules Take Effect on June 7th

Revisions to the CHEAPR EV purchase incentive program approved in February are going into effect on June 7th. This was announced at the CHEAPR board meeting on June 4th. We don’t really know if there has been much advance outreach to the dealers or not. The announcement felt abrupt so it could be that there will be a bumpy transition for a period of time. The details of the program are described in this earlier blog post written when the changes were announced.

In the meantime, the April update was released on June 5th. The March rebates were restated upward to 170 with April at 119. The Toyota Prius Prime continued as the vehicle with the most rebates at 31, followed by the Toyota RAV4 Prime (20), Chevy Bolt (19), and Tesla Model 3 (18). All other models were in single digits.

The program continues to pace below budget.

The numbers have picked up somewhat recently as the economy recovers. The slide below was shown by DEEP and indicates an upward sloping EV sales trend in CT this year through the first quarter.

Even with the March spike, the pacing is still below the baseline budget for that month. It remains to be seen if the upturn in the economy and the new rebates will raise the spend level to match the available funds. We may not really know the program’s true run rate for several months. The new LMI incentives are going to require outreach and education, and the process is more complicated. It is likely there won’t be much traction for a while.

Connecticut Has Poor Air Quality

Our small state has big air, as in big air pollution. Part of the reason is that we’re a heavily transited state situated between major metro areas. As a result, 38% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation sector, according to data published by the CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, which is about 10 points higher than the national average. The American Lung Association in its State of the Air Report gives every county in CT a grade of F for ozone pollution, the kind of thing that exacerbates asthma and other cardio-pulmonary conditions. This backdrop underscores the importance of getting more zero-emission vehicles on the road.

Tons of CO2 Emissions Avoided

It should come as no surprise that a Ford Explorer that is subject to heavy police vehicle use burns a ton of gas. The car isn’t fuel-efficient to start with, garnering an EPA-rated 16 MPG. In police use, which veers from extended periods of idling to pedal-to-the-metal takeoffs, the “real-life” mileage recorded by the Westport Police slides to 10 MPG. The Explorer that was used in the financial analysis dashboard was driven 23,060 miles over the course of one year, translating to 2306 gallons of gasoline.

We used data from FuelEconomy.gov that pegs 1 gallon of gas as causing 20.35 pounds of CO2. Most of that weight comes from the oxygen in the atmosphere that is part of the CO2 formation that happens in the combustion process. Here is the specific link that describes the process.

The math is straightforward, 2306 gallons x 20.35 lbs per gallon equals 46,927 lbs. or 23.5 tons per year. From one car!

Note: This is a comparison of tailpipe emissions only. There are emissions associated with the manufacture of each vehicle, the fuel sources used to generate electricity in the CT grid, and the many upstream emissions of extracting petroleum, refining it into gasoline and transporting it to the various points in its journey until it is pumped into a gas tank.

Avoided Health Costs

Our reference for avoided health costs was the journal Climatic Change, published by way of Think Progress. The data were developed in a study by Drew Shindell, a professor at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. It’s worth a read if you have the time as it is more wide-ranging than our use of it here which is to narrowly focus on the impact of gasoline. That impact translates to an additional $3.80 per gallon over the retail price in health and environmental costs. Referencing the Ford Explorer’s burning through 2306 gallons, that works out to avoided health and environmental costs of $8763 for one car driven at this level of mileage over the course of one year.

Town of Westport Adds 2 Chevy Bolt EVs To Its Fleet

The Town of Westport has announced further progress to its march to net-zero by 2050 with the addition of 2 Chevrolet Bolt battery-electric vehicles to its fleet. The vehicles are the standard-level trim options and they are the new 2021 model.

Westport has been taking tangible steps to achieve its environmental objectives. These Bolts will be used for municipal inspections by the Engineering Division and the Tax Assessor. The current practice is for vehicles to be swapped out around every four years. As other vehicles turn over, the town plans to continue converting its inspection fleet to EVs.

The Bolt was selected due to its reasonable price, reputation for quality engineering, and being the right size. It has an EPA-rated range of 259 miles.

The Bolt typically comes with an 8-year/100,000-mile battery warranty. However, these vehicles were obtained through Enterprise Fleet Leasing and will almost certainly have been turned over before getting to that point.

Importantly, EVs last a long time, have a low maintenance profile and could lower carrying costs. This was taken into account when making this decision.

Rivian Brings New R1T to CT in Support of Direct Sales

With the fate of SB 127 hanging in the balance in the waning days of the 2021 legislative session, a pre-production version of the Rivian R1T all-electric pickup truck made an appearance in CT. It could be found Thursday in Hartford, where legislators and the governor were given the opportunity to go for a drive and see the future of electro-mobility. The fate of the bill in the Senate is expected to be determined over the next few days. It would then still have to go before the House.

On Friday, a last-minute gathering came together, where some members of the EV Club CT, were also able to get a look. We hope to bring them back to CT once they have started production later this year.

Group photos by Paul Braren

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.

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.

Join the EV Club for our next Zoom meeting on April 15th at 6:45 when U.S. Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut’s fourth congressional district will speak to us about what we can expect for EV policy as the Biden Administration pushes major infrastructure legislation. The Congressman was first elected to his current position in 2008 and has been a supporter of progressive environmental policies.

We have only a limited amount of time with him, 30 minutes, and I am looking to have questions teed up for him because it will be too much to try and traffic cop in that limited time. Some of the things that are pending are modification of the federal EV purchase incentive, an updated cash for clunkers, EVSE infrastructure, EVs in the federal fleet, changes to CAFE, MHD standards, and other possible policy levers.

Registration required:

https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMlf-6hqzIrHtSyDlPHR4Cht011A0wdRhZn

If anyone would like to suggest a question, please do so in the comments or via the contact form.

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.