1

Sandy Munro Tells It Like It Is

Sandy Munro Unfiltered

Sandy Munro, famous for his willingness to express his (highly informed) opinions in a direct and unfiltered manner, joined the EV Club for a conversation on March 21st. The video has been posted on YouTube and is embedded below.

Munro clearly feels that mainstream press coverage of EV news is often ignorant and at times biased. This was his closing comment about why he holds these discussions with EV clubs and similarly interested audiences:

“My job, really, is to try and dispel as many of these silly rumors that are out there, and this is the only way to it because the normal press doesn’t want to have anything to do with the kind of discussion that we had here today.”

A few items contained in the video:

  • On autonomous driving – “FSD is a myth by everybody until we move to Forward Looking Infrared. Lidar and cameras don’t reliably work. Only Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) can see through everything.” He also mentioned that FLIR is what the military uses and that about half of the work done by his engineering firm, Munro and Associates, is defense-related.
  • On batteries – Pouch design does not hold up as well as cylindrical. The expansion and contraction kicks the daylights out of them. Solid state is the holy grail and will last indefinitely.
  • The press over-sensationalizes Tesla issues because Tesla doesn’t buy ads. “If you don’t give us ads, we’re going to throw you under the bus.”
  • The Tesla Gigacast will produce a body that is much stronger than any sheet metal currently in use.
  • What did he find when he pulled out the floor of a Mustang Mach-E frunk?
  • Should you be happy to see an ABB charger?

 

 




First Look at Managed Charging Incentives

Utility EV Rate Design – Proposed Details for Single Family Residences

The grid at the top of this post comes from a filing by Eversource for its proposed EV charging incentive structure for single family residential homes. It is one piece of the many-legged creature that is the new EV Rate Design Adjudication that was released by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA). In turn, the EV Rate Design is but one facet of PURA’s larger grid modification docket. To be clear, these incentives come from the utilities.

When the adjudication was released in mid-July, not all of the incentive levels and implementation details had been determined. Working groups were set up to address the unfinished work. This is the month when a lot of the submissions are required.

The EV Rate Design is a big program that includes incentives for residential, commercial, workplace, fleet, and public charging. The incentives include hardware and installation subsidies, make ready, demand charge mitigation, and financial incentives to avoid charging during peak periods. The grid up above is only the single family residential part. This is not final. It has been submitted by Eversource to PURA for approval. There is a comment period and there could be changes. It is our expectation that changes will likely be at the margin. For that reason, we thought it worthwhile to tease it and these are the provisions.

Please note that this program begins in January 2022 and the subsidies for hardware and installation only apply to purchases after the start of the program. The first set of bullet points are for hardware and installation.

  • A household can receive a $500 subsidy to offset the purchase of a smart charger. It has to be a smart charger, meaning WiFi enabled, in order to be able to participate in the program because the utility, or Electric Distribution Company (EDC) as they are referred to, has to be able to see the charger/charging activity. Taking this subsidy requires participation in the demand response or managed charging program. $500 is a meaningful amount as there are smart chargers out there in the $6-700 range. Only approved equipment is eligible. The approval list has not yet been released. This is necessary because the EDC has to know that the unit will function in its particular software environment.
  • There is an additional $500 subsidy to offset the cost of bringing a 240 volt line from the panel to the garage. The total cost of this will vary with each residence based on the amperage of the line being pulled and the difficulty and distance in getting from the panel to the garage.
  • If your panel does not have enough capacity for an EV charger, or the charger you want, you would have to upgrade your electric service. There is no provision to offset that expense, which can be $5000 or more.
  • There is an installed base of dumb chargers among existing EV owners and the program has a provision for these folks to participate.
    • If the vehicle has telematics access, GM and Tesla being the specific examples cited in the filing, the utility can capture the data via the car without needing the smart charger.
    • If there is not telematics access, the utility will send a device to track it.
  • There may be an installed base of smart chargers. The filing doesn’t address this. It may be an omission. If the program wants to treat these differently than a dumb charger, then one would have to wait for a determination of whether this equipment is approved.

The next incentives are for participation. The idea is to offer discounts to get customers to charge their EVs during periods of lower electricity demand. This will help load balance the grid.

  • For those accepting the hardware and installation incentive, since that comes with the obligation to participate, there is no enrollment incentive.
  • For telematics participants, there is a $200 enrollment incentive. For non-telematics “device” participants, the enrollment incentive is $150.
  • Charging incentives for smart charger and non-smart charger participants are capped at $200 annually.
    • The program is intended to have 2 levels of participation: demand response and managed charging. Only demand response will be rolled out for 2022. Managed charging will follow 12 months later.

Demand response means that the utility will alert customers when a high demand period is coming. The alert will typically happen 24 hours prior to the event. These events will generally be 3 hour blocks of time occurring between 3 – 9PM in June through September on days when demand spikes. Customers with smart chargers will be opted-in by default but have the ability to opt-out for a given event in response to an alert. Being opted-in means that the car will either have its charging rate curtailed or will temporarily not be able to charge during the high-demand block of time. If a car is simply not plugged-in, that counts as being opted-in. Customers are permitted up to 2 opt-out events per month to remain eligible for the incentive. Telematics customers will work similarly, except it is up to the customer not to plug-in during these times (since the utility can’t control the charger). The incentive is structured as $50 per month for each of the 4 months, paid annually after the summer.

The minimum participation requirement is 24 months. After 24 months, participation continues unless affirmatively withdrawn by the customer. Participation may be terminated prior to 24 months if there are extenuating circumstances, such as customer no longer owning an EV or moving to a new residence.

The more advanced demand charge level allows the utility to throttle the rate of charge as needed. There are no discreet events as with demand response. Customers can switch between tiers in either direction, but must participate for 6 months before switching and then another 6 months before switching again. The EDCs have proposed that a higher incentive be made available to participants in the more advanced managed charging program but have not yet specified how much it will be.

As noted at the start of the post, this plan is not final. We will publish updates as events unfold.

 




Bolt Owners Still Treading Water

The Chevrolet Bolt recall is inching closer to the one year mark, having started in November of last year. GM expanded the scope of the vehicles being recalled over the course of several stages until in August, it expanded to every Bolt manufactured. That’s the bad news/good news. The recall involves every Bolt, but it hasn’t been a big seller. The irony is that was beginning to change. Since the introduction of the redesigned model this year which came with a lower price, it has been getting traction as one of the better BEV values. Below is the registration trend of the Bolt in CT, compared with its stablemate Volt that was discontinued in 2019. The most recent numbers in the chart are as of July 1, which was before deliveries began of the Bolt EUV.

Bolt Trend in CT

 

There may finally be a ray of hope. ElectricDrive.com reported that GM has identified the cause and that its supplier, LG Chem, has restarted production lines. New battery cells could be reaching dealers by later this month. It is not known how long it will take to work through the recall backlog as well as the resumption of new vehicle manufacturing. The automaker also announced “new diagnostic software” to be deployed over the next 60 days.

The recall does tell us a couple of things. If you read the ElectricDrive piece, the problem is described as a defect in the manufacturing process. There is more detail than that, but the point is that it isn’t a problem with the battery design or underlying technology. It is strictly quality control. In the article, it specifies that the problem occurred at the LG plant in Korea. But LG opened a plant in Michigan in 2019 and newer Bolts have batteries manufactured at that facility. The fact that GM included Bolts with batteries manufactured in each facility indicates a more across the board concern. (Batteries are very heavy and expensive to ship. It is much more cost-effective to co-locate battery and vehicle manufacturing. The Michigan facility is likely part of how GM was able to lower the price of the refreshed Bolt. Perhaps it provides some measure of hope that there will be a meaningful battery manufacturing presence in this country, a critical national security technology, as opposed to our usual practice of developing technology and then ceding the manufacturing to the Chinese, e.g. solar panels.)

There are a number of Bolt owners among club members. For a variable number of months now, depending upon which recall batch their vehicle is in, they have been living with a vehicle that needs to be garaged outdoors and used in a range-compromised fashion. The Bolt’s 259 mile range is now effectively 163 with the guidance to maintain a battery state of charge of not less than 70 miles and no more than 90%. With this slow-rolling, multi-stage recall, where there is still no definitive no end in sight, how proactively has GM or its Chevy dealers been  communicating with their customers? Bolt owners responded to our query between September 21st and October 4th.

GM has been in a difficult spot, given the expanding scope of the recall, the elusive nature of the cause, and possibly its negotiations to get LG to assume some portion of the liability. Nonetheless, GM and Chevy dealers are responsible to the customers and the general consensus is that there has been a minimal level of communication. The near-silence from GM may be be because it hasn’t had much to say, but there does not seem to be much of a communications strategy in place. The number of communications from GM seems to basically be one, or one per recall if the vehicle was in one of the earlier batches before the full scope of the problem became apparent. The content boils down to, “be patient.” Some owners are frustrated, while others have more equanimity, with GM getting points for proactively expanding the scope of the recall. The dealers don’t seem to be much in the loop. Updates have not been forthcoming as the saga has dragged on. No complimentary loaners have been provided.

Some customers have requested that GM repurchase their vehicle. One advised that there is a YouTube channel called “Wrenching Fool” that provides guidance on how to go about getting a case number. The repurchase requests are being evaluated by GM on a case by case basis and do not appear to have been resolved to this point.

There was one exception to that. Club-member Glen Zackowski reports reaching a favorable repurchase deal with his dealership, Grossman Chevrolet, in Old Saybrook. He will have to wait until the car is fixed. At that point, he will be the owner of a new Bolt EUV. No doubt, staying in the family helped. Customers also report that they like the car. They just wish this process had been made easier for them.

 

 

 

 




Westport Police Led The Way, And Will Be Again Next Week

Tesla Tech Enables Innovative Solutions to Law Enforcement Customization

The Westport Police were out in front of the market when they acquired a Model 3 for patrol car duty in December 2019.

What is becoming apparent is that their diligence and attention to detail placed them further ahead than others who made a similar move after they did.

Case in point – how does one handle the police electronics. In a conventional ICE police car, the vehicle is equipped with a heavy-duty alternator. The Tesla doesn’t have an alternator – what to do?

One option, as was done with a Model Y that went into service this past July in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, is to add a second 12-volt battery. Eden Prairie, MN, Model Y, battery in frunkThis photo was published in DriveElectricCanada.ca. It shows the additional battery parked tidily in the frunk.

While that works, a more elegant solution was arrived at in Westport, which was to wire the police electronics directly into the large battery. The police report this being a trivial drain. It required the police and Whelen Engineering working with Tesla to do some recoding to make it happen.

The point is that there is a lot there when it comes to the potential to re-purposing the native tech in a Tesla. Westport has also been able to incorporate some of the camera and computing power into the license plate reader.

We don’t know how widely this knowledge about these opportunities to lower the cost of customization is being disseminated, though the Westport Police have more than done their part in terms of being generous with their time and sharing what they have learned.

The police have the approval for another electric patrol car, which will most likely be the Model Y.

Model 3 to Lead EV Parade

Officer Charles Sampson, who was the project leader for the Tesla patrol car, will be driving the Model 3 as the escort for the EV parade on October 2nd. There will be an opportunity to check out the vehicle before the start of the parade. The parade departs from the Westport Train Station at 10 AM. Registration is still open at https://bit.ly/GreenWheels

Drivers should arrive between 9 and 9:30 to give us time to organize.




National Drive Electric Week Events

A Selection of NDEW Events in CT

National Drive Electric Week is soon to be in full swing with a range of events throughout the state. This is in marked contrast to last year when the pre-vaccination pandemic had a chilling effect. To be sure, pandemic restrictions are in place, but with events being out of doors, a relatively high vaccination rate in CT, and masking and social distancing requirements in place, it looks to be an active, but safe, time to resume (semi) in-person EVangelizing.

EV owners requested to showcase their vehicles at all of these shows. All events are free unless otherwise noted.

The home page for National Drive Electric Week is https://driveelectricweek.org/index

You can enter a city or zip code to find events near you. Most organizers are glad to welcome more EV owners.

Westport/Fairfield – Green Wheels EV Parade and Showcase

Oct 2, 2021  10 AM – 2 PM

There will be an EV parade beginning at the Westport Metro North Train Station and ending at the Bob’s Plaza Lot 889 Post Road, Fairfield, CT. This is similar to the parade that was held last year. However, unlike last year, there will be an EV showcase at the terminus.

This event is produced by the Sustainable Fairfield Task Force and the EV Club of CT.

This is where to register.

East Hampton – Portland EV Showcase

September 25, 2021   12 PM – 3 PM

Rain Date September 26, 2021

East Hampton High School

15 North Maple Street East Hampton, CT

The East Hampton and Portland Clean Energy Task Forces are organizing the Third Annual “Electric Car Show 2021” on Saturday, September 25, 2021 at the East Hampton High School at 15 North Maple St. from 12 noon to 3 pm (Rain Date is Sunday, September 26th). The show is part of the National Drive Electric Week program. Come join them as they showcase electric, hybrid, and alternative fuel cars from private owners and various dealerships.

Willimantic EV Ride and Drive

The New England Electric Auto Association will be hosting an electric car ride and drive event at Jillson Square Park in Willimantic Connecticut on Sunday, September 26th from 12:30 to 5 pm. Several dealers along with actual EV owners will be present for test drives. A solar installer will also be present. This is a great opportunity to test out an electric vehicle in a friendly, no-pressure environment. Please go to www.neeaa.org for more information. Dinner at a nearby restaurant after the event.

Event Page: https://driveelectricweek.org/event?eventid=2877

Middletown EV Ride and Drive

The New England Electric Auto Association is hosting an electric car show and ride and drive event on Sunday, October 3rd from 1-5 pm at Harbor Park in Middletown Connecticut. Several dealers will be present for test drives. A solar installer will also be present. This is a great opportunity to see an electric vehicle in a friendly, non-sales environment. Dinner afterward at a nearby restaurant.

Harbor Park – Harbor Dr, Middletown, CT 06457

Event Page: https://driveelectricweek.org/event?eventid=2904

 




Where The EVs Are – July 2021

Fairfield County is Home to 41% of EVs

7023 of 17,217 EVs in the state are registered in Fairfield County.

EVs by County in CT

The map at the top of the post shows the distribution of EVs across cities. The larger the bubble the greater the number of EVs, with the top cities being Greenwich, Stamford, Westport, Fairfield, Norwalk, West Hartford, and New Canaan. These ranks don’t change that quickly but Norwalk has overtaken West Hartford. There is nowhere near enough room to display all cities in the static screenshot of the recent trend below. In the interactive dashboard, there is both a slider and a slicer to help navigate the larger charts.

EV trend by city

Adjusting for population reveals a different rank with mostly smaller towns in Fairfield County dominating: Westport, Weston, New Canaan, Greenwich, Woodbridge, Darien, and Wilton.

EVs Per Capita by City

The two charts below show EVs by make by city. These do not come directly from the DMV because the DMV separates the geo from the other information. I have created my own estimates based on the available data. Again, the screenshot is not large enough to display all cities and all of the makes in the legend. The dominant orange color is Tesla. Below the bar chart is the same data in map form with bubbles sized to overall EVs and the wedges representing each make. Again, it looks better in the dashboard which has more visual flexibility.

EVs by Make by City

Map of EVs by City by Make July '21

If anyone has any questions about a particular city, please email EVClubCT@gmail.com.




Mid-Year 2021 Dashboard Update

July 1 EV Registration Data

Post by Barry Kresch

Overall Trends

Following an earlier blog post updating topline registration data, I have now been through the details and will cover them over the course of several more posts.

As earlier reported, total electric vehicle registrations now total 17,217. This represents an increase of 36% over July 2020.

Trend of Registered EVs in CT 2017 - July 2021

 

 

Definitely an improvement, but we need more on a sustained basis. The glimmer of good news is that, not surprisingly, the bulk of the growth was recent. The last 6 months are growing at close to the pace we need. The chart below looks at semi-annual growth for the past 18 months.

% Change in EVs in CT by Period

Recent semi-annual EV growth CT

Fuel Type

Below is the trend by fuel type from 2017 through July 2021. For those new to the lingo, BEV = battery electric vehicle, PHEV = Plug-in Hybrid EV, BEMC = battery electric motorcycles, FCEV = Fuel Cell EV. BEVs have continued to outpace the other major category, PHEV.

BEVs outpaced the field. I will get into more detail in a subsequent post, but the big difference-maker was the Model Y. PHEVs, having been flat pretty much since the demise of the Chevy Volt, rebounded this year on the strength of two Toyota models: Prius Prime and the new RAV4 Prime.

When I have discussed the information on this project with reporters over the years, the first thing they ask is how many fuel cell vehicles there are. There are 3, as there have been. These vehicles are not currently available to buy in the state.

Fuel Type Change

Fuel Type July 21

Vehicle Body Type

A new field in the dataset this year is vehicle body type. An imponderable: Will I continue to receive it? The two pie charts below show the vehicles that were new to the file in first-half ’21 and all EVs as of July 1. So the vehicles in the first chart are included in the second and comprise about 25% of the total. With the Model Y and some other new models, the SUV percentage of the fleet is growing rapidly. 36% of the adds were SUVs, bringing the total file to 20%.

Vehicle Body Type

 

This probably understates how popular these vehicles are becoming. Keep in mind that this file is registrations and not sales. If I restrict the new vehicle chart to the most recent vehicles, MY 2021 and 2022, the SUV percentage goes to 44%.

MY 21, 22 Body Type

All data in this post come from the Interactive EV Dashboard, July 2021




Call for EV Owners for Electric Car Guest Drive

Get Paid for Sharing Your EV Enthusiasm

A lifetime ago (okay, 2 years) in pre-pandemic days, the club participated in several EV ride and drive events, called Electric Car Guest Drive, staged by the publisher of Electric Car Insider. My blog post about the first event is here. These events, typically sponsored by a utility or power authority, involve EV owners bringing their vehicles to be used for test drives (or guest drive) with the owner in the passenger seat. The drive is over a pre-planned route about 1.5 – 2 miles in length on local roads. No highway driving. Owners are paid $300 for each day they participate. Arrival is 9AM and the event runs from 10-4. Lunch is provided, as well as an optional dinner.

The test drive is casual with no dealerships or salespeople on site. Owners explain the vehicle, describe the ownership experience, and answer questions. Just conversation, no sales pressure of any kind. These events have been demonstrably successful at promoting EV ownership with 31% of test drivers buying an EV within 6 months.

Members of the public taking the drives are pre-registered and pre-screened.

If you are concerned about Covid, so are we! The event will only happen if it is safe. The organizer and the utility are watching developments closely. Drivers must be vaccinated. We await final word on protocol for the public and will update this space once we know. If you are interested, register to save the date.

Dates and locations:

September 23, 24, 25 – Middletown, NY (Orange County)

October 16 – Utica, NY

October 23 – Niagara Falls, NY

October 29, 30 – Middletown, NY

Those Utica and Niagara Falls locations are a bit far from CT, but there are a small number of folks on our list in upstate NY.

This is a link with more background information: www.electric-car-insider.com/evpresenters/

There is a registration link on that page. Or contact the publisher, Chris Alan, directly at Chris@electric-car-insider.com

Register for as many or as few days as you like. It’s a fun day!




Time for Ludicrous Mode

Post by Barry Kresch

An Opportunity for Large Cuts in Emissions Along With Major Budgetary Savings.

When the Westport Police were doing their diligence in advance of the purchase of a Tesla Model 3 for use as a patrol car, they worked with Sustainable Westport (SW) to run a set of estimates for the payback time period. After running the numbers, they were confident that within 3 years, the purchase premium would be recovered.

The vehicle entered service in February 2020. This spring, the EV Club approached the Westport Police about their interest in doing a deep dive on the financials: purchase, customization, operation, and maintenance. The police shared granular details of costs, including a maintenance schedule, which is the basis for the analysis. The completed analysis showed that full payback happens in year one and considerable savings are realized by year 4.

When I initially started the analysis, my expectation was that the SW numbers were reasonable and we would end up somewhere in that neighborhood. I hadn’t thought the financials would end up being such a slam-dunk with savings of $52,000 over 4 years, enough to buy a new Tesla.

Police fleet vehicles offer a bigger opportunity than initially expected.

This Tesla Pilot was only a test, but it begs the question: with such strong results, is there any reason not to go all-in for EVs, and forget gradualism?

To help understand what the financial ramifications look like, I used the information I had learned about the Tesla and the Ford Explorer comparison vehicle to model what a transition might look like. This is a general, somewhat macro exercise, and not specific to Westport or anywhere else. I would need more data for that. Nevertheless, I believe it is possible to generate directional numbers with the information at hand. The scenario, which is for a fleet of 12 vehicles, is obviously not New York City, but the basic findings wouldn’t change if it were larger.

Scenario

  • A starting fleet of 12 patrol cars, 4 Ford Crown Victorias, and 8 Ford Explorers. The Crown Vic was a ubiquitous patrol car before Ford discontinued them. Many are still around, including in Westport.
  • It is assumed the price for the Crown Vic and the Ford Explorer are the same. They probably aren’t but doubt the difference is that much.
  • Service life is 4 years for the Ford patrol cars and 3 vehicles are turned over each year. The Tesla service life is 6 years. The service life is what is used in Westport.
  • In the business as usual (BAU) scenario, each vehicle is replaced by a new Ford Explorer.
  • In the ZEV scenario, each car is replaced by a Tesla Model 3.
  • All cars are fully customized for law enforcement. When a new car replaces a like car, it is assumed that customization is reused and a zero cost is assigned in those instances. (This is most certainly understating the cost as the customization presumably does not install itself. If I had those costs, it would narrow the customization differential between Ford and Tesla due to less frequent turnover of the Teslas.) Also, in real life, if there is a model refresh, that can cause customization parts not to fit. Based on history, that is likely to happen more frequently with the Ford. But for the sake of keeping it simple for this exercise, all customization is treated as 100% re-usable.
  • It is assumed that the first 6 Teslas will have to incur full customization costs and in the BAU case, the same goes for the Explorers that replace Crown Vics. But in general, the BAU scenario has a lesser degree of customization.

The chart at the top of the post depicts the cumulative savings in this hypothetical example of 12 patrol cars over 12 years with staggered turnover. It comes in just a whisker short of $800,000. The charts below show the cumulative cost lines by year for each scenario. The charts for the fixed costs are calculated on an amortized basis with fixed costs divided by the respective service life of each vehicle.

Cumulative Total Cost by Year

Components

The three charts below break this up into the 3 categories of expense: acquisition, customization, and ongoing costs (fuel and maintenance).

Acquisition – This chart illustrates cumulative acquisition costs. Keep in mind that acquisition is staggered as neither scenario does envisions retiring vehicles before their normal service life ends. The cost curve slightly favors Tesla because, on an amortized basis, the annual cost of a Tesla is slightly lower. The longer this comparison is extended, the greater the differential would be.

Cumulative Acquisition Cost

Customization – The customization costs are somewhat lower in the BAU scenario. This is due to the fact that replacing the 8 incumbent Ford Explorers does not incur customization costs in this model. Customization costs are a bit lower for a Tesla, so in the early years as Teslas are customized and Explorers replace Crown Vics and require customization, the Tesla cost curve is lower. It catches up once the Crown Vics are fully replaced. Once the fleet is fully Tesla, that part of the curve flattens out. As noted earlier, if there are any costs incurred in the re-use of customization, it would narrow the differential as the service life is shorter for the Explorers.

Cumulative Customization Costs

Ongoing Costs – As we saw in the earlier Model 3 patrol car analysis, there are large savings in fuel and maintenance for an EV. Electricity is more efficient than gasoline and these vehicles need much less maintenance. This category saves around $940,000.

Cumulative Ongoing Costs

This makes manifest the ramifications inherent in the Westport Analysis. There are major savings to be had. This is not to underestimate the complexities of the budget process and the need to deal with upfront acquisition costs. However, as noted in the earlier analysis, the upfront purchase premium is recovered within one year, so it isn’t that big a burden.

We have data on the police patrol vehicles, but the same logic applies to other vehicles on the force and for a municipality in general. With savings this substantial, to borrow a Tesla term, it pays to up the pace of acquisition to Ludicrous Mode.




CHEAPR Does Double Duty

2 Rebates per Licensed Driver

That is the double-duty reference. A major, and welcome, change is that drivers can get the rebate twice, as opposed to the previous limit of once. There has to be a minimum of 24 months separation between the rebates. Also, June 7th starts with a clean slate. For anyone who has previously gotten a CHEAPR rebate, the count resets and you can get 2 more.

Data Appear to be in a Transitional Phase

As CHEAPR transitions to the new program (all that has preceded until now has been the “pilot) with new incentives and new rules, effective June 7th, the monthly publication of the data set looks a little stunted. We are assuming this is due to reporting changes that will need to be implemented to accurately track the new program.

For June, there were only 31 reported rebates and none after June 15th. Also, the rebates occurring after June 7th were not at the new rebate levels. We do not know if that is an artifact of moving away from the old system. I have a feeling there will be numerous corrections next month. May numbers were restated to 131 rebates.

17 of the 31 rebates were for the Tesla Model 3. The next highest model was the Toyota Prius Prime with 4.

Rebate+

There were no Rebate+ incentives awarded. This could be due to the aforementioned questions about the data or it (likely) is that the program is still working out the kinks and just beginning outreach.

I have seen some chatter on social media questioning why the incentive for a used EV is higher than for a new car. The answer lies in the population that is being targeted. Lower-income folks need more help and this was the recommendation of the consultant. CHEAPR itself does not get into the income verification business. That is something that is invasive and the program seeks to avoid that. So a proxy is used, which is receiving benefits from one of the designated public assistance programs. It remains to be seen whether this sets the bar in the right place. For very low-income people, buying even a used EV may still be a stretch. And due to the process of the buyer submitting the information and waiting for approval, they have to float the cash until they get reimbursed.