Daniel Sperling

Professor and DirectorInstitute of Transportation Studies (ITS-Davis)

University of California, Davisand

Board Member, California Air Resources Board

CEIPWashington, DC

24 September 2012

States Leading the Way With PEVsStates Leading the Way With PEVs

“States and localities, which have generally advanced PEV commercialization

more directly and effectively than has Washington, will likely be the source of the

most durable solutions.”

In our report, we say…

Huge Market Uncertainty • Consumers: How will they value all-electric

range, limited range, zero emissions, quietness?

• Technology: How fast will battery costs drop?

• Manufacturers: How will automakers value PEVs?

• Policy??

Mainstream consumers

Early adopters

Development of market

Valley of

death

What We Know…

Continuum of Electrification, But Uncertain Market Outcomes

?

5

2025 CAFE/GHG 54 mpg Standards Probably Won’t Stimulate Significant

PEV Sales by 2025…

Even With Special ZEV Credits (EVs count as 0 g/mi and receive 2x credits initially)

Stringency

% GHG reduction/yr

% Hybrids % EVs

4% 18 0

5% 43 1

CARB/EPA/DOT Analysis of Technology Needed for Compliance

Why (State) Policymakers Are Interested in PEVs

• Air pollution and public health

• Climate change

• Electric utility performance

• Jobs

• Industrial development

Motivations vary greatly across government agencies and legislatures

… for California, it was first local air pollution and is now mostly climate change

One CARB Scenario to Achieve GHG goals by 2050 …

Virtually All Light Duty Vehicles must be “ZEV” by 2050

Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov/board/books/2012/012612/12-1-2pres.pdf 

Many States Charging Ahead With PEVs

ZEV mandate

states

Checklist for California Policies Supporting PEVs Motivating PEV Manufacturers and Consumers

ZEV mandate (CARB + 10 states)

PEV consumer tax credit ($2500)

GHG/CAFE stds to incentivize PEVs

Carpool lane access

Cultivating Local PEV Clusters Working with metro areas on public charging and streamlining

permitting (w/DOE funding)

Promoting PEV Interactions With Electricity Providers Electricity rate design for PEVs (PUC)

Investing strategically in recharging infrastructure (Governor, $100 million)

Revenues from low carbon fuel standard (LCFS)

Cap and trade revenues?

Key California Policy Has Been ZEV Mandate, With a Tortured History (now adopted by 10 other states)

Year

1990 ZEV mandate adopted: 2% ZEVs in 1998, 5% in 2001, and 10% in 2003—measured as % of new car sales

1996 Eliminated 2% 1998 requirement and replaced with much softer requirement of 3750 BEVs

1998 % ZEV requirement further reduced by allowing very clean gasoline (and other alt fuel) vehicles as partial substitute (“PZEV”)

2001 % ZEV requirement further reduced by allowing small numbers of FCVs to satisfy requirement

2002 GM/DCX sue and win temporary delays

2008 New requirement: 12,500 BEVs or 5000 FCVs, plus 58,000 PHEVs by 2014

2012 Large increase for post-2015

Stimulated investment in electric-drive technology, but limited impact on market development (so far).

ZEV Mandate (California)(roughly equal % for 10 other states)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Annu

al V

ehic

le S

ales

3%

6%

9%

12%

14% of 2025 New Vehicle

Sales

FCVs

BEVs

PHEVs

15%

5

An

nu

al %

of N

ew

V

eh

icle

Sale

s

UCDavis University of California

California Energy Commission Funded

New PH&EV Center at UC Davis

New Public-Private Leadership in California

PEV Collaborative created in 2010 to coordinate activities between state and local governments, automakers, electric utilities, and others.

This detailed report was published in Dec 2010.

California Aggressive in Promoting ZEVs (led by Governor, CARB, PUC)

May 2012 ZEV Executive Order by Governor

$100M for: – 200 fast charging stations – 10,000 parking space charging stations at

apartment complexes, large work sites, universities, etc

Targets set by Governor’s Executive Order• 2015: major cities have adequate infrastructure and “ZEV

ready”• 2025: 1.5 million ZEVs in California• 2050: virtually all personal transportation based on ZEVs and

GHG emissions from transportation reduced by 80 percent.

15

EV Charging Infrastructure Challenges

• How much public charging needed, where, and what type (110v, 220v, 480v) ?

For PHEVs and BEVs

• Will industry invest in public charging?

• What is role of gov’t for:

Home

Workplace (and retail shopping)

“Public”

Project Get Ready & ETEC, 2011

How to Obtain Approval for EV

Charging Installation

A really dumb location for EV charging (in N. Carolina)

Photo courtesy of Linda Gaines

UCDavis University of California

UC Davis Is Designing Optimized Charging Networks

• GIS tools• Fast charge network

design• Regional planning• Demand analysis

(temporal and geographical)

Funding: CEC, ECOtality, Nissan

UCDavis University of California

Where do People Want Chargers and of What Type?

More Incentives for PEVs

California Low Carbon Fuel Standardadopted by California April 23, 2009

• Requires 10% reduction in carbon intensity of transport fuels (gCO2-eq/MJ)

• Encompasses all fuels: NG, petroleum, unconventional oil, biofuels, electricity, H2

• Based on lifecycle measurements (source to wheel)

• Imposed on oil refiners

• Companies can buy and sell credits (from electricity and/or infrastructure suppliers)

Could generate hundreds of dollars per vehicle per year

Summary of California Policies Supporting PEVs Motivating PEV Manufacturers and Consumers

ZEV mandate (CARB + 10 states)

PEV consumer tax credit ($2500)

GHG/CAFE stds to incentivize PEVs

Carpool land access

Cultivating Local PEV Clusters Working with metro areas on public charging and streamlining

permitting (w/DOE funding)

Promoting PEV Interactions With Electricity Providers Electricity rate design for PEVs (PUC)

Investing strategically in recharging infrastructure (Governor, $100 million)

Revenues from low carbon fuel standard (LCFS)

Cap and trade revenues?

Overarching Policy/Ideological Issues

• Importance of government intervention?

• Perceived “cost” of pollution/climate change, and urgency in addressing them?

• Market vs regulatory approach?

Policy approaches depend on what you believe:

1)PEVs are expensive and have limited market potential;

OR

2) PEVs are attractive and sustainable, and likely to dominate

“States and localities, which have generally advanced PEV commercialization more directly and effectively than has Washington, will likely be the source of the most durable solutions.”(?!)