This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.


California ramps up the speedometer on the electric vehicle future

EDF  Energy Exchange's picture
Blog, Environmental Defense Fund

EDF's energy experts discuss how to accelerate the transition to a clean, low-carbon energy economy. Guided by science and economics, EDF tackles urgent threats with practical solutions. Founded...

  • Member since 2018
  • 1,023 items added with 953,093 views
  • Oct 9, 2020

By EDF Blogs

By Larissa Koehler and Pamela MacDougall 

California recently made history when it committed to making every car across the state electric, with a specific goal for electrifying all operating trucks and buses by 2045. The move — along with a number of other clean vehicle initiatives — will eliminate a huge amount of climate pollution as well as other emissions that deteriorate air quality and impact public health. But what comes next?  How should the state prepare for this 100% electric vehicle future?

Rolling out more medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles will not be possible without building out more charging infrastructure.  This is a complex process for many reasons. For one, passenger vehicles have different charging needs than larger trucks and buses.  Additionally, more vehicle charging will also lead to higher electricity demand. Finally, some communities and neighborhoods — like those situated near transit hubs or high-traffic areas — are more directly affected by diesel pollution and may need clean vehicle solutions more urgently than other places. California needs to account for all of these factors to develop a plan that maintains a clean, reliable and affordable electric grid, and delivers clean air benefits to the communities that need it most.

Enter the Transportation Electrification Framework. This plan was first introduced by the California Public Utilities Commission in 2018 and provides guidelines that utilities can use to smartly ramp up charging station deployment. Stakeholders from across the country (including EDF) have provided input on the plan, which the CPUC will finalize in the coming weeks. This framework will provide critical information that will help utilities organize their charging build out plans over the next few decades. 

In order for this revolution to be successful, there are three things that absolutely must be integrated into that framework.


 As mentioned earlier — not all communities experience the impacts of vehicle pollution to the same degree.  Heavy-duty trucks and buses simply emit more pollution than a standard passenger vehicle. Therefore, people who live along busy trucking routes, freight corridors, ports, rail yards or other facilities where there is a lot of heavy-duty vehicle traffic experience worse air quality. Many of these facilities are located in communities of color and lower-income neighborhoods — creating disproportionately more pollution for these groups. Utilities must consider this when developing their charging plans and should prioritize electrification of these areas first.

Secondly, this transition needs to be equitable for the vehicle owners too — particularly for fleet owners who will be required to purchase multiple vehicles. Because fleet sizes vary greatly, there must be a range of financing options made available to these vehicle owners. Due in part to the economic recession, smaller fleet owners in California are more capital constrained now than at other times in recent history. This means California will need to explore both private and public funding options to support and enable the transition of fleets. Otherwise, a one-size-fits-all approach will put some fleet owners at a disadvantage.


More electric vehicles will demand more energy. In California, which has a history of experiencing energy blackouts, this is a significant concern.  Fortunately, if our charging systems are designed adequately, we can avoid putting additional strain on the grid and building out grid infrastructure more than is absolutely necessary. For example, utilities can make it cheaper to charge vehicles during off-peak times — which also more accurately reflects the cost of serving customers. Concurrently, utilities can also reward fleet owners who distribute energy back into the grid when demand is highest.  Designing charging rates that reflect the conditions of the energy grid is a valuable tool that should be part of electric vehicle transition planning.

Drivers, specifically those who drive longer trucking routes, need assurances that charging stations will be available to them, and that they’ll be able to charge their vehicles at any charging station, regardless of who owns and operates it. This too, should be accounted for in utility planning. 


While the purchase price of electric vehicles is often higher than diesel counterparts, multiple analyses have found that electric vehicles may actually cost less in the long run because of fuel and maintenance savings. Additionally, California has a rebate program geared toward medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that can help offset the purchase cost. Despite this, many fleet owners still have concerns about upfront vehicle prices, often because they are unaware of the mechanisms available to bring down the upfront cost, and the potential for savings over time. Widespread marketing, education and outreach around rebate plans and vehicle financing should therefore play a significant role in any utility charging plan.

It is encouraging to see California continually lead the country on climate and clean energy policy.  The Governor’s vision for zero-emission vehicles is a truly forward-looking one and its benefits will be significant, but the transition has to be managed responsibly — factoring equity, reliability and affordability into this transitional process.  EDF and our allies are committing to work with utilities, fleet owners and others to ensure a fair and reliable clean vehicle future.


Read More

Bob Meinetz's picture
Bob Meinetz on Oct 15, 2020

"California recently made history when it committed to making every car across the state electric, with a specific goal for electrifying all operating trucks and buses by 2045."

That's incorrect. Governor Newsom's Executive Order mandates all vehicles sold in California will be "zero-emission", not "electric".

And the distinction isn't as trivial one. When more electricity is generated here by burning "natural gas" than any other source, not one of the 350,000 electric vehicles in the state is zero-emission and won't be until California ends its dependence on gas.

That's the hard part. Many Californians don't realize it was money from gas that elected Newsom's protégé, former governor Jerry Brown. It was money from gas that elected his his father, former governor Pat Brown. It was money from gas that helped Jerry Brown's sister Kathleen get elected to the Board of Directors of the largest gas company in the U.S., Sempra International.

It has nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with profit. It's all about pretending "wind" and "solar" will one day power California, when everyone in the business of selling energy knows their contribution is insignificant and always will be.

Not surprisingly, EDF has its own bank to make both selling gas and marketing it with solar and wind. Let's take a look at EDF's Board of Directors:

"They include:

The CEO and owner of natural gas and renewable energy investment firm Umoe who is also the former chairman of Petroleum Geo-Services.

A major investor in Siva thin film solar panel manufacturer;

A major investor in oil and natural gas service provider Haliburton;

A board member of Sunrun, a company that has benefitted directly from EDF's lobbying for solar subsidies and mandates at the federal and state level;

The administrator of the Getty Oil and real estate fortune;

A renewable energy lobbyist.

The owner of Northwest energy, a major natural gas company.

A former board member of Hess, a large oil and gas firm.

A former chairman of Quicksilver, another oil and gas company."

“This is the most impactful step our state can take to fight climate change,” says Newsom. No Governor, the most impractful step our state can take to fight climate change is to keep Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant open, and prevent 43 million tons of CO2 from being emitted by the natural gas plants that will replace it. But that, of course, would negatively impact the governors investments in gas and oil.

Like EDF, Governor Newsom's actions have nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with profit.

EDF  Energy Exchange's picture
Thank EDF for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »