Thanks to all for participating in our Project Get Ready webinar. If you were unable to attend, feel free to view the playback of the full program.

Note: This webinar ran about thirty minutes over our typical hour-long format. Following Jim Francfort’s presentation, we had an informal and open discussion about the INL data and other topics.  If you happened to sign off prior to this discussion, you can hear the playback, starting at the 60-minute mark.

Please click on the links below to download pdfs of each presentation.

• National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Kevin Walkowicz
• Pyxidus, Sean Osborne
• Idaho National Laboratory: Jim Francfort

Please download a pdf of the minutes, here.

Download the report here.

Thanks to all for another informative webinar.  I have copied the minutes below. If you were unable to attend, feel free to view the playback of the full program. You may also download each of the following presentations:

• Green Parking Council: Paul Wessel, Executive Director
• Canopy Airport Parking: Skeeter Buck, Sustainability Manager
• Car Charging Group: Michael Farkas, CEO

Project Get Ready Webinar Minutes

December 13, 2011

RMI/PGR Update

• International EV Casebook
  • Publishing book of 25+ city EV readiness strategies
  • Partnering with Clinton Climate Initiative, the Climate Group, Department of Energy, International Energy Agency, UC Davis, and the Clean Energy Ministerial’s Electric Vehicles Initiative.
  • Seeking participation from PGR cities
  • Casebook provides opportunity to highlight efforts among other pioneering cities
  • Profiles completed for Portland, Los Angeles, New York City, Barcelona, and Stockholm

Paul Wessel, Executive Director, Green Parking Council Email: paul@greenparkingcouncil.org

• National 501(c)3 organization
• Unites parking, green building, clean technology, smart grid, urban planning and sustainable mobility
• Why provide EV charging at parking facilities?
  • Garages are an opportunity to help uptake of electric vehicles
  • Offer all-day charging
  • Urban garages and lots often serve residential and daytime parkers
  • Extend range to workers
  • As an industry, we’re acknowledging that we’re part of the automobile ecosystem
  • Service we can offer in a highly competitive industry
  • Public value in offering charging
    • Public relations value for being involved
    • Helps improve image of parking lots and garages
    • Now we have lots with green walls, roofs, car-share programs, and now charging
  • Best garage locations for electric vehicle charging stations
    • Need to think of Installation, maintenance costs and performance
    • Parking garages offer protected alternative, keeping stations safe from inclement weather, such as snow and ice
  • Turnover in spaces with vehicle charging equipment
    • We should be so lucky to have this problem
    • Most EV spots are typically unoccupied
    • But there is one approach to use valet services to rotate vehicles
    • Placing charging station between space allows two cars to be charged
    • Control Module (GPC Partner) have ceiling mounted unit that can slide along the ceiling for different spaceds
  • Airport Parking
    • The Parking Spot (GPC Partner)
    • If car is at lot for 7 hours, you can charge and shift, or valet can move
    • Level 2 charging allows valet option
    • If you’re doing level 1 charging (for lengthy stays), you can cheaply set up a bank of outlets for 110.
  • Payment for EV charging in garages
    • Multiple approaches being offered
    • ChargePoint, 350Green, and others are exploring various options
    • Edison Parking offers free charging. If you pay for parking, you get charging for free. Modest electricity prices absorbed in fee.
    • “Charge cars, not people” is a popular mantra
    • Freejuicebar.com
    • Hotel operators are using free charging. Doesn’t cost operator much and can give hotel competitive advantage
  • Do parking operators anticipate future charging installations?
    • Thoughtful operators and consultants are considering pre-wiring and planning for EVSE
    • Ann Arbor facility, developed by Karl Walker associates,
    • Connecticut is redeveloping highway rest stops. Clean Cities is working with developer to put in wiring.
  • Emerging Practices: What Works?
    • Hype is good
    • Raising the bar and recognizing industry leaders is important
    • Place-making through Iconic and memorable displays (see presentation for examples)
  • Resale of electricity
    • Haven’t encountered any problems
    • It has been an issue for people generating electricity on garages (solar or on-site wind turbines).

Skeeter Buck, Sustainability Manager, Airport Canopy Parking Email: skeeter.buck@propark.com

• Demonstrator site for Green Parking Council
• Located in Commerce City, Colorado
• 4200 parking spaces
• Greenest Parking Structure in the U.S.
  • Wind turbines 16.9kw
  • Solar panels 9.6kw
  • Geothermal
  • LEED Gold: steel is 35% recycled, asphalt 25% recycled, invested in water conservation to save 50% on consumption
  • EV Charging Stations
  • 15 bio-diesel and CNG shuttle vehicles
  • 100% carbon neutral fleet vehicles (achieved in part by purchasing carbon credits)
  • Facility uses 70% less energy than typical property-type
  • Goal for the future: net zero property through increased efficiency and solar
  • EV Charging stations
    • Juice Bar Charging stations: Level 1 and Level 2
    • 6 dual charging stations on property: 2 in valet area, 4 in covered parking
    • Wired for 24 additional units
  • Challenges
    • “Range Anxiety” affects some drivers in Boulder and Denver but shouldn’t be
    • Employing marketing and education to reduce range anxiety
    • How many people will choose to drive their EVs to the airport, instead of another car?
    • Build it and they will come
  • Networking and Collaboration
    • Clean Cities Coalition
    • Rocky Mountain Institute
    • National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL)
    • Department of Public Health and Environment
    • Governor’s Energy Office
  • Strategy
    • Project FEVER (Fostering Electric Vehicles in Expansion in the Rockies) Community Readiness Awardee
    • Build and then expand with increased demand
    • Support service

Michael Farkas, CEO, Car Charging Group Email: mdf@carcharging.com

• Headquartered in Miami, Florida
• Mission is to establish a nationwide infrastructure, enabling EV and PHEV owners to charge their EVs anytime, anywhere
• Residential, multi-family, commercial properties, retail
• Strategy is to be a first in strategic partner with businesses, municipalities, shopping malls, parking garages, multi-family residential and commercial properties, and others who are expected to have high numbers of EVs at their locations
• Landowner partners: shopping malls, retail, entertainment areas
• Best Practices of installing EV charging stations, range of installation costs
  • Not a simple process
  • Visibility of installation and cost of installation need to be balanced
  • Visibility often ends up costing more money.
  • Unique requirements of installing EV charging stations at different types of locations
    • Each type of location needs different types of installations: wall-mounts, pole-mounts, bollards, etc
    • Coulomb units are linked through cell phone.
    • Subterranean installations make communication difficult, so costs may rise
  • EV parking payment mechanisms and how they are integrated into existing parking fees
    • Can’t give away electricity for free
    • Cost of electricity is downplayed. Costs can add up when 15-20% of cars are plugged in
    • Free charging will not work long term
    • Car Charging Group’s business model is based on established norm of paying for “fuel.”
  • Pre-wiring
    • Technology changes, so build in conduit in advance
    • Build in conduit with new construction and pull wiring when necessary
    • Reduces costs when building owner decide to install stations
  • Maximizing EV charging turnover
    • Important that industry figures out way to prevent cars from hogging unused charging stations
  • Level 1 versus Level 2 chargers
    • Business model based on speed of charge
    • Level 2 is preferred choice for billing customers

Please feel free to send suggestions for future topics.

Thanks,

Ben Holland

Thanks to all for another informative webinar.  If you were unable to attend, feel free to view the playback of the full program.
See the minutes below for a description of the following presentations:

Getting Our Region and Communities EV Ready, Robert Graham, Southern California Edison

Lessons Learned (So Far) Mark Perry, Nissan

Plug In Electric Vehicles Education and Outreach, Jeff Barghout and Stacey Carless, Advanced Energy

Plug in America (Paul Scott)

• Produced series of seven PSAs
• Hosted seminar on multi-family EVSE integration
• Planning a larger seminar in greater metro region of LA
• National Plug-In Day: October 16^th
• Anticipating 12 cities to participate
• Event will coincide with release of Revenge of the Electric Car
• Expecting over 100 electric cars at the event
• Anticipating heavy press coverage
• Put together drive-way and house party packets
• Holding first house party in Seattle

Southern California Edison (Bob Graham)

• SCE Strategy for Clean Energy Future

o   Reduce GHG emissions with more energy from renewable resources

o   Smart power deliver manages greater diversity of supply and optimizes existing capacity

o   Smart metering to enable customer energy conservation and peak reduction

o   Plug-In Electric Vehicles to achieve transportation sustainability and distributed energy storage

• EVs aren’t just clustered in one part of region. We’re seeing them all over
• Ensuring that distribution system is not impacted

o   Working with dealerships

o   Putting planners in place to inspect transformer size in advance of vehicle arriving

o   Neighbors of early adopters are the next customers

• Spending a great deal of time tracking customer experience
• Familiarizing call centers and service planners with entire EV process
• Responding to customer demand
• Customer education and outreach: SCE Plug-In Rate Assistant
• Rate calculator helps customers determine savings
• Will also work with individual ratepayers to do in-depth rate
• Established Champion City Program

o   Engage local communities about PEV readiness, with focus on inspection and permitting streamlining

o   Complete verified plans with 30 local governments addressing PEV readiness

o   Recognize cities that have implemented best PEV readiness practices

• Engage with every city
• Majority of SCE’s cities do over-the-counter permitting when person comes in with right documentation.
• Implement public education and outreach program
• Participate actively in regional initiatives
• Implement PEV infrastructure preparedness
• Establish designated PEV point of contact for:

o   Issues resolution

o   Participation in regional initiatives

o   Lessons learned analysis

o   Media relations

• Information is readily available
• Infrastructure finance

o   Participate in regional infrastructure initiatives to apply for Federal and State funding

o   Apply for state and local funding to finance infrastructure

• Near-Term Infrastructure Installation

o   Upgrade 1990s infrastructure to meet current standards

o   Install infrastructure at key travel destinations

o   Work with Commercial and Industrial organizations in community to install and track charging stations

• Create a PEV Readiness Team to plan and implement PEV Readiness Activities

o   Review lessons learned from other communities and apply as appropriate

o   Integrate PEVs into community long range vehicle purchasing plans

o   Acquiring and operating PEVs in the city’s internal vehicle fleet

o   Support funding incentives to encourage residents to buy and operate PEVs

• Initiate Title 24 City Codes to ensure that new codes to ensure that new building construction is PEV Ready

Nissan (Mark Perry)

• What makes a successful launch market?

o   Forecast consumer demand: What is city doing to make friendly environment?

o   Public policy leadership

o   Utility cooperation

o   Consumer incentives certainly help!

o   Public infrastructure equals peace of mind

o   Rolling out where we feel welcome

• What’s your ask?

o   Time and people

o   Incentives for consumers

o   Charging infrastructure

o   Consumer friendly permit process

o   Education public outreach

• Grassroots Holistic Outreach

o   3+ years of WORK

o   1,638 business cards collected

o   27 states

o   308 cities

o   Countless presentations and calls

• What did customers tell us?

o   Educate Me…about everything

o   Make it easy…put it all in one place

§  GoElectricDrive.com

o   Respect…my time and interest in your company

o   Communicate…keep me informed

• Enthusiasts

o   Very passionate about the subject

o   Must not ignore the enthusiasts

• Best Practices

o   SDG&E monthly workshops

o   SCAQMD EV 101 Seminars

o   Oregon Business Council/Portland State/PGE

• We notice what cities are doing
• Results so far

o   Conversion rate from hand raising – 48$%

o   1^st MY sold out

o   82% new to Nissan brand

o   Prius is #1 Conquest Model

o   Average HHI is $140k+

o   Driving less than 60 miles a day

o   Not interested in gasoline AT ALL

Advanced Energy (Stacey Carless and Jeff Barghout)

• Defining Outreach
• Interactive Approaches

o   Educational Forums

o   Workshops

• Providing Resources

o   Collateral

o   Online Resources

o   New Media

• Forums

o   Opportunity to educate

o   Start a discussion

o   Answer questions

• Workshops

o   Inform major stakeholders

o   Start a conversation

o   Generate ad Answer Questions

o   Collection of Ideas

o   Interactivity

o   Determine barriers and explore different perspectives

• Charging Station and Installation Handbook

o   Overviews, guidelines and checklists to help contactors and inspectors

• Community Planning Guide

o   Help communities with all aspects of planning and preparing for PEVs

• Advanced Energy website

o   EVSE Web Tool: Single resource for charging station information

o   Access to print resources

o   Workshops

o   General PEV information

• Raleigh Television Network: broadcasts of workshops
• YouTube Videos

o   Charging Station Installation

o   How to Charge Your PEV

Save the Date

• Portland State University and Portland General Electric
• November 1-3
• Getting to a Million
• Clean Cities Coaltion, Clinton Climate Initiative, Electrification Coalition

Open Discusion

SCE Rate Plans

• Whole house rate: created years ago to incentivize people to us pool pumps between 9pm and 6am
• Low rate EV rate
• Third rate: Second panel and second meter
• Majority of customers are using whole house

o   SCE can use smart connect system to implement wirelessly

Question: Is policy or general public education more important?

• Bob Graham: Education and Outreach is most important action by all stakeholders

o   It’s critical that anyone getting federal dollars for fleets should be buying EVs

• Mark Perry: Debt crisis puts everything on the table for negotiation again

o   From a consumer standpoint, the level of support that’s out there now is not guaranteed for the future

o   Only a one year extension for tax credit

o   Need to “man the battle stations” and make sure we keep what we have

·     IEEE: Mary Reidy

·     SAE Communications Standards: Jim Scholer

·     ANSI Electric Vehicles Standards Panel: Jim McCabe

Project Get Ready Webinar Minutes

June 21, 2011

RMI Update

o    PGR Partner Calls

• PGR webinars have grown in size, necessitating individual city partner calls

• RMI will work with cities to identify top of mind issues, challenges and long term goals

• PGR webinars will be framed around chief concerns of partners and other stakeholders

o   EVSE installation costs

• RMI is working to disaggregating cost for EVSE installations

• Identifying components that drive costs

• Goal is to inform partners and stakeholders interested in investing in infrastructure

IEEE Standards Association: EV Standards Development (Mary Reidy, National Grid)

• Global standards are critical to smart grid success
• Technology behind smart grid is advancing rapidly
• IEEE will focus on fostering interoperability

o   Ensure any device from any manufacturer can plug into the grid

• IEEE working closely with standards bodies: ISO, ITU, IEC, SAE, AICTO
• Developing or updating in excess of 100 global standards relevant to smart grid
• Global Smart Grid Challenges

o   Future energy supplies through use of renewables

o   Use of technology to increase system efficiency and reliability

o   Policy, regulatory, and security debates

o   Educating consumers to prepare them for lifestyle changes

o   Cross-technology integration (IT, Communications, Support Services)

• IEEE Smart Grid Standards Initiatives

o   Interoperability of electric power, IT, and communications systems

o   Powerline communications and networking, regenerative interconnection, automotive interconnection, storage, high voltage technology

o   Incubation and bringing new technologies from research into standards development

• IEEE P2030.1 Working Group

o   Purpose: Development of a guide for electric sourced transportation and its impact on the grid

o   Currently drafting working documents for task force groups

o   Four task force groups: Vehicle technology, Electric Grid, Roadmap, Communication and Cyber Security

o   Webinars held bi-monthly to address development of each task force

o   Task Force 2 (Electric Grid) draft document distributed to working group and was reviewed on June 24^th webinar

o   Next steps: Vehicle Technology draft (End of Summer 2011), Roadmap (TBD), Communications and Cyber Security (TBD)

SAE PEV Communication Task Force

• J2836: Creating use cases to tell story of what SAE wants to accomplish
• Use cases are then used to create corresponding requirements
• Communication Requirement: Energy service interface (ESI)
• Developing mapping document to determine needs for consumer experience
• DC level 2 (50-80kw stations) is current focus of task force
• Creating standard for DC combo connector
• DC standard (connector and communications) will be fully tested and ready for implementation by end of 2011
• Use cases are published and available on SAE site
• Standards are being entered into NIST catalog of standards

American National Standards Institute (ANSI): Electric Vehicles Standards Panel (Jim McCabe)

• Mission: Foster coordination and collaboration on standardization matters among public and private sector stakeholders to enable the safe, mass deployment of electric vehicles and associated infrastructure
• Tasks:

o   Catalog existing standards (published, in development, under revision)

o   Identify gaps and harmonization issues

o   Make recommendations for addressing gaps and issues and do the same for related conformity assessment program

• NFPA 70 definition of electric vehicle includes plug-in hybrids
• Architecture of EVSP

o   Vehicle Domain

• Energy Storage Systems Working Group (WG)

• Vehicle Components WG

• Vehicle User Interface

• Infrastructure Domain

• Charging Systems WG

• Infrastructure Communications WG

• Infrastructure Installation WG

• Infrastructure User Interface WG

• Support Services Domain

• Education and Training WG

• Draft Project Timeline

• First Plenary Meeting (June 20-21)

• 1^st and 2^nd WG Conference Calls  (weeks of Jun 27- Jul 18)

• 3^rd and 4^th WG conference calls (weeks of Jul 25 – Aug 15)

• Steering Committee Meeting (week of Aug 15^th)

• Progress update at SAE / NFPA summit (Sept 27-28)

• Publish / Promote Roadmap Version One (Oct – Nov)

Please feel free to send suggestions for future topics.

Thanks to all for another informative meeting.  See the minutes below for a description of the following presentations:

·     The EV Project: Jim Francfort (INL) and Steve Schey (Ecotality)]

·     Charge Point America: Richard Lowenthal

·     Northeast Utilities: Watson Collins

Project Get Ready Webinar Minutes

May 17, 2011

RMI Research: EVs and Economic Development

• Despite lots of discussion in the media about whether EVs actually create jobs or help local economies we haven’t seen a lot of research
• RMI surveyed regions with early EV and EVSE deployment to understand job effects
• RMI reviewed academic literature on job creation and local spending multipliers
• Analysis to be released over the next month and we welcome your feedback

New Staff

• Jay Tankersley – jtankersley@rmi.org
• Jana Holt – jholt@rmi.org

EV Project Deployment and Data Collection: Steve Schey (Ecotality) and Jim Francfort (INL).

• Participants: Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity (AVTA), Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and ECOtality
• AVTA Goals: Petroleum reduction, assist fleet managers, benchmark data for modelers, R&D programs, vehicle manufacturers, and goal setters
• INL: Multi-Program DOE Laboratory (Nuclear, Fossil, Biomass, Wind, Geothermal, Hydro, Advanced Vehicles and Battery Dev., Energy critical infrastructure protection
• The EV Project: $230 Million Project ($115 Million from DOE, $115 match)

o   Plan, build, study evaluate

• EV Project Micro-Climate Plan

o   Community planning

o   Road Mapping

o   Infrastructure Implementation

• Residential Infrastructure

o   5,700 Nissan Leafs, 2,600 Chevy Volts

o   8,300 Level 2 residential EVSE

• EV Project Commercial Infrastructure

o   5,300 Level 2 public EVSE in retail, municipal, and employer locations

o   200 Dual port DC fast chargers

• Data Collection:

o   Vehicle performance, operational and ambient conditions, charging profiles

o   Infrastructure: siting, use Time-of-Day pricing, Charging level (I,II, fast charging) utilization, public vs private, at home vs. public, micro vs. macro grid issues

o   Quantified testing results that avoid subjective reporting

• Data management process

o   Data is collected in file server warehouse

o   Producing data quality reports, individual vehicle reports, fleet summary reports, focused technical analyses and custom reports, modeling and simulation

• Data visualizations

o   Distribution of number of charging events per day

o   Distribution of distance driven per vehicle per day

o   Battery State of Charge after last trip of the day

o   Battery state of charge before first trip of the day, when charged the night before

o   Battery state of charge at the start of charging events, between trips

o   Batter state of charge at the end of charging events, between trips

• Vehicle data parameters

o   Vehicle ID, Data/Time Stamp, Event type, odometer, state of charge, GPS, fuel consumption (for some vehicles)

• Nissan Leaf Usage Reports

o   Number of trips, total distance traveled, average distance per day, average number of trips between charging events, average distance traveled between charging events, average number of charging events

o   Charging location and type: Number of charging events by home (Level 2) and away-from-home (Level 2, fast charge, non-project), total electricity consumed (AC MWh)

o   Number of complete charging events, number of partial charging events, home and away state of charge, % of distance driven in ch arge depleting vs. charge sustaining mode (Volt only)

• Overview Report:

o   Charging infrastructure reported by regions: number of EV Project EVSE and fast chargers installed, number of charging events performed, electricity consumed (AC MWh)

o   Vehicles reported by regions: EV Project Leafs and Volts enrolled to date, number of trips, distance driven

• Future EV Project Activities: 117 metrics and plots including

o   Charging unit utiliziation

o   Aggregate charging demand vs. time of day and day of the week

o   Individual charging even metrics: How often, how long, how empty, how full

o   Reporting by various subgroups

Coulomb Technologies/ChargePoint America: Richard Lowenthal, Founder and CTO, Coulomb Technologies

• Network offerings

o   24/7 Driver Support and Services

o   Billing and authentication

o   Station management

o   Fleet management

o   Energy management

• Necessary for:

o   Condos and apartments, workplace charging, public lots, curbside, retail charging, residential smart charging

• Where will we charge?

o   Home, work, retail and recreation (where we shop and play)

• How many are needed

o   2 chargers per EV

o   3 million EVS WORLDWIDE BY 2015

o   North America will need 2 million chargers

o   Locations: Single family home with garage, multi-dwelling units, workplace, public

• 4000+ stations shipped to 700 customers since 2008
• Operating in 14 countries
• Breakdown of customers:39% businesses, 37% municipalities, 22% utilities, 2% automakers
• Open architecture: driving billing, management/control, vehicle telematics, mobile devices, utility office AMI
• Open API, open EVSE interface, open driver interface
• Charging Service models: workplace, city, apartment building, pure service provider, hotel, retail
• ChargePoint America Key Objectives

o   2,600 public commercial charging

o   2,000 home charging systems

o   Deployment aligned with early round of cars: NYC, DC, Boston, Orlando, Detroit, Austin, Sacramento, San Francisco, LA, Redmond/Bellevue, Washington State

o   DOE is paying for stations, local grants or owners paying for installation

o   In California, the energy commission pays for installation

• Data going to INL

o   Where stations are going in, which home, which are commercial

o   15 minute interval data on energy dispensed: peak power, average power, energy, start-stop times, faults

o   Weekly updates in csv format

o   3 year study – station host keeps stations permanently

• PHEVs charge twice as much as BEVs

o   PHEV drivers want to charge at home and at work, to avoid using gasoline

o   BEV drivers charge about once a day

• Cities can’t give away electricity
• IRS employee charging when a business offers free employee charging
• Myth Busting

o   Home Charging tends to happen on peak, if uncontrolled

o   Charge at work is typically off-peak

o   With incentives and fuel savings, EVs make economic sense

o   The Leaf economic case is a slam dunk: with higher starting price, resale value will be higher; lower fuel and maintenance will save $2,00 a year

o   Volt saves $1,300 a year in fuel and maintenance costs

Northeast Utilities: Watson Collins, Manager, Business Development

• Founder and chair of Regional Electric Vehicle Initiative (REVI) with NSTAR, National Grid, UL, CMEEC, MMWEC
• Installed six Level II (240v) charging stations at NU facilities
• Pursuing multiphase utility research program

o   Capture lessons learned

o   Current project focused on away-from-home charging

o   Future pilot testing to include residential charging

o   Proposed study of charging in large metropolitan area (w/NSTAR)

• Physical utility system infrastructure and EV recharging

o   Rule of thumb: A 5% penetration rate of EVs increases total kWh by about 1%

o   Some potential for local distribution levels depending on various factors

o   Policies needed to promote diversified overnight/off-peak charging for minimum impact on distribution system

• NU looks at EV adoption in three time horizons

o   Now (2011): ~500-1,000 cars; some amount of public charging infastructure

o   Soon (2012-2014): ~5,000 cars/yr; Additional public charging stations added

o   Future (2015 or later): 10,000-20,000 cars/yr; uncertain need, business model and standards

• Recharging overnight is the common denominator

o   Parked and charging while you sleep

o   Emissions profile of electricity generation varies by region, time of day and season

o   Electricity system optimization: capacity exists in utility system overnight; plug-in vehicle recharging can reduce electric rates if done right (broader cost allocation)

• Future opportunities

o   V2G or other grid services

o   Battery swapping

o   Pathway recharging (e.g., highway stops)

• Optimizing existing utility investments

1.     Capacity of chargers

a.     Lower capacity chargers are not likely to cause significant utility impacts, but high capacity (10kW and above) chargers in residential locations will impact utility system

b.     Ratemaking policy for distribution  upgrades associated PEV recharging and utility demand charges may need to address high capacity charging locations

2.     Metering and ‘Smart’ charging

a.     Metering approaches defined (submeter, facility meter, etc)

b.     Off-peak recharging approach needs to be tested: information based with price signals to consumers (TOU rates) or centrally controlled

c.      TOU rates for just the vehicle or whole ho use

3.     Interoperability

a.     The franchise utility can’t inferface with multiple ‘closed’ systems. ‘Open’ systems based on common standards needed’

4.     Utility notification of charging locations

a.     Utilities can accommodate if we know when and where

5.     Consumer protection

a.     Important to preserve the fuel cost advantage of EVs for consumers, given high first cost of the vehicles

Next Webinar: June 14, 2011, 1pm EST

Theme: Standards for electric vehicles, EVSE and smart grid communication protocols.

• Mary Reidy, Chair, IEEE Standards Association
• Rich Scholer, Ford, SAE
• James McCabe, American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

Thanks to all for another informative meeting. If you were unable to attend, feel free to view the playback of the full PGR webinar.

Important note: An invitation for our May 17th webinar will follow this email. Some of you will receive a notice for a new PGR mailing list. We reached our capacity on our previous listserv, so we’re now transferring email addresses to a new PGR Google group.

See the minutes below for a description of the following presentations:

·     New York City – Ari Kahn (PDF)

·     Fort Collins - Mike Freeman (PDF)

·     Power Tagging – John LoPorto (PDF)

Project Get Ready Webinar Minutes

April 26, 2011

RMI Update: Ben Holland

New Resources

• Air quality impacts of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in Texas: evaluating three battery charging scenarios.
• Estimating the Costs and Benefits of the Smart Grid

DOE Funding Opportunity Announcement

• “Clean Cities Community Readiness and Planning for Plug-in Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure”
• DE-FOA-0000451 Clean Cities FY 2011 FOA.
• Press Release

Ari Kahn: EV Program Manager, NYC Office of Long-Term Planning & Sustainability.

• Implementing McKinsey study
• Educate and recognize challenges and opportunities
• Remove barriers to adoption
• Focusing on commercial parking lots
• Working with ConEd and Nissan to analyze impacts of EVs on older buildings
• Northeast partnership with Boston and Philadelphia

o   Pooling efforts around research and outreach

• Enhancing the Feasibility of Electric Vehicles in New York City:

o   Study conducted by Columbia University

o   Two part analysis

o   EV adoption and EVSE mapping

o   Utility best practices

• Geospatial analysis

o   Mapped key EV adoption indicators

o   Most educated, highest income, previous hybrid sales

Mike Freeman, Director of Economic Development, City of Fort Collins

• Studying implications of renewable energy, storage and EV for utility
• Expects uptake of vehicle electrification to be significant
• Demonstration project looking at ways to offset incremental load of EV, with renewables and storage
• Fire and Ice: Solar system and Ice Energy storage
• Implementing at neighborhood level
• Seeking residential opportunities for testing
• Project goals:

o   Model and simulate impacts of Fire and ice

o   Develop new business models for charging

o   Develop software systems that manage interplay of information

o   Global visibility

• Coordinating with Denver and Boulder

John LoPorto, CEO, Power Tagging, Inc.

• Power Tagging offers communications architecture for electric utilities to deploy on the grid
• Technology allows utilities to tag/fingerprint energy on the grid
• Bi-directional communication
• Makes loads on the grid self aware
• Grid recognizes type of load and location
• Vehicle Intelligence Module (VIM) acts similar to SIM card in cell phone
• Instead of operating over cell network VIM is embedded into EV charging circuitry
• Allows utilities to see electrically, where cars are plugging in
• Helps plan for roaming and unpredictable loads on transformers
• Real-time data collection

o   Collect and report back to utility

o   Use for road tax, instead of GPS VMT reporting

o   Eliminates privacy concerns

• When vehicle plugs in it reports back electrical location
• Acts like a network location on the internet
• Self-updating and self-provisioning

Next Webinar: May 17, 2011

• James Francfort, Idaho National Lab
• Steve Schey, Ecotality
• Richard Lowenthal, Coulomb Technologies
• Watson Collins, Northeast Utilities

Download the report

Abstract
The air quality impacts of replacing approximately 20% of the gasoline-powered light duty vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) with electric VMT by the year 2018 were examined for four major cities in
Texas: Dallas/Ft Worth, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV)
charging was assumed to occur on the electric grid controlled by the Electricity Reliability Council of
Texas (ERCOT), and three charging scenarios were examined: nighttime charging, charging to
maximize battery life, and charging to maximize driver convenience. A subset of electricity generating
units (EGUs) in Texas that were found to contribute the majority of the electricity generation needed to
charge PHEVs at the times of day associated with each scenario was modeled using a regional
photochemical model (CAMx). The net impacts of the PHEVs on the emissions of precursors to the
formation of ozone included an increase in NOx emissions from EGUs during times of day when the
vehicle is charging, and a decrease in NOx from mobile emissions. The changes in maximum daily 8 h
ozone concentrations and average exposure potential at twelve air quality monitors in Texas were
predicted on the basis of these changes in NOx emissions. For all scenarios, at all monitors, the impact
of changes in vehicular emissions, rather than EGU emissions, dominated the ozone impact. In general,
PHEVs lead to an increase in ozone during nighttime hours (due to decreased scavenging from both
vehicles and EGU stacks) and a decrease in ozone during daytime hours. A few monitors showed a
larger increase in ozone for the convenience charging scenario versus the other two scenarios.
Additionally, cumulative ozone exposure results indicate that nighttime charging is most likely to
reduce a measure of ozone exposure potential versus the other two scenarios.

Download the report

Abstract

The present electric power delivery infrastructure was not designed to meet the increased demands of a restructured electricity marketplace, the energy needs of a digital society, or the increased use and variability of renewable power production. As a result, there is a national imperative to upgrade the current power delivery system to the higher performance levels required to support continued economic growth and to improve productivity to compete internationally. To these ends, the Smart Grid integrates and enhances other necessary elements including traditional upgrades and new grid technologies with renewable generation, storage, increased consumer participation, sensors, communications and computational ability. According to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the Smart Grid will be designed to ensure high levels of security, quality, reliability, and availability of electric power; improve economic productivity and quality of life; and minimize environmental impact while maximizing safety. Characterized by a two-way flow of electricity and information between utilities and consumers, the Smart Grid will deliver real-time information and enable the near-instantaneous balance of supply (capacity) and demand at the device level.

March, 15th, 2011

Webinar Playback

RMI Update: Matt Mattila and Ben Holland

• RMI is continuing “data multiplier” role and appreciates support from cities and tech advisers

• Exploring partnerships and data collection efforts
  • GeoEVSE Initiative with NREL, Google, Plug In America and others.
  • Working with international partners to develop strategy for data collection and dissemination
• Created PGR LinkedIn page to help partners connect

BMW: Aaron Singer and Peter Dempster

• Mini-E U.S. pilot started summer 2009, fleet of 450 all electric mini-es in LA and New York metro areas
• Study analyzed how customer intracts with EV on day to day basis
• Challenges
  • Delays and roadblocks to successful implementation of home charging
  • Mini-Es used proprietary connector which came out between old and new J1772
  • We’ve taken what we’ve learned and will have another trial
  • BMW Active-E trial: taking lessons from mini-e and applying them to Active-E
  • Using fully certified J1772 box and we have a more robust data flow between installation company and utilities
• 54 participants in consumer study run by UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies
  • Three-quarters of drivers lived within 20 miles of work
  • Nearly all MINI E customers could reliably drive between 80 and 100 miles on a charge
  • One customer drove 50,000 miles in 15 months
  • Trip Composition expands as drivers get more comfortable with range. EV-activity space is expanded
• Public infrastructure was unavailable for U.S. study
• Drivers become less anxious about range
  • 32% said they felt range anxiety between 2-4 times a year
  • These customers drove on average 8600 miles in one year, some up to 40,000
• Home EVSE is perfectly suitable to meet customer’s needs
  • 42% of customers plugged in when they got home
  • 15% charged every 3 days
  • Battery state of charge is 40-60% on average when it’s plugged in
• Two-thirds of drivers said that driving the Mini-E changed the way they think about energy use, in and out of the car

GM: Britta Gross

• Volt’s initial markets: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, California, Texas and Michigan
• Vehicles are migrating to other states
• Over 1000 on the road now
• On target for 10,000 vehicles at the end of this year and an additional 45,000 by end of next year
• Full roll out to all 50 states by the end of the 2011
• 650 dealers in first round 7 states, another 650 service sites around the country
• Early notification system: When orders come in from dealers, GM asks customer to fill out survey about charging needs
  • 120 volt cord set comes with volt for regular outlet, but if you want to step up to 240, you fill out form
  • Asked to share address with utility for local grid analysis
  • If they don’t opt out, send email to utilities, telling them which addresses will be charging EVs
  • Enables utilities to step back and take look at aggregations, clustering in neighborhoods
  • 90% are opting in to give utility address

• Very few issues, but clustering is occuring

• Inspector and contractor outreach
  • Members of team are in San Fran, LA, and San Diego with NECA and IBEW
  • Doing outreach with inspectors and contractors in the area
  • Lessons learned – what’s helpful to know in advance
  • Working with National Fire Protection Agency, emergency repsponders
• Permitting costs ranging from $50-$300
• Variability and, complexity over rates
• Simplify Everything: Permitting, options, local incentive programs

Hertz: Jack Hidary

• Out to market this past December with first rentals and shares of EVs
• New York launch went well:  7,000 consumers came for launch
• Offering wide range of vehicles: Volt, Leaf, I-MIEV, Smart EV, and others
• Announcing four different models of Renault in Europe and launching in China
• Partnerships key: working with utilities, hospitality company and others
• Putting in stations ourselves and some partners are installing
• “EV 2.0″: critical that the stations are connected
• Need to enable customers to see stations ahead of time, as well as status and availability
• Encouraging station companies to enable internet connectivity

Enterprise: Jeff Morrell and Kyle Sabie

• 55% of entire fleet of vehicles have 28 mpg or higher
• All vehicles are available through variety of distribution models
• Working with strategic partners and manufacturers to makes sure early adopters have positive experience
• Focusing on ease of use
• As infrastructure and strategic partners continues to grow, we can introduce EVs into WeCar share program
• Bringing EVs to market through car share, dedicated use, long term rentals
• Home City plus will be good fit for EV
  • Driving around familiar territory
  • Fits model that manufacturers talk about when they look at retail sales target
  • Home city exposure could lead to 100-200 unique experiences and test drives every year
  • Provides educational opportunity for drivers unfamiliar with EV technology
  • Will show customers how cars function and charge.

• 500 nissan leafs delivered in 2011
• Several orders of the Volt are on order

EDTA – Terry Johnson

• National Plug-in Vehicle Initiative
• Transitioning from Policy and Technical issues to Education and Outreach
• Addressing market and institutional barriers
• Educate consumers/key sectors on PEV basics – Purpose of GoElectricDrive.com
  • Resource Locator
  • Incentives ­– access DOE/AFDC database
  • Route to serving Utilities for their PEV-related rate schedules/service implementation resources
  • Linking to RMI’s Project Get Ready cities through zip code locators
  • Energy Cost/CO2 calculator
  • Charging station locator (future)
• Strategic Initiatives
  • GeoEVSE Forum – Unify charging database
  • Utility PEV Implementation planning: Planning template
  • Public-Private partnership Initiative: Model Cities plan led by Chad Bell of Best Buy

Read more and download here.

View the case studies here.

Houston’s EV Readiness Program

Houston EVSE Permitting Process

·      OSU CAR Presentation on Upcoming Research

·      GE Presentation on EVSE and Fleets

·      Electrification Coalition Presentation on Fleet Roadmap
Happy Holidays from all of us at RMI!

Project Get Ready City and Tech Advisers Call

December, 14th, 2010

General Updates

New Resources RMI – Ben Holland

·      Raleigh YouTube Video: Installing Public Charging Stations

·      DOE Technical Assistance Program: Preparing for the Arrival of Electric Vehicles

·      Charging Infrastructure Data Collection Guidelines

·      Clean Cities Webinar: Charging Infrastructure, Micro-Climate Process and Data-Collection.

·      Technology Review: BMW Group Electric Vehicle Program

·      Preparing for the Rollout of Electric Vehicles

·      King County VanPool Presentation

·      Electrification Coalition Fleet Roadmap

Data Collection RMI- Ben Holland

Project Get Ready is collecting EVSE installation information from its city partners and technical advisers. By gathering data about the installation costs and permitting times–and how each varies by location–we intend to develop best practices for EVSE infrastructure investments.

So far we’ve collected a small segment of the data, so thank you to Richmond, Houston, Kansas City and Indianapolis for providing your data.  And thank you to all of our partners for being patient in this effort.

City Updates

Indianapolis – Tim Pulliam: tpulliam@cincorp.com

·      Think North America has delivered 15 cars to State of Indiana: 12 used as state park patrol vehicles, 3 used as state pool vehicles

·      Next Round of Vehicles will be deployed by Think in near future.

·      EVSE Installations: Duke Energy and IPL are doing site assessments and determining costs of installation. First installations will be complete by end of year.

·      Secondary Battery Life: MOU between Duke Energy and Itochu Corporation to analyze battery degradation and evaluate secondary applications.

Kansas City – Larry Kinder: larry.kinder@lilypadev.com

·      Two charging stations installed

·      10 additional EVSE on the way

·      KC Plug-In Ready Task Force is working on actionable deployment plan

Rhode Island – Al Dahlberg: albert_a_dahlberg@brown.edu

·      Working with private companies that are interested in installing EVSE

·      Seeking funding for future EVSE deployment

Houston – Laura Spanjian: laura.spanjian@houstontx.gov

·      NRG EV Services, Houston, is first residential energy provider to provide funding for charging stations

·      Installing 50 fast charge and 100 level 2 throughout Houston

·      Incentives available for EVSE for purchasers of Leaf or Volt

Boulder – Paul Nelson: paul.nelson@saoradh.com

·      Boulder EV Project:  Supporting installation of 30 EVSE, City is providing rebates to put in EVSE in businesses, plan is to have 45 EVSE installed by end of 1^st Quarter 2011

·      Targeting EV deployment (PHEVs and BEVs): 100 in 2011; 200 in 2012

·      Conducting Vehicle to Building interaction

·      Some buildings in the program with EVSE will be locations that have installed PV

Toronto – Ben Marans bmarans@tfund.org

·      Fleetwise EV 300 Program is recruiting new OEM partners

·      Partnership with Nissan Canada: Committing 500 Leafs to public and private fleets.  Azure Dynamics providing Transit Connect.

·      Fleet Servicing: Fleet Karma tool developed to help fleets do analysis of current vehicles and determine need for EV. Also analyzing driver experiences.

·      Toronto Hydro installed charging stations

·      Sheraton Hotel installed 2 EVSE

·      Electric Mobility EV Conference in September 2011

Orlando – John Parker john.parker@ocfl.net

·      Launched new interactive website, which includes a locator map for tracking charging stations

·      300 public EVSE to be installed in 70-mile radius of downtown Orlando

Amsterdam – Roland Steinmetz r.steinmetz@evconsult.nl

·      100 EVSE installed in city, with 2-4 Fast Charging Stations being installed in February

·      1000 Leafs arriving in February

·      Total of 2000 EV in 2001

·      50% of difference between EV and ICE is being subsidized; free parking and charging for 1st year

EV Pilot Studies

University of Colorado – Alison Peters, Managing Director, Deming Center for Entrepreneurship

·      18 Prius PHEVs used in household study

·      13 Mile Charge may encourage public charging

o Will be able to gather data on frequency of use of public EVSE

·      Smart Grid Program enables good data collection

·      Current challenges with data collection instruments

·      1 of 5 cities to participate in Toyota program
Ohio State Center for Automotive Research – Giorgio Rizzoni, Director, OSU CAR

·      Gathered group of utilities and OEMs into consortium

·      Modeling PHEV grid integration with info provided by OEMs and Utilities

·      Analyzing battery aging in plug-in vehicle applications, as well as secondary use and aging cycles

·      Collaboration with American Electric Power, Duke Energy, First Energy, Dayton Power and Light and PJM

·      Gathered together 10 fleet vehicles to acquire data.  OSU CAR collects data off cars, using the information to inform vehicle grid models, sharing information with electric utilities.  Working closely with City of Columbus and ODOT.

·      Six EVSE on order will be located at CAR and available to public

GE Watt Stations and Fleet Purchase – Michael Mahan, Global Product Manager

·      Largest ever single EV commitment: 25,000 by 2015

·      Deployment will be coupled with about 35,000 EVSE installed around the country

·      Data sharing: Building up list on type of information to track, either data of chargers or telematics on vehicles, number of times a day charged, preferred location, etc.

·      EVSE Deployment: Will build out line over the next 2 years, by end of 2011- 58 different charging stations, indoor/outdoor enclosure, Watt Station

·      Partnership with Better Place:  Technology standards and fleet deployments, battery financing for projects abroad, working together on market development

Electrification Coalition Fleet Roadmap – Sam Ori, Director of Policy

·      Fleet Study: fleets are an ideal place where uptake could be rapid

·      Fleet managers almost always rank TCO as most significant factor

·      Route predictability could allow fleet operators to right size batteries

·      High vehicle utilization rates increase number of miles traveled, accelerating payback period of EVs for fleet operators

·      Parking facilities allow fleet operators to minimize investment in public charging and benefit from economies of scale in installation

·      Report findings:

o   Even without government subsidies, traditional hybrids are most cost effective for many fleets

o   Falling battery and component costs favor EVs by mid-decade

o   EVs and PHEVs become most cost effective option between 2016 and 2020 assuming no incentives

o   Battery residual risk is key obstacle

·      200,000 EVs on the road in commercial and government fleets by 2015

Authors: Jesse Cohn, Brandan Lai, Max Monn, Quinn Savit, Kayla Weisdorf

Abstract:

“Through PGR RI, we will prepare the state of Rhode Island for the future. We began by researching other Project Get Ready initiatives throughout the continent that have already taken steps toward implementing a functional EV infrastructure. We then evaluated the current status of the PGR RI initiative and how we could facilitate the establishment of the electric vehicle as a valid means of transportation within the state. Our subsequent role was essentially twofold: to provide research on electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) technology and manufacturers and to identify potential sites for public charging. In this report, we will discuss our entire approach, beginning with a brief history of alternative fuels and the electric car. We will then detail the present state of PGR RI, and what we specifically contributed to the progress of the venture: our compilation of EVSE technology research, a summary of the Rhode Island planning manual for installing EVSE, possible plug-in locations, and branding. Finally we will outline our recommendations for the future of PGR RI.”

Abstract

Electric vehicle adoption has the potential to wean America off its current unsustainable appetite for oil, which poses a risk to the global economy, security and environment.  The goal of this research is to assess the greenhouse gas emissions impact of electric vehicle adoption on individual and in Rhode Island on a fleetwide level between 2010 and 2030. A Battery electric vehicle reduces lifetime emissions by 90 percent compared to a conventional vehicle.  Statewide emissions impact is analyzed using scenario analysis that compares a Business-As-Usual Scenario (no plug-in vehicle adoption) with a 50% Plug-in-Vehicle Adoption Scenario (50% new vehicle sales in 2030).  The plug-in vehicle scenario reduces transportation emissions by 1.36 million metric tons (MMT), or 37 percent, for 2030, and reduces emissions by 9.6 MMT, 13%, between 2010 and 2030. The extent of electric vehicle adoption in Rhode Island is dependant on reducing vehicle upfront cost, installing a comprehensive charging infrastructure (including Level III Quick Charge stations), and developing a host of policies and public awareness campaigns in order to encourage PEV adoption.  The Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and tax rebates on the upfront cost of plug-in vehicles are two policy measures that have potential to encourage plug-in vehicle adoption. The introduction of electricity as a vehicle fuel source will shift a piece of the burden of transportation emissions onto the electric sector.  Plug-in electric vehicle adoption must be examined on a regional scale in order to assess the current grid’s capacity to support electric vehicle charging.  Implementing a valley-filling approach, like off-peak and time-of-use pricing, could greatly improve the grid’s efficiency and maximize capacity. The positive greenhouse gas emissions impact should encourage policy makers, industry, and citizenry to work together to bring about plug-in electric vehicle adoption in Rhode Island.

1. Trenching
2. Electrical Panel Box
3. Installation of Conduit
4. Inspection of Groundwork
5. Installation of Bracket Footing and Bollards
6. Installation of Charging Stations on Mounting Brackets
7. Testing of Charging Units
8. Final Inspection

Watch this video and others on Raleigh’s YouTube Channel.

Summary:

“Additional charging infrastructure deployments, installed by 3rd parties, are welcome additions to
the eTec Project, as this will provide a more infrastructure-rich charging environment. However,
in order to be added to the eTec Project, all charging infrastructure most be safe and capable of
providing the same charging event information, in the same format, and at the same frequency as
the infrastructure installed by the eTec-Project participants. The DOE provided scope for this
ARRA funded project has very defined data collection, evaluation, and dissemination
requirements for a massive amount of charging infrastructure. These requirements and the mass
of instrumented vehicles and charging infrastructure necessitate that the data handling and
reporting be conducted in the most economical and similar manner possible. Therefore, any
organization can install infrastructure at their choice, but it is not possible to consider it part of
the eTec-Project unless it is installed and provides data in the same exact manner as the 12,000
units deployed by the eTec Project.”

From the report:

“The concentration of buying power associated with
fleet operators and fleet management companies represents
a significant opportunity to assist the early development
of the electric drive vehicle industry. Moreover,
fleets tend to possess a handful of important characteristics
that may make them more likely than typical
consumers to take on the potential risks of electric drive
ownership in anticipation of reaping financial benefits
down the road.”

The presentation describes BMW’s analysis methods and features results from the Mini E field trial.

Vehicle Specifications:

• Two Seater
• 35 kWh Lithium Ion Battery
• Range: 100 in Real World Conditions

User Testing:

• Test compares customer responses and impressions across three markets: Great Britain, United States, and Germany
• Combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis methods
• Methods: Online Travel Diary, Questionnaires, Interviews

Conclusions

• Range sufficient for most trips
• Reported range averaged between 70-120 miles
• Charging not a big issue, even without extensive network of EVSE

Restrictions/Barriers

• Lack of standardized vehicle inlet
• Very limited access to public charging
• Air cooled batteries
• Reduced cold weather performance
• No remote access to vehicle information
• Limited cargo and passenger capacity

Download it here.

Abstract:

The mass production of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) is expected to start in the coming years. Climate change, peak oil and the automotive and economic crisis have put a significant pressure on the current transportation regime. Increasing urbanisation, range and efficiency advantages of PEVs in city traffic and the problem of urban air pollution have moved cities into the focus of PEV dissemination. Three case studies were conducted in this research to analyse the functioning of PEV systems in cities. Different functions like knowledge development, market formation and resource mobilization are analysed and discussed. The main critical issues around PEVs like range, cost, and environmental performance are investigated in a city context, and corresponding recommendations for cities to become plug-in ready are outlined.

Executive Summary:

Commercially produced electric vehicles (EV) are a reality in Virginia today, and Virginia is well-positioned physically and economically to be a leader in electric vehicles. Embracing electric vehicle use in Virginia will assist statewide efforts to reduce vehicle emissions, increase energy independence, and generate positive economic development for the Commonwealth. This initial Virginia “electrification plan”…

• details how to overcome potential barriers associated with the adoption of plug-in vehicles and charging infrastructure specifically related to codes, standards and processes;
• outlines initial communication strategies to educate appropriate partners, stakeholders and the general public;
• illustrates the existing and potential incentives to encourage businesses and individuals to purchase plug-in vehicles; and
• outlines the issues and tasks necessary to the installation of charging infrastructure, from the technical to the managerial.

Virginia’s codes and standards are in a good position. This plan identifies best practices, including online access to information and rapid permitting processes enacted by some Virginia localities. Nothing in the statewide building code prevents or delays charger installations.

The reality of charging infrastructure, technical and managerial, is outlined at length in this document. The process of charging an electric vehicle can be as simple as plugging the vehicle into a 120 volt outlet; however, for faster charging, electrical upgrades may be needed.

The Virginia EV educational process will involve many partners, including regional and statewide organizations, Clean Cities, and the Commonwealth’s varied university and community college system. This plan outlines some initial educational strategies and processes and provides some base resources. Additional information can be found online at this centralized Virginia Electric Vehicle website: http://www.VirginiaEV.org/.

Several incentives have been identified that can accelerate electric vehicle adoption and position Virginia for advanced adoption of these vehicles. In addition to nonmonetary incentives, the addition of a $2,000 Virginia tax credit for electric vehicle purchase can put us in a competitive position with Maryland and other states offering such an incentive.
Additional policy suggestions and implications are included in the recommendations section.

In tracked alternate fuel vehicle fleets alone, there are 71 plug-in-hybrid or full electric vehicles on Virginia’s roads today. These are generally converted vehicles, light duty small trucks, and neighborhood electric vehicles. The upcoming months bring initial deployments and sales of full sized electric vehicles from several major automotive manufacturers, as well as additional offerings from niche producers.

These vehicles represent an attractive alternative to traditional vehicles powered by petroleum fuels. With lower fuel and operational costs as well as zero tailpipe emissions, electric vehicles can lead to cleaner air in our urban areas as well as allow us to use robust in-state coal and nuclear energy and allow for renewable fuel options such as solar, wind and biomass power.
In these challenging economic times, electric vehicles represent an economic opportunity for the Commonwealth. In addition to the strong penetration of existing energy jobs that exist throughout the state, in 2010, 84 new jobs and $23.5 million in new investment have been announced in the electric vehicle charger and battery component sectors in Virginia. With Virginia’s excellent business environment, the electric vehicle business sector can continue to grow and flourish with existing Virginia businesses. PRTM Management Consultants, an energy industry research group, has estimated that vehicle electrification could represent greater than $250 billion in economic development opportunities worldwide by 2020, taking into account growth in electricity generation and distribution, grid and infrastructure investments, batteries and other components, sales of vehicles, and associated advertising and marketing services. PRTM’s research also suggests that government and commercial fleets will be a leading sector for early adoption of electric vehicles.

Virginia’s economy is already benefitting from the electric vehicle value chain. Companies located in Virginia currently make batteries, battery components, motors, and charging stations. They design vehicles, deploy electric vehicles, and convert vehicles to plug-in hybrids and battery electric vehicles. Northern Virginia is connected within the 70-mile radius of the federally funded DC ChargePoint America charger deployment, and the Commonwealth is home to many early adoption electric vehicle enthusiasts. In central Virginia, Charlottesville is involved in a significant smart grid demonstration program and a vehicle conversion deployment program and joins Northern Virginia with a high number of early hybrid vehicle owners. Richmond has a large fleet presence and a local electric vehicle initiative. The Hampton Roads region includes large federal fleets in close proximity that are likely to benefit from enhanced vehicle electrification. Virginia fleets currently have numerous electric vehicles and there are several public and private charging stations available, including modern units and deployment units from the late 1990′s.

Virginia utilities have installed plugs into converted Prius vehicles, deployed plug-in bucket trucks, and have agreed to purchase and test Chevy Volt units when available. The Commonwealth has installed free access vehicle charging units at one rest area and hosts numerous electric vehicles in agency and university fleets. Virginia entities are researching vehicle conversions, assessing charging capacity, reviewing financial strategy, and considering roles in jump-starting vehicle adoption and infrastructure deployment to further benefit of our local economy.

Providing both financial and environmental benefits, vehicle electrification in Virginia can help state and local fleets comply with current and future clean air regulations. Vehicle electrification will be especially beneficial in Hampton Roads, Richmond, and Northern Virginia localities currently facing air attainment and health issues now and in the future.

In summary, Virginia is well-positioned for the arrival of electric vehicles and is making additional strides to embrace and expedite their adoption. Taking an active role in the promotion of electric vehicles at this crucial period of growth will allow the Commonwealth to secure the economic development opportunities that may otherwise flow to other regions.

Some cities in America have prepared for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) for years, but the PEV transition will soon affect much of the U.S. relatively quickly. With the first wave of vehicles upon us (starting by the end of 2010), initial PEV fleets will hit specific areas where, for a number of reasons, readiness and appetite is highest.

The path of the subsequent nationwide rollout of PEVs will be driven by the “chicken-and-egg” dilemma of city readiness and charging infrastructure.

Luckily, pioneering cities can make the roadmap to PEV readiness much clearer and shorter for those who are less-prepared. It is not too late for newcomers to the game to prepare to join the next wave of PEVs by taking lessons from the leaders to more rapidly “get ready.”

In the report, “Electric Vehicles in America,” Roland Berger Strategy Consultants and Rocky Mountain Institute’s Project Get Ready identify which of America’s 50 largest metro areas are currently most prepared for PEVs, which are making progress to develop the necessary ecosystems in the near future, and which need to accelerate to accommodate the imminent launch of PEVs.

While RMI’s Project Get Ready has collaborated on EV readiness plans with over a dozen partner cities, the report expands exploration to provide a nationwide snapshot of readiness across America.

The study assesses the following key requirements for PEV readiness, including:

• Regulatory environment
• Infrastructure readiness
• Consumer readiness
• Operating environment

Although not all of these factors (local weather for instance) are directly under a city’s control, the report highlights the substantial opportunities that cities, states, the federal government, automakers, electric utilities and consumers can pursue to create a favorable PEV ecosystem in the near future.

Shared Learning for Nationwide Success

The report stresses the importance of planning and the benefits of shared learning across cities with varying levels of readiness.

Due to the work of pioneering cities (see how the PGR partner cities ranked), followers have a clearer, shorter path to readiness especially in the areas of infrastructure planning, regulatory alignment, and consumer awareness. Based on the lessons learned, late-adopting cities can develop good plans that enable maximum benefit while avoiding costly mistakes. Some have already made good progress and are aggressively closing the gap, while others will wait before committing to the PEV transition.

Read the full report to view full city rankings, and key enablers that cities can pursue to enable a functional PEV market in the future. (Please note: You will be redirected to rolandberger.com and asked to provide to access the report)

Download volume one here.

PHEV Impact on Nationwide Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Overview of Study and Results
This report describes the first detailed, nationwide analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. The “well-to-wheels” analysis accounted for emissions from the generation of electricity to charge PHEV batteries and from the production, distribution and consumption of gasoline and diesel motor fuels.

Researchers used detailed models of the U.S. electric and transportation sectors and created a series of scenarios to examine assumed changes in both sectors over the 2010 to 2050 timeframe of the study. Three scenarios represent high, medium, and low levels of both CO2 and total GHG emissions intensity for the electric sector as determined by the mix of generating technologies and other factors. Three scenarios represent high, medium, and low penetration of PHEVs in the 2010 to 2050 timeframe.
From these two sets of scenarios emerge nine different outcomes spanning the potential longterm GHG emissions impacts of PHEVs, as shown in the following table. (see PDF)

Researchers drew the following conclusions from the modeling exercises:

Annual and cumulative GHG emissions are reduced significantly across each of the nine scenario combinations. Annual GHG emissions reductions were significant in every scenario combination of the study, reaching a maximum reduction of 612 million metric tons in 2050 (High PHEV fleet penetration, Low electric sector CO2 intensity case). Cumulative GHG emissions reductions from 2010 to 2050 can range from 3.4 to 10.3 billion metric tons. Each region of the country will yield reductions in GHG emissions. More detailed results are presented below and in Chapter 5 of this report.

Overview:

“How much lithium would be required if hybrids, then plug-in hybrids, and then
pure electric vehicles expanded their market share extremely rapidly? We
estimated an upper bound on the quantity that could be required by using four
promising lithium-ion battery chemistries. To evaluate the adequacy of future
supply, we compared total demand to (1) estimates of production and reserves
and (2) the quantity that could be recovered by recycling. “

Electrifying Results from UK Mini E Pioneers

(PresseBox) München, 14.09.2010, As the second half of the twelve month MINI E field trial begins this week, the outcome of interviews and objective data collected from the first three months, of the December to June 2010 phase of the trial has now been analysed. The key results show that MINI and the BMW Group are gleaning valuable learning that will help shape the specification and operating characteristics of its Megacity vehicle which will make its debut in 2013.

The key findings from the first six months of the UK field trial are as follows:

-MINI E usage differs only marginally from a control group of MINI Cooper and BMW 116i drivers in terms of average journey distance, daily mileage and frequency of use.

-Before the trials began, users expected limitations in terms of range and charging times. In practice these have only proved to be barriers in a very few specific cases.

-Users felt reassured that both the MINI E itself and the charging process are completely safe.

-There was a very strong feeling from both private and fleet users that renewable energy should play an important role in future electricity generation. There was also a strong feeling that the battery of an electric vehicle (EV) should be charged using renewables to optimise the ecological advantages of an EV.

-The BMW Group is trusted to provide a technically mature solution to the challenges presented by EVs.
-Users reported a need for more interior space for journeys requiring more passengers and more storage capacity.

-Users felt strongly that public charging facilities for EVs were desirable and even essential. However, at the same time, the majority claimed that they coped without public charging facilities.

-In summary, users liked MINI E’s lack of noise, the convenience of home charging, low off peak power charges, not having to go to a petrol station and queue, driving a zero emissions vehicle, MINI E’s acceleration characteristics and regenerative braking.

-Drawbacks include current mileage range for certain journeys, limited carrying capacity and suboptimal car performance during the extremely cold weather conditions in December 2009 and January 2010.

MINI E average trip distance mirrors that of cars in the same segment

The National Travel Survey reveals that the average single trip length for car users in the UK is 8.6 miles, a distance almost exactly matched by MINI E drivers at 8.5 miles. Using the same survey data, 90 per cent of all trips are 15 miles or under, while another eight per cent are between 20 and 35 mile. Only two per cent are above 35 miles. Using a control group of MINI Cooper and BMW 116i customers these statistics are reinforced, MINI Cooper drivers averaging 7.3 miles and 116i drivers only 6.8 miles. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that there are no objective limitations on average daily use for MINI E drivers.

The same conclusions can be drawn by analysing average daily distance driven. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) confirms that 22.8 miles is the average private daily mileage across the UK. For MINI Cooper and 116i it is 27.0 and 26.1 respectively while, again, MINI E experience slots right in the middle at 26.7 miles. The conclusion is that MINI E daily driving use matches cars in a similar segment almost exactly.

Reasons for non use

Naturally not all trips could be taken in the MINI E. Reasons quoted by users for not using their MINI E were for longer journeys (89 per cent said this had occurred for them) and limited space, either for carrying shopping or because they needed more than two seats. Lack of space was quoted by 67 per cent of users for not using MINI E on odd occasions. These are characteristics that the future Megacity vehicle will address.

Charged experiences

The process of charging MINI E from the charging box supplied and fitted at users’ homes was convenient and appreciated by the MINI E pioneers. On average the cars were charged every two to three days. Two thirds of users charged their car three times a week or less while only six per cent charged daily. It is clear that users quickly adapted to charging overnight when electricity costs are cheaper and it also suited the daily routine of the drivers.

When asked whether users saw a need for a public charging infrastructure 87.5 per cent agreed that it is necessary, with only 12.5 per cent seeing no need. However 75 per cent of all users also said they could use their MINI E without a comprehensive charging infrastructure.

In summary the home charging was seen as safe and easy to operate, users easily adapted to a charging routine and most charged their MINI E overnight. Actual charging times were seen as efficient with some users becoming so happy with it they found it more convenient than having to queue up at a petrol station. Participants would like a public charging system but did not need to rely on one.

Renewable energy

All users, both fleet and private, feel that renewable energy generation should play an important role in future electricity generation. There is a similar agreement from users that it is important to charge the MINI E batteries with renewable energy with 100 per cent of fleet users and 89 per cent of private drivers holding this opinion. However, only 22 per cent of private, and 72 per cent of fleet, drivers thought that EVs should be exclusively powered by renewable energy.

The $64 million question – would they buy one?

Would this early experience of MINI E encourage the pioneers to buy an electric vehicle? The initial conclusion from the first phase of the trial is a resounding, but qualified, ‘yes’. The MINI E drivers all appreciated the use of a zeroemissions car that removed emissions from their immediate environment, the reduced reliance on fossil fuels and the lower noise pollution inherent with an EV. They also appreciated the dynamic acceleration characteristics of MINI E and its regenerative braking performance.

There are, of course, barriers to a possible future purchase. Both the current driving range and the carrying capacity for passengers and cargo are viewed as limiting factors. Also, the suboptimal performance of the car in very cold weather needs improvement.

On balance, though, all were convinced about the viability of electric vehicles in an everyday UK road environment and to a man, and woman, all claimed that taking part in this study had increased their enthusiasm to buy an EV as well as reducing the time frame in which they plan to do so.

There is the small question of price as well. Like all drivers their purchase intentions are pricesensitive. However almost half of the users stated that they would pay one third more than a conventional MINI in order to benefit from the advantages of a more sustainable form of personal mobility. This implies a UK acceptable price of around £16,000. The strength of purchase intention would be increased with improvements to luggage and passenger space.

” The early learning from this first stage of the MINI E trials has given us very positive feedback and pointers as to where we will need to improve” explained Jochen Goller, Director of MINI UK. “One has to remember that MINI E, despite being very thoroughly engineered for its task, is in the end a modified existing production MINI Hatch. An EV designed from the ground up will be able to address some of the criticism on packaging and driving range. That is precisely the reason we are holding these trials.”

“We are very confident that the full 12 month trial under real road conditions with real people will help us greatly in producing an exciting and extremely efficient vehicle for the urban environments of the future” Goller continued. “We are truly grateful to the 80 pioneers who are helping to shape the future of the sustainable electric car. They are people who care about the future of our planet as much as they do about the mobility of its inhabitants” he concluded.

Iain Gray, Chief Executive of The Technology Strategy Board said,

“We created the Low Carbon Vehicle Demonstrator competition to act as a catalyst for industry, the public sector and academia to come together to create low emission vehicles and provide solutions to powering them. Many trials have already begun and it is planned that within the next six months around 340 vehicles will be on the UK’s roads. The majority of the vehicles are electric, with a small number being plugin petrol/electric hybrids. The information gained from this project will make an important contribution to the future plans of manufacturers and their partners, to develop low carbon vehicles for the mass market.”

The future is Megacity

BMW Group’s strategy to meet the needs for a sustainable future has four strands. Today, there are exceptionally efficient internal combustion engines, both diesel and petrolpowered, which are now being joined by hybrid technology taking an initial step towards the electrification of the driveline. The next step is a fully electric vehicle which will be available for customers in 2013. The Megacity Vehicle (MCV) combines all of BMW Group’s expertise in lightweight engineering, electric drive technology and dynamic driving characteristics in one unique, groundbreaking vehicle.

BMW engineers are developing a revolutionary LifeDrive concept that comprises a completely new vehicle architecture adapted to the demands of future sustainable mobility. The entire powertrain, the electric motor, power electronics and the battery system, are all being developed in house. LifeDrive consists of two horizontally separated, independent modules. The Drive module integrates the battery, drive system and structural and crash functions into a single construction within the chassis. Its partner, the Life module, consists primarily of a highstrength and extremely lightweight passenger cell made from Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastics (CFRP). Furthermore, the new vehicle architecture opens the door to totally new production processes which are both simpler and more flexible, and use less energy.

Carbon fibre bodywork not only provides immense strength but is also extremely light. Using this form of construction will reduce car weight by 250 to 350kgs which in turn will offset almost all the extra weight created by the batteries. The Megacity will be the first volumeproduced automobile to employ the significant benefits afforded by carbon technology.

The MINI E field trial is informing the design and development process for Megacity which will provide a practical, efficient and sustainable answer to the demand for zeroemissions urban mobility.

Notes to editors.

1.The MINI E is a two seat development of the familiar MINI Hatch. It is powered by a 204hp electric motor that also generates 220 Nm of torque. It is driven by battery power in the form of a sophisticated 35 kWh Lithium-Ion battery containing 5,088 cells. The battery can be charged by a special home charger supplied by consortium partner Scottish and Southern Energy. This enables a charge time of 2.4 hours at 50 amps. The MINI E has a top speed of 95mph and an official range of 149 miles (according to FTP72 standards), although a realistic range is 112miles.

1.The UK field trials mirror those taking place concurrently on the East and West coasts of the USA and in both Munich and Berlin. In the UK 40 examples of the MINI E have been operating for six months from late December 2009 until June 2010, 20 being private individuals and the balance with Corporate customers. The 40 MINI E Pioneers were selected from applicants in the South East of England. They are predominantly highlyeducated males aged 35 and over, earning above average income and with a high level of interest in ecological issues. A second group of 40 take the MINI Es over in September 2010 and will run the cars in normal road conditions until March 2011.

1.This research information covers only the first three months with the first tranche of MINI E Pioneers.

1.The UK Consortium supporting the MINI E trials are Scottish and Southern Energy who supply the home charging technology and renewable energy, Oxford Brookes University who are analysing data from users, SEEDA who provide political support and advice and, of course, the BMW Group which supplies the MINI E, selects users and manages driver education.

Über BMW Group

The BMW Group is one of the most successful manufacturers of automobiles and motorcycles in the world with its BMW, MINI and Rolls-Royce brands. As a global company, the BMW Group operates 24 production facilities in 13 countries and has a global sales network in more than 140 countries.

The BMW Group achieved a global sales volume of approximately 1.29 million automobiles and over 87,000 motorcycles for the 2009 financial year. The pretax profit for 2009 was euro 413 million, revenues totalled euro 50.68 billion. At 31 December 2009, the company employed a global workforce of approximately 96,000 associates.

The success of the BMW Group has always been built on longterm thinking and responsible action. The company has therefore established ecological and social sustainability throughout the value chain, comprehensive product responsibility and a clear commitment to conserving resources as an integral part of its strategy. As a result of its efforts, the BMW Group has been ranked industry leader in the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes for the last five years.

This Technical Report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) was published in 2007 as an analysis of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) charging impacts in Colorado.

Introduction:

The combination of high oil costs, concerns about oil security and availability, and air quality issues related to vehicle emissions are driving interest in “plug-in” hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). PHEVs are similar to conventional hybrid electric vehicles, but feature a larger battery and plug-in charger that allows electricity from the grid to replace a portion of the petroleum-fueled drive energy. PHEVs may derive a substantial fraction of their miles from grid-derived electricity, but without the range restrictions of pure battery electric vehicles.
As of early 2007, production of PHEVs is essentially limited to demonstration vehicles and prototypes. However, the technology has received considerable attention from the media, national security interests, environmental organizations, and the electric power industry. In 2006, the Bush administration announced the U.S. Advanced Energy Initiative, which includes the goal of developing a PHEV capable of traveling up to 40 miles on a single electric charge. For many U.S. drivers, a PHEV-40 could reduce average gasoline consumption by 50% or more.
The economic incentive for drivers to use electricity as fuel is the comparatively low cost of fuel. The electric equivalent of the “drive energy” in a gallon of gasoline delivering 25-30 miles in a typical midsized car is about 9-10 kWh, assuming a vehicle efficiency of 2.9 mile/kWh. The cost of this electricity using the U.S. average residential rate for 2005 (9.4 cents/kWh) is under $1, and could be even less when using off-peak power at preferential rates. This cost is directly comparable to the end-user cost of gasoline, which nationally averaged $2.60 for regular-unleaded in the 12-month period ending August 2006. Given these potential cost advantages, a study by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) found a significant potential market for PHEVs, depending on vehicle cost and the future cost of petroleum. Furthermore, several researchers have noted that by adding “vehicle-to-grid” (V2G) capability, where the vehicle can discharge as well as charge, PHEV owners may also receive substantial revenue by using the stored energy in their vehicles to provide high-value electric system services such as regulation, spinning reserve, and peaking capacity.

The use of PHEVs would represent a significant potential shift in the use of electricity and the operation of electric power systems. Electrification of the transportation sector could increase generation capacity and transmission and distribution (T&D) requirements, especially if vehicles are charged during periods of high demand. Other concerns include emissions impacts including regulated emissions (NOX and SO2) and currently unregulated greenhouse gas emissions. Utilities are interested in the net costs associated with this potential new load, including possible benefits of improved system utilization enabled by controlled PHEV charging.
This study is designed to evaluate several of these PHEV-charging impacts on utility system operations within the Xcel Energy Colorado service territory. We performed a series of simulations in which the expected electricity demand of a fleet of PHEVs was added to projected utility loads under a variety of charging scenarios. The simulations provide some basic insight into the potential grid impacts of PHEVs, focusing on the following issues:

• How do various PHEV-charging scenarios affect the total system load?
• What are the emissions associated with PHEV charging, and what are the combined emissions from both generator and vehicle? How do these emissions compare to a conventional vehicle?
• What are the marginal costs associated with PHEV charging?
• What are the quantifiable system benefits associated with controlled PHEV charging?

Download the pdf here.

Summary:

“Electric vehicles and electric vehicle charging stations are coming to Washington State. In 2009 the
Washington State Legislature recognized this as both an economic and environmental priority and with the
support of the Governor, enacted a new law designed to encourage electric vehicles.

To create a consistent regulatory framework that would help this industry grow across Washington State, the
legislature required the Puget Sound Regional Council and Department of Commerce to develop guidance
for local governments.

To meet this requirement, the Puget Sound Regional Council and Department of Commerce formed a
broad-based technical advisory committee made up of local governments, charging equipment vendors,
utilities, ports, state agencies, and consumer interests.

The state’s new electric vehicle law requires that all local governments in Washington State allow electric
vehicle charging stations in most of their zoning categories. Allowing charging stations creates the need to
address a number of issues beyond zoning. These include on-street and off-street signage, charging station design standards, parking enforcement, accessibility for all users, SEPA exemptions, and more. These are addressed in this document.

The guidance includes the following:

• A discussion of the context within which charging stations are provided (Introduction).
• A model ordinance (Section 1).
• Model development regulations and, for topicswhere regulations may not be required or standards do not yet exist, information that is provided as guidance (Section 2).
• A set of resource documents and glossary (Section 3).
• Under a separate cover, the guidance includes a set of appendices that include templates, checklists, and research findings. “

Read more here.

Minor Installation Label:

• Original minor label program was used by electrical contractors for installation of branch circuits up to 30 amps at 240 volts.
• EVSE installations require 40 amp 240 volt circuit
• Minor installation label will be extended to include EVSE installations in one or two family dwellings, in attached garages.
• 9 out of 10 installations will not be inspected under minor installation label

Also, download here a press release, which explains Oregon’s Building Code Division’s permitting process for home charging units.

Download the pdf here

Steps for setting up EV charging at condos, townhouses or apartments:

1. Tenant receives EV technical requirements from dealer and contracts building management
2. Building representative initiates installation process as a value-add, contacts tenant association if applicable
3. Tenant orders EV and notifies building representative to initiate installation process
4. Building rep. assesses external installation resources and potential contractors
5. Building rep. makes preliminary design and layout decisions with selected contractor
6. Contractor prepares estimate and layout site visit from utility planner
7. Utility planner reviews plans and issues recommendations if necessary
8. Contractor revises plans if necessary and initiates installation, including acquisition of permits
9. Contractor orders necessary equipment
10. Utility installs equipment as needed
11. Contractor installs EVSEs
12. Contractor contacts local building inspector for an inspection
13. Utility initiates service
14. Tenants begin charging

Key Findings:

• Voters See Electric Cars As A Critical, Transformative Step Forward
• Americans Believe Electric Cars Will Reduce Pollution And Dependence On Foreign Oil, While Creating Jobs
• Voters Support A Proposal To Electrify Transportation With Support Increasing As They Learn More
• Voters Overwhelmingly Prefer A Candidate Who Supports The Proposal And Ascribe A Range Of Positive Attributes To Them
• The Most Compelling Arguments Focus On Reducing Air Pollution & Reliance On Middle East Oil, As Well As On Keeping Jobs From Going To China
• Interfering With The Free Market And Increased Spending Are The Most Persuasive Opposition Messages, But Less Compelling Than Arguments In Favor

May 13, 2010

Attendees:

McCaffrey, Ryan – AmeriCenters

Flavin, Andy – Dominion

Patterson, Dave – Mitsubishi

Wynne, Avera – Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council

Kawai, Hiroko – Rocky Mountain Institute

Crotty, Fran – State of Minnesota

Schey, Stephen – ETEC

Dessanti, Daniel – National Grid

Oney, Emory – EDTA

Del Monaco, John – Public Service Enterprise Group

Castro, Joe – City of Boulder

Davis, Peter – City of Austin

Sharp, Korin – DTE

Groll, Stephanie – City of Cambridge, MA

James, Art – Oregon Department of Transportation

Parker, John – Get Ready Central Florida

Gilbert, Marty – Walmart

Rosinski, Bob – EV Charge America

Daniels, Nelson – City of Raleigh, NC

Gilbert, Kelly – Kansas City Metropolitan Energy Center

Kramer, Felix – CalCars

Dahlberg, Al – Brown University

Fernandes, John – Constellation Energy

Detjen, Chris – NextEnergy

Scott, Paul – Plug In America

Penney, Terry – NREL

Hamman, Jeff – Portland General Electric

Schewel, Laura – US Berkeley

Barghout, Jeff – Advanced Energy

Gabel, Dan – EDTA

Bjork, Thor – Xcel

Clapper, Mark – General Electric

Sikes, Dean – Cleco Power

Waters, Michael – Progress Energy

MacArthur, John – Portland State University

Echols, Ben – Georgia Power Company

Gale, Allan – Ford

Coley, Bryan – Georgia Power Company

Markel, Tony – NREL

Wilson, Zach – CM2 Limited

Potts, Sarah – Clinton Foundation

RMI: Matt Mattila, Tripp Hyde, Hiroko Kawai



===Agenda overview and Updates (Matt Mattila)===

Kansas City and Vancouver, CANADA signed MOU for PGR.

EDTA and other NGOs: RMI is coordinating efforts among NGOs so that Cities don’t get inundated by different NGO’s approaching with similar topics.

A heads up on Plug-in 2010 Conference in July

PGR may have an informal lunchtime meeting, please let us know if you are interested



===Main Discussion==

Garage Orphans

ETEC- potential for charging valet and more workplace charging

Level III Charging: Does it help accelerate the EV market penetration?

ETEC- rolling out ~1 Level III for every 30 Level II and running evaluations on usage

[Dave Patterson: Mitsubishi Motors - david.patterson@na.mitsubishi-motors.com ]

Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) and Mitsubishi Motor, Nissan are working together to address the issue of “garage orphans”.  Most people in Japan don’t have garage to install charging device.  TEPCO and Mitsubishi Motors are preparing “fast” charging stations at LAWSON convenience store locations, apartment complex valet services, Mitsubishi car dealership locations, and the Japanese government also is trying to help install charging stations.

186 Stations will be built within the Tokyo-Kanagawa area.

U.S.-Japan Joint Program to develop charging stations is work-in-progress.

GE – current ratio for Level III to Level II is low- no current US standard for Level III

ETEC to provide Level III charging stations in partner cities

Will collect and share data

Who owns charging stations?

[Minnesota]

Initially city-owned, then, hoping that private sector will own for profit making opportunities.

RI – initial ~50 stations owned by private entities, some discussions/interest from municipality and utilities for future options

NC – currently costs covered by entity owning it, but some may rate base a portion of it which affects all rate payers

Houston – currently all stations are on Houston property or right of way. City does not want to be in charging station “business”. Hope to see private enterprises and utilities join in soon

In Amsterdam the 100 stations are operated by the local utility but owned by the city

[Steve Schey, ETEC]

Charging stations to proliferate to generate revenues for business owners.  Currently tasked to test out revenue generating options.

Quick charging—does it potentially deteriorate batteries?

[Dave Patterson, Mitsubishi Motors]

No, it won’t.  Intelligence on the vehicle will monitor and regulate to ensure the battery’s longevity.

• There are two sides of “Intelligence” to monitor: battery management system and the grid monitoring.

• SAE Evaluating the charging standards for the U.S. market.  CHΛdeMO[1] (Charging station standards developed by Japanese automakers and TEPCO)[2]

(moderator’s note) Studies are being conducted and anecdotal evidence suggests no significant reduction in battery longevity based on limited V2G testing http://www.magicconsortium.org/

Where does intelligence live?

EVSE providers prefer it to be in the station because it would be easier to meter/monitor

Utility Waiting Period- not accurate and unlikely to be enforceable if it were accurate

(moderator’s note)- question stemmed from an article stating a utility executive claimed there will be a waiting period

[Kelly Gilbert, Kansas City]

Q: Battery warranty: Compatible with State’s inspection safety regulations?

[Dave Patterson, Mitsubishi]

A: 24,000 miles/2 year warranty is set by the Federal gov.

Kelly to look into more detailed information about this topic.

Signage to identify EV Charging, EV Parking,

Arizona Legislature statute for EV parking enforcement (http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/28/00876.htm&Title=28&DocType=ARS)

Oregon

• ICE vehicles to be out of EV Spot
• To guide EV drivers to identify where EV charging is available.
• Additional signage examples from Cambridge, MA
• Amsterdam will tow diesel vehicles parked in EV spaces
• For some cities enforcement depends on who has jurisdiction over spaces (public vs private)

[2] Nissan, Mitsubishi, Subaru and TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company) developed the standards for LEVEL III Charging Stations for EV.

Additionally, this RFI can be used as a template for any region to submit an RFI to manufacturers for their own local initiatives.

Abstract: Request for Information specific to technical information on electric vehicle supply equipment for electric vehicles.

The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards are in the Code of Federal Regulations. Go to http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html

Scroll down to title 49, Transportation and select the Oct 2008 volume.

Then select the 500 – 599 subpart, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and then select part 571.

FMVSS 305 is the standard specific to shock prevention, battery retention and electrolyte spillage. It references some of the other standards as well.

NHTSA was petitioned by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers to amend this standard to accommodate fuel cell vehicles, and you can read about that in the docket. Some of these changes would also effect battery EV’s. Go to www.regulations.gov and in the box, “Enter a Key word or ID”, type in NHTSA-2007-28517. Then click on “open docket folder”. The notice of proposed rulemaking is on page 3. Go to this docket to see the progress of this rulemaking action.

The EMS division worked several years ago on some first responder training with DOE, but if so the materials would be very old. We generally just ask the manufacturers for their guides. They are available at http://www.extrication.com/ERG.htm.

NHTSA crash tests online at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem.8027fe7cfb6e727568d07a30343c44cc/.

If for any reason you want to look up crash test results/video/reports on any hybrids you can find them there. We have some very old reports on EV’s, for example, the EV1 is test 2898. The easiest way to query the database is “Query by vehicle parameters such as make, model, and year.”

Also, we received this additional safety information from NREL…

Seems like the details of safety would have to be addressed by the OEMs – for example, Prius has emergency response guidelines: https://techinfo.toyota.com/techInfoPortal/staticcontent/en/techinfo/html/prelogin/docs/2ndprius.pdf

Emergency Response Guides for Hybrid Vehicles: http://www.ct.gov/cfpc/cwp/view.asp?Q=445610&A=832&cfpcPNavCtr=|30654|

GM Emergency Responder Hybrid Resources: http://www.extrication.com/ERG.htm#GM_Emergency_Responder_Hybrid_Resources

GM probably doesn’t have any EV emergency response manuals out yet but there are things like this: http://gm-volt.com/2009/08/25/chevy-volt-underwater-testing/

Introduction

“The arrival of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) to the North American light vehicle market marks the first time since the earliest days of the automotive industry that electricity could be considered a major transportation fuel. The introduction of PEVs also marks a major point of departure for the management of the North American electricity grid with the introduction of a significant new charging load.

While PEVs present a significant new load, they also represent an opportunity to develop existing and potentially new products and services for grid management. In the near term, managed charging of PEVs, coordinated among megawatts of charging load, could help provide ancillary services or emergency reliability services. By using the PEVs’ capability to support two-way power transfers (charging and discharging to the grid), PEVs will serve as a large distributed energy source.”

Introduction

The Project Get Ready team attended the recent Globe 2010 Conference, in Vancouver and participated in the Auto Future Tech discussion.

The topics of this panel included:
• Case studies of municipalities getting ready infrastructure-wise
• EV market readiness.
• Tax incentives
• “Timing”
• Life cycle analysis
• Comparing extraction of lithium ion from Bolivia to oil from Middle East.

Additional conferences are coming up as well: the Electrification Coalition meeting in Washington, D.C., “Alternative Fuels and Vehicles” on May 9-12 and “Business of Plugging In” October 12 – 14, 2010.

Website Updates

We have updated the PGR website. Our Total Cost of Ownership calculator has been improved to include state-specific electricity and fuel prices. The user can also input 2008 or 2009 prices, or use current prices

The Oregon EV guidelines have been briefly taken off the website, but they will be back on when the final and approved versions are completed.

We recently added Federal Highway signage to the website, as well as a new study by Friends of the Earth. This study surveys infrastructure and permitting guidelines in bay area of California.

New Technical Advisers
• Michael Mahan – Product Manager at GE industrial services; Michael works on electrical distribution-switchboards, panels, etc. He’s signing on to help answer any infrastructure questions
• Intertek – National Standards Testing Lab
• Possible future adviser: eTech

Other Notes

Jeff at Advanced Energy is working with PGR to create a Request For Information (RFI) for stakeholders to understand options, technology, and pricing for EVSE.

Charging Station Locator
• National Renewable Energy Laboratories has an Alternative Fueling Station Locator.
• Any updates to the site will be shared with PGR partners
• NREL has a subcontractor that takes care of researching new stations and adds new ones to database once a month.

Cities Updates

Denver: Matthew Marshall
• A parking enforcement vehicle is being converted to full battery electric.
• This should be a good EV application because of slow stop and go, few miles.
• In process of getting a charging station installed from Go-smart, in one of the parking garages. Conduit and data line are installed.
• Pleased to see KB Homes will be offering pre-wiring for EV charging. They are doing 11 different developments in Denver.
• 53 Tesla owners in Denver/Boulder Area.
• PGR Note: Denver did a great job in bringing together different actors in the space. Local charging station providers were in the area. Some of their first successes have been in the purchase of local vehicles and stations. Some truth behind economic development argument.

Rhode Island: Al Dahlberg
• Rhode Island School of Design (RISD) students are working on designing manual for EVSE.
• Goal is to have 25-30 EV installations by 2011.
• Area has been receptive.
• Exploring incentives in tax credits and PR
• Moving forward on guide and assembling information for companies interested installing charging stations. Release date will likely be in June.

Raleigh: Rob Underhill and Jeff Barghout (Advanced Energy)
• Continuing contractor and inspector workshops.
• With regard to sites, we have been solidifying site selection criteria.
• Looking at Macro scale: which properties; Micro: where on the property.
• Outreach activities: working on plans to encourage commitments.
• Outlining several large workshops across the state.
• Raleigh’s Earth Day celebration is coming up. Planning on integrating EVs.
• Moving closer towards having Clean Cities grant available.
• Advanced Energy: “We’re expecting to help install 80 charging stations in area for clean cities initiative.“; This has expanded into other cities in Triangle area. Exciting to work with cities on road mapping; We’re putting together RFI for charging infrastructure – nearly 20 different manufacturers. Information that we received back, we will make publicly available to all PGR teams; Expecting everything to come in by may 10th (target), but will continue to post if more come on; Cities need to have this information as they make EVSE choices.

Central Florida: John Parker
• Streamlining Permit process.
• Actively working with building inspectors to get up to speed.
• Hoping to mimic Houston/Raleigh models.
• Converting Hybrids to Plug in Hybrids. These demonstration vehicles will go to hotels, theme parks and area businesses to promote EV transportation.
• Grant funds from DOE to make a solar charging station. There’s currently one at the University of Central Florida and Orlando Utilities Commission. Progress Energy has a grid connected charging station.
• Working with “SunRail” planners who are putting in train stations throughout metropolitan Orlando. Planning charging infrastructure so commuters can park and charge.
• PGR: We’d love to hear more about the economics of solar charging and train station progress, challenges.

Kansas City: Kelly Gilbert
• Launched the Plug in Readiness initiative Jan.
• Holding first stakeholder conference April 23rd.
• After strategy is completed in January, implementation process begins.

Toronto: Ban Marans
• Presented at Globe 2010.
• Conference highlighted municipalities leading the way.
• Toronto has been active in EV working group. Addressing infrastructure at plug level and utility level.
• Toronto is tweaking Total Cost of Ownership calculator with Canadian data.
• Looking at policy level: right of ways, street charging, waterways.
• Gaining traction with OEMs. Toyota plug in hybrid is going to be tested in Toronto.
• Hoping to use smaller pilots for informing process for EV300 initiative.
• Toronto Airport Authority has 180 charging spots. Looking to add to their highway ready vehicle fleet.
• Looking to form relationships with other munis around Toronto.
• Exploring opportunities to develop a Canadian PGR-type network.
• Issues with selling electricity, access to electricity. Electricity reseller or service provider – these are questions Toronto is interested in.
• PGR: we’ve been working with charging station providers to see what regs. are in place. We can pull together best practices. In U.S., individual PUCs control certain areas, but we will dive deeper into emerging issues in Canada.
• GE: One of the features designed into charging stations is ability to do remote diagnostics of station and chargers themselves. Let people know when unit needs to be repaired.
• CT: Resale issues around private parking management companies. There is a formation within National Parking Association trying to create a LEED “tent”. EV Charging is an element of this. They don’t see it as a resale or significant revenue enhancement. They see it as a way to move their parking projects through LEED certification process quicker. They don’t see significant increase in kilowatts. LEED is a big incentive. Recently in Florida, saw a company that was looking at reselling in a highrise in Pompano Beach.

Tampa Bay: Avera Wynne, Greg Miller
• 4 counties: Tampa, St. Pete, Clear Water
• Three large utilities: Progress, Florida power and light, Tampa Electric
• Meeting with Hillsboro County to start talking about education of electricians and establishing curricula for educating them.
• We have a lot of KB Homes in our region, so we’ll be looking into them for support.
• Suburban homes are good because 80% of charging will be done at home. Production homes players will be huge players.
• Planning a big role out event. Orlando helped a lot in getting started.
• Light rail program underway – TBRTA. Connecting regions- “super region”
• Airports and rail stations are both interested in doing charging stations.
• Light rail people and airports are interested in serving rental car market.

General Discussion

Paul Scott (Plug-In America) asked Orlando about charging levels for long term parking, noting that it might be a good cost saving measure to use level 1. Orlando, as of yet, hasn’t considered charge level. Focus has been on conduit and wiring.

DMV Registration Issues
• No box to indicate EV.
• PGR: we’re going to try to answer this state by state. As each of you has experiences or best practices, please let us know. We’ll add to website and update going forward.

Signage
• Standardization is important. We have put some examples online. Opened design contest.
• Success stories in making interesting signage

EV Maintenance
• Partners have found difficulty in servicing hybrids. Vehicles like the Prius often have to go in dealership because no one is trained to do work.
• How wills this affect EVs?
• Are EV manufacturers planning on doing training programs for mechanics?
• PGR: There are a few such programs through tech-schools and associations. We’ll publicize this info and reach out to OEMs.

Final note

If there are any additional questions, don’t hesitate to ask the PGR team. Our Technical Advisers are a valuable resource and are eager to share their knowledge with you.

Finally, if you find any interesting reports or resources, feel free to forward them to us. We’ll make sure they go on the website and share them with the rest of the partners.

In addition, Plug In America has created a great, easy-to-read, incentive chart.

1. Adopt specific permitting policy for EV chargers and train staff
2. Ensure public access to comprehensive EV-related information
   1. Post EV charger specific website pages
   2. Develop a comprehensive EV charger guide
3. Streamline permit access
   1. Reduce the number of government office visits
   2. Reduce the number of home visits
      1. Allow self-certification for simple installations
      2. Condense compliance review inspections for more complicated installations
   3. Establish set fees for simple installations
   4. Process EV charger permits on a priority basis
   5. Discontinue plan requirements for simple installations
   6. Establish 24-hour inspections request systems
4. Other policies to reduce the cost of electric charger installations
   1. Require new construction to include EV chargers, or at minimum wiring components for later EV charger installation

Additionally, there is specific information on permitting in many of the Bay Area cities, a flowchart for common residential installations, and a sample EV charger installation guide.

Summary:

“This Guidelines document is not intended to be an installation manual or a replacement for approved codes and standards, but is intended to create a common knowledge base of EV requirements for stakeholders involved in the development of EV charging infrastructure. Electric vehicles have unique requirements that differ from internal combustion engine vehicles, and many stakeholders are currently not familiar with these requirements. eTec’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Guidelines provide the necessary background information for understanding EV requirements and the related codes, laws and standards, and are the foundation upon which the EV Micro-Climate© program builds in order to provide the optimum infrastructure to support and encourage the adoption of electric vehicles, wherever it is directed.”

• 2015 demand for EVs based on performance criteria ~2.3M
• Demand will drop further when cost criteria is applied. Hence EV will be a small niche in the near-term.
• Range anxiety is a serious impediment to the adoption of EVs. E-REVS and PHEVs will be overwhelmingly favored.
• Roadside Assistance and Telematics and LBS services are “a must have” feature for EVs. Must be provided standard.
• Development of a public charging infrastructure is critical -mitigates range anxiety, enable optimization of driving range, and reduce vehicle cost.
• Business models need to be reinvented – should maximizes revenue streams and provides value added services to reduce the cost burden on electric vehicle owners.
• A vehicle with a driving range of 100mi is unlikely to be seen by most Americans as their primary vehicle. A range of 150mi is more likely to merit that consideration.
• Vehicle manufacturers could consider offering BEV with a package of some free rental car days to position a BEV as a primary vehicle.

Abstract:

This paper examines the impact of Virginia’s policy of exempting hybrid-electric vehicles from minimum occupancy requirements on state HOV lanes. Virginia registration statistics are used to compile hybrid market shares on a county level to compare the impact of HOV lane access to other socioeconomic variables. The HOV incentive is shown to have a significant impact in Northern Virginia, but not in the Hampton Roads area. The paper also addresses the criticisms and potential unintended consequences of the incentive policy, including whether it has impacted the “green” image of the hybrid in Virginia.

Meeting Minutes 2/17/10

RMI intro and updates (15 minutes)
* EDTA recap – NPVI section, had lots of PGR partners involved – looking to link in with team and PGR data, rapid response plan proposed- more to come on the relationship soon

* Challenges with registration:
- RI couldn’t get vehicle registered given vehicle had 0 cylinders, no regular checklist for regular combustion engine vehicles
- Portland had some initial challenges – smog check – fined for no tailpipe – just a process, no certificate, not in our book that way
- work through with DMV every time
- Clipper Creek – happens on east coast – outsourced – no ability to make exception – conversions and 90s vehicles

* PGR readiness certification – possible publicizing of ratings

Read the study: Technology Improvement Pathways to Cost-Effective Vehicle Electrification.

Abstract:

Electrifying transportation can reduce or eliminate dependence on foreign fuels, emission of green house gases, and emission of pollutants. One challenge is finding a pathway for vehicles that gains wide market acceptance to achieve a meaningful benefit. This paper evaluates several approaches aimed at making plug-in electric vehicles (EV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) cost-effective including opportunity charging, replacing the battery over the vehicle life, improving battery life, reducing battery cost, and providing electric power directly to the vehicle during a portion of its travel. Many combinations of PHEV electric range and battery power are included. For each case, the model accounts for battery cycle life and the national distribution of driving distances to size the battery optimally. Using the current estimates of battery life and cost, only the dynamically plugged-in pathway was cost-effective to the consumer. Significant improvements in battery life and battery cost also made PHEVs more cost-effective than today’s hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and conventional internal combustion engine vehicles (CVs).

To see what products have been UL certified. Go the UL Online Certifications Directory. Here, search by “UL Category Code” to see the EV-related products: use “ffvi2″ for EV connectors and inlets, “fftg” for EV chargers, and “ffwa” for EV supply equipment.

The results as of 5/20/2010 are as follows:

EV Connectors and Inlets

• Avcon Corp
• BMW of North America LLC
• ITT Corp BIW Connector Systems
• Yazaki Parts Co LTD

EV Chargers

• Aerovironment Inc
• EBus Inc
• ETEC
• Panasonic
• Toyota

EV Supply Equipment

• Avcon
• ClipperCreek
• Panasonic

UL 2202: Standard for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging System Equipment
This standard covers both on-board and off-board chargers, where a charger is a device that supplies charging current to a battery. The products may be used indoors or outdoors unless considered on-board, in which case they are considered outdoor use. These products include all charging levels, including Level 3.

UL 2231-1: Standard for Personnel Protection Systems for Electric Vehicle (EV) Supply Circuits; Part 1: General Requirements
UL 2231-2: Standard for Personnel Protection Systems for Electric Vehicle (EV) Supply Circuits; Part 2: Particular Requirements for Protection Devices for Use In Charging Systems
These standards are used to cover the particular Personnel Protection System that is required by the National Electrical Code under Article 625 (paragraph 625.22).

UL 2251: Standard for Plugs, Receptacles, and Couplers for Electric Vehicles
This standard is used to cover the actual EV connector and EV inlet provided to connect a vehicle to the power source. If the parts on the vehicle side of the cable, they are considered to be connectors and inlets (the combination of which is a coupler), or if on the power source side of the cable, a receptacle and plug. These particular components are not intended for direct connection to a normal receptacle in the wall, and NEMA type receptacles are not included in the scope of this standard.

UL Subject 2580: Outline of Investigation for Batteries for Use In Electric Vehicles
This outline covers batteries for use in electric vehicles. Specifically, Nickel, Lithium Ion, Lithium Ion Polymer cells, cell modules, and battery packs, for use in EVs.

UL Subject 2594: Outline of Investigation for Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment
This outline covers supply equipment, which is defined as a device that delivers power to an on-board charger. These products include portable or stationary cord sets, charging stations, and power outlets. The differences in these products are as follows: EV cord sets consist of a power cord for connection to the typical NEMA receptacle in the owner’s garage, an electrical enclosure in the middle to house personnel protection components and other control type components, up to 25 feet of EV cable and the EV connector. This product may be transported from place to place (portable) or hung in a dedicated space for use in one location (stationary). Charging stations are products that are provided with a cable or a means to connect a cable, and the personnel protection equipment components required by the National Electrical Code are housed in the device. Power outlets are similar to charging stations, but they are not provided with personnel protection equipment, as they rely on the portable cord set to be brought to the charging location and the personnel protection is provided by the cord set.

UL 62: Standard for Flexible Cords and Cables
This standard is used to cover the cable types EV, EVJ, EVE, EVJE, EVT, and EVJT, which are the six cable types defined in the National Electrical Code as a suitable cable type for use with electric vehicles. See 625.17 of the National Electrical Code.

UL Subject 2733: Outline of Investigation for Surface Vehicle On Board Cable
This outline covers the cable and wiring harnesses used on board an EV for interconnection of the different components within the charging path.

UL Subject 2734: Outline of Investigation for Connectors for Use With On Board Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Systems
This outline covers the actual connectors at the end of the cables covered under UL Subject 2733 above and these connectors are used to provide an electrical connection between the components in the charging path.

UL 1004-1: Standard for Rotating Electrical Machines: General Requirements
UL 1004-2: Standard for Impedance Protected Motors
UL 1004-3: Standard for Thermally Protected Motors
UL 1004-4: Standard for Electric Generators
UL 1004-5: Standard for Fire Pump Motors
UL 1004-6: Standard for Servo and Stepper Motors
UL 1004-7: Standard for Electronically Protected Motors
UL 1004-8: Standard for Inverter Duty Motors
This series of standards covers the motor construction, tests and protection means by combining the general requirements with the appropriate part of the series. Not all of these are relevant for EV’s, for example Fire Pump Motors does not apply, but i included all the titles for the sake of clarity so you would not wonder where the missing part numbers were. If you have a thermally protected motor, you would combine part 1 and part 3 together to cover the motor. These motors would be considered suitable for use on board a vehicle.

UL Subject 2735: Outline of Investigation for Utility Metering Equipment
This outline will cover the utility meter for smart grid applications.

This covers the standards currently in place. Please note, UL Subject 2733, UL Subject 2734 and UL Subject 2735 are not yet published, but will be soon as they are already in the process.

Abstract: This paper is concerned with batteries for use in plug-in electric vehicles.  These vehicles use batteries that store a significant amount (kWh) of energy and thus will offer the possibilities for second-use in utility related applications such as residential and commercial backup systems and solar and wind generation systems.  Cell test data are presented for the performance of lithium-ion batteries of several chemistries suitable for use in plug-in vehicles.  The energy density of cells using NiCo (nickelate) in the positive electrode have the highest energy density being in the range of 100-170 Wh/kg.  Cells using iron phosphate in the positive have energy density between 80-110 Wh/kg and those using lithium titanate oxide in the negative electrode can have energy density between 60-70 Wh/kg.  Tests were performed for charging rates between 1C and 6C.  The test results indicate that both iron phosphate and titanate oxide battery chemistries can be fast charged.   However, the fast charge capability of the titanate oxide chemistry is superior to that of the iron phosphate chemistry both with respect to temperature rise during charging and the Ah capacity retention for charging up to the maximum voltage without taper.

There are a number of possible second-use applications.  Some of these applications are closely linked to utility operations and others are connected to commercial and residential end-users. Since the energy storage and power requirements for the end-user applications are comparable to those of the original vehicle applications and would require only minor reconfiguring of the packs, these applications are well suited for second-use.   The applications closely related to utility operations do not seem well suited for second-use.  Those applications require MW power and MWh of energy storage which are orders of magnitude larger than that of the vehicle applications.  The primary barrier to implementation of the second-use is demonstrating the economic viability of the reuse of the batteries in terms of the cost of the batteries to the second owners and a guarantee that the used batteries would have satisfactory calendar and cycle life.

Abstract: The technical and economic feasibility of applying used electric vehicle (EV) batteries in stationary applications was evaluated in this study.  In addition to identifying possible barriers to EV battery reuse, steps needed to prepare the used EV batteries for a second application were also considered.  Costs of acquiring, testing, and reconfiguring the used EV batteries were estimated.  Eight potential stationary applications were identified and described in terms of power, energy, and duty cycle requirements.  Costs for assembly and operation of battery energy storage systems to meet the requirements of these stationary applications were also estimated by extrapolating available data on existing systems.  The calculated life cycle cost of a battery energy storage system designed for each application was then compared to the expected economic benefit to determine the economic feasibility.  Four of the eight applications were found to be at least possible candidates for economically viable reuse of EV batteries.  These were transmission support, light commercial load following, residential load following, and distributed node telecommunications backup power.  There were no major technical barriers found, however further study is recommended to better characterize the performance and life of used EV batteries before design and testing of prototype battery systems.

While most charging will likely be done at private (at home or private office parking) locations, public charging stations will play a critical role in a successful plug in vehicle ecosystem. As new innovations are introduced including faster charging stations or even battery swapping, public stations will become increasingly important.  PGR cities are among the first to purchase and install stations.  Below is the beginning of a list on how partner cities strategically deployed their charging stations.

Denver Area
Denver and the local Clean Cities Coalition identified 100 sites as good locations for charging stations as part of a grant proposal.

Selection process:
1) We only considered off-street parking, and only parking lots/structures that are own/controlled by the City—we decided that we wanted to start as simple as possible, so initially we’re focusing sites that were easy to look after and didn’t involve any private partners (not that we would discourage installations on private lots—I think we have two hotels in the area that offer EV parking spaces).   This wasn’t too difficult, as we own a lot of public facilities and parking lots, so we don’t have any shortage of good sites to keep us busy.

2) Some of the sites identified were fleet-only (the main areas where our City vehicles park).  For the public locations, we went through our list of parking lots/structures, and winnowed the list:

3) Major venues with a lot of parking where people park for long periods (and/or offer monthly parking)—cultural complex, Perfoming arts complex, zoo, central/lower downtown public parking, etc.

4) Then we worked with our Library and Parks and Rec Dept and went through the list of libraries and parks/rec centers to select the best potentials based on:

a) Enough parking to reserve a space or two if we decided to make them EV-only at some point (our Libraries and rec centers are pretty popular, so often have full lots—initially we would probably start with “leave this space for EVs unless no other space is available” until there was reasonable demand).

b) Geographically distributed in as many neighborhoods/City council districts as possible.

c) Tried to find sites that had could be conveniently be used by City Fleet vehicles (areas park maintenance might park, or very close do other City gov offices) so that we could get double duty out of them.

d) Site that were near other private attractions—libraries that were situated in popular shopping/dinning districts.

e) Also took into consideration the Library and Rec folks’ general knowledge of where made sense—ruling out areas with vandalism issues, sites with typical customers that would be more-likely early-adopters (like lots of young professionals).

f) availability of power on the existing panels in the parking structures (although we focused on Level I charging stations as they are the least expensive and still provide access and visibility)

g) the electricity price schedule for each facility—out utility has a flat $/kWh charge for lower-consuming sites, but at larger sites it is combo of  a small $/kWh charge plus a high $/peak-kW ( We want to be mind full that we don’t end up bumping a facility into the next rate structure or otherwise don’t adequately plan for potential increases in utility cost from a jump in demand charges from level 2 charging.  Obviously the strategy for managing cost would vary depending on the type of unit installed and the model of service provided to users and if there is flexibility in recovering costs if needed. )

The biggest piece of the effort was just talking to and getting buy in from all the different folks that manage these sites—not just several different departments, but most of the cultural facilities, airports, and the library operate basically as independent entities.  It is nice to have all the sites aware and “on board” so we are ready to move ahead as we are able without having to introduce everyone to the concept.

Blue is fleet only, red is public

Download here

Contents:

• Reference Legislation Codes and Standards
• Plug-In Vehicle Technology
• Charging Scenarios
• Utility Integration
• Planning Considerations
• Cost Estimating

Attendees on Call

Executive Summary

• RMI updates on recent developments
  • New partners, recent meetings, and website developments
• City updates on charging infrastructure installation, vehicle procurement, and utility integration
• Overview of freight electrification opportunities
• Questions for technical advisers including ADA compliance
• Next steps

RMI Update

• Discussing opportunities to work with EDTA as a resource for information
  • NPVI- new site as data aggregator
• Meeting with Electrification Coalition
  • Seeking feedback on PEV supporting legislation
• Meeting with Clinton Climate Initiative
  • Looking to share information and improve collaboration
• How can we benefit from the above potential relationships?

New Partnerships

• Underwriter Laboratories
  • Providing certifications for products within industry (whole scope of EVSE and standards developments)

City Updates

Denver

·       Potential for Toyota to put 15 plug-ins in Boulder. 10 in Denver. Portion will be given to homeowners to test how they will interact with and affect the grid

·       Go Smart Technologies (Denver start-up) manufacturing a residential charging unit. Models are coming off the line this month

·       QM – Drive Train – working with Coda Automotive. Bought $7.5 million facility to expand production

·       Denver is beginning to budget level 1 charge points across city. Many will be existing outlets but with signage to raise profile

·       As demand increases, sites may be upgraded to level 2

Rhode Island

·       Launching program Jan 20. Went through strategy process last summer, finalized in Sept

·       Reaching out to large organizations across state to encourage installation of charge points. Emphasis on workplace charging and free charging for employees

·       Planning to release list of leading companies before Memorial Day

·       Interested in EVSE, expediting permitting for charge spots

·       Working with National Grid

Houston

·       New Mayor is supporter of EVs

·       Working with major grocery chains and parking garages

·       Putting a plan together for 400 locations of level 3 stations

·       Nissan leaf is coming February 5^th

·       Deploying charging stations signs

·       48 hour turnover for charging station application and approval

·       Looking into establishing preferred, certified electricians for installation

Toronto

·       Mayor represented city and C-40 and EV network in Copenhagen

·       City of Toronto council passed Sustainability plan. – continue work on activities to facilitate uptake of EVs in corp. and govt fleets

·       Formally launched EV 300 initiative – aimed at getting 300 EVs on the road in Toronto by 2012. Working with multiple stakeholders

·       Create buyers club, bringing together public/private fleet managers. Peer to peer, technical support

·       Bringing together Province of Ontario, city of Toronto,  Toronto hydro fleets.

·       Looking at how EVs operate in fleets, real on the road numbers

·       Performing analyses – how weather affects performance of vehicle and battery

·       Toronto Hydro – v2g studies. Smart meters deployed with TOU pricing. Getting a good understanding of grid interaction

·       Province of Ontario is launching plug in incentive of $10,000  desire buyers club in place

working with public/private fleets to work on education
receiving excellent media attention.

Portland

·       EV Roadmap concept to assess current state and create plan to move forward

·       ETEC Nissan initiative moving forward

·       2010 action plan developing

·       Working with public opinion research firm. Public and political research.

-Have begun to track what citizens know and think about EVs.

-Very high enthusiasm but gaps between what people know and should know. Helpful knowledge for public information campaign

·       No performance measures yet, work in progress. Plan to have this in place, to track milestones

·       Concentrate efforts around broad applications of EVs. Previous attention has been given to 4-5 person vehicle. Pay more attention to bikes and trucks

·       evroadmap.com – proceedings from workshop. Willing to chat with anyone in PGR community

Indianapolis

·         Secured additional OEM partners Think and Smart. Think will begin North American production of their EV in Elkhart Indiana and contribute 50-100 vehicles to Project Plug-IN in Summer of 2010. Smart has selected Indianapolis as a launch market for their ForTwo EV and will provide 50 per-production vehicles to Project Plug-IN late Summer 2010.

·         Utility partners Duke Energy and Indianapolis Power & Light (IPL) hosted a workshop for the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission regarding Project Plug-IN. Nissan, Smart, and RMI spoke at the workshop which focused on the utilities plans to provide charging infrastructure (approx 200-300 sites)for the Project Plug-IN demonstration as well as develop an ongoing pilot program to provide charging infrastructure to utility customers who purchase plug-in vehicles.

·         Project Plug-IN has added ITOCHU Corporation (Japan) as a corporate partner and they will provide battery management systems and DC to DC charging stations.  Additionally, Project Plug-IN will become a sister project to a similar pilot led by ITOCHU in Tskuba Japan involving Mazda, Tokyo Power and Electric Company, and others.

Raleigh

·        Have developed Permit Application Process for Electrical Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) Installation; Residential and Commercial

·        Working on Prequalifying Guidelines for Potential EVSE Locations

·        Raleigh is on the Nissan Leaf  Promotion Tour – January 29, 2010

·        Developing in-house training for electrical inspectors on potential installation scenarios

·        Developing  an Incentives Plan for Potential EVSE Locations

·        Developing a City Sustainable Mapping Program to include locations of EVSE

·        PGR Task Force meeting bi-weekly to discuss updates (task force to include City of Raleigh Sustainability, Inspections, Fleet Managers, City Planning; Advanced Energy and Progress Energy)

Freight Electrification Opportunities

·       Freight trucks use a lot of fuel and can save quite a bit of it with electric power systems.

·       Many technologies that make use of battery technology are currently available and market ready

·       Charging stations can benefit freight trucks in the same way as passenger vehicles with common infrastructure

Updates from Technical Advisers

San Diego Gas and Electric

·       Working with groups relative to permit situation – statistics about time that took to install. Southern Cal. Edison

·       San Diego is testing ground for infrastructure

·       Talking to electrical inspectors

·       One of aspects of ETEC is training program for inspectors

·       Chair person for clean cities coalition. and manager for SDG&E

·       ETEC will provide data before summary from DOE comes out

·       Looking for real time information.

·       Instituting rule making from California PUCub. Affects PG&E, SoCal Edison, SDG&E

·       Hands are tied on infrastructure until rules are put in place

·       Putting together experimental rates – see what consumer behavior is relative to different rate structures/ charging behavior

·       Real-time roll-out in tandem with Nissan rolllout

·       Meeting on Jan 22nd with all utilities, CARB, CEC, OEMs, Coulomb, Better Place

Questions for Tech Advisers

How is Houston managing charging station installations at multiple levels?

·       Most charging will be at home, as opposed to on the street. though there will be on the street. Chargers had some issues as they were chipped for Europe

·       Houston wants to be early adopters but not to be first in charging world. The 400 charging stations is a conceptual business plan

Trucking/Freight Question: is it feasible to make existing electric truck stations personal vehicle chargers?

·       It is likely feasible, but right now they are for trucking
ADA Compliance and Infrastructure Questions

·       BC Hydro – addressed compliance. Recommendations for parking stalls. Attached document

·       Have you done any work to site and identify locations for infrastructure? How do you locate?

·       Already have an installed infrastructure. Some people felt burned by EVs not coming true

·       What has changed from 10 years ago? Back then car makers were mandated to produce cars. Now they want to

·      London is partnering with grocery chain to test neighborhood deployment.

·       Success in Japan with convenience stores.

Download the pdf

Top Priorities for Overall Utility Support:

• Consumer EV Support (24/7 operator for EV charging questions).
• Residential infrastructure assistance: Fast convenient installation process that is affordable
• Outreach and leadership in readying regions for plug-in vehicles
• Compelling consumer EV rates and easy sign-up process
• Policy assistance (e.g. eased permitting, building codes, incentives)
• Expanded fleet purchases

The pledge focuses on the following:

• Infrastructure: Utilities will help ensure there are no system impacts from fueling large numbers of plug-in vehicles from the power grid. They also will help develop comprehensive local charging infrastructure plans.
• Customer Support: Utilities will ensure that PEV customers receive excellent customer care on questions ranging from charging mechanics to rates.
• Customer and Stakeholder Education: Utilities will collaborate with state and local officials, automakers and other stakeholders to provide comprehensive education outreach to customers on all aspects of PEVs.
• Vehicle and Infrastructure Incentives: Utilities will work closely with federal and local stakeholders to encourage PEV penetration, including purchase incentives, tax rebates, off-peak charging rates and subsidized parking.
• Utility fleets: Utilities will take significant steps to accelerate the introduction of PEVs into their utility fleet operations.

Take a look.

Houston budgeted for the project by assuming $10,000 for the first station and then $1,000 for each additional station.

Please email Ben Holland to submit additional charging station installation cost data.

The Advanced Electric Drive Vehicle Education Program includes:

• Specialized curricula and training for a variety of target audiences – Consumer-friendly educational materials, including the Advanced Electric Drive 101 Toolkit – Web-driven simulators – Vehicle simulation and demonstration tool.
• Support of National Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Day Odyssey, where the general public can receive an up-close and personal view of advanced electric drive vehicles.
• Many education and outreach events including trade shows, exhibits, and other opportunities addressing advanced electric drive vehicles.

Check it out!

• Business of Plugging In – recap

• Response to Charging Infrastructure Paper
  • How to estimate infrastructure wiring costs? – talk to some installers and get your feedback
  • lots of hits, more evse companies reaching out , more city interest- talk about fast vs slow charging

• Portland meeting for infrastructure deployment
  • people, focus, sponsors, freight, and cons survey, and deployment

• Esource Webinar

• City Updates
  • Update to city rating and tracking

Questions for Tech Advisers

• Standards – similar Nissan and GM and Mitsubishi
  • Why is J1772 taking so long? What will change when it is approved?
  • Can we just use UL approval?
    • need to do both – UL does permitting – city officials and inspectors don’t need to do an engineering analysis
    • makes approval process easier
  • UL models need full evaluation of the system – if j1772 needs full compliant connector – January approval then connector manufacturer will tool up those components by Q2 of 2010 – then testing, some already starting
  • charging infrastructure is an issue – create cord sets for outlets – NEMA 1450 plug – RV parks for decades, NEC doesnt allow for advertising – plug for electric car – NEC looks at it, not from OEM viewpoint – early adopters are taking matters into their own hands with the 1450 plug
  • can charging companies compete with this? clipper creek $1k
  • safety of plugging in and out – how can u do this without the handshake of j1772 – J1772 required intelligent handshake for greater than 120V 15/20A

• What do our first responders need to know? – some discussion at biz of plugging in, programs in detroit in local areas, some of our cities are starting to look into it – evs in fleet like houston
• Still no signage standards
  • Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is not helping, making it more difficult to create a standard sign

• Procurement
  • What can we do to attract vehicles – Mitsubishi and Nissan rollout and availability – call them
    • looking at success in japan – infrastructure, incentives, plan for education; want them to be successful
    • opportunity now to bring Japanese vehicles for demo program – good programs to educate decisions on how to launch successfully and how to site chargers – start this year to get some indication on success – OEM side needs to know now – works in Japan – but not the US…what does it take to be successful?
  • How can we avoid ICEing (ICE vehicles parking in EV spots)?
    • ticket tow early and often, no solution yet, vandalism a big issue, expensive and dont want to have lots of vandalism
  • OEMs are going to use the PGR city rating system to see what cities are most ready and then send cars there

• Alternative lease models; OEM plug-in financing plans – open, proprietary
  • Nissan- pricing first, studying all options, together, depends on regions, different options to different areas, want to go to mass market – we want to reach out to all, one of our challenges we hear is the ability to claim tax credit – can Nissan claim the credit and pass it on to them?
  • Where can we find updated lists of rollout plans for your vehicles by city – open to group – Mitsubishi
    • no announcement yet – no info online
  • Encouraging off peak charging
    • Critical peak pricing plans – most practical and easy – basic intelligence to encourage vehicle to charge at particular times, allow them to charge at specific times not AMI, but also have EV only rates or TOU rates – AMI will happen but this is the near term answer
  • Should cities install more Level 1 chargers or less Level 2 chargers?
    • recommend level 2 – level one fine for PHEV, but pure BEV, especially with long range, push level 2 everywhere
    • once they have EV they want level 2, level 1 not practical – can’t go very far – those who have studied issue want upgradeable units
    • level 2 the way to go
    • we found testing in japan – DC quick charge – can use this in garage and commute
    • valet quick charge in parking garage – one charger services 50 vehicles a night
      • eliminates icing – like a gas station – Tokyo area
    • cities don’t want to double dip and do 2 sign ups and roll outs – so do an upgradeable – start with level 1 and upgrade
  • What other events should we be aware of or encouraging?
  • biggest part is the team and you need team members – fleet managers are nuts and bolts – vs policy, get the central contact
  • business development departments have regular meetings to discuss – have a department that can track down the right people

Download the full Excel tool

Download the full Excel tool (alternate version for older versions of Excel)

Read the instructions

Also, be sure to read the full report.

Finally, have a look at Pacific Gas & Electric’s charging station information where their most recent report details EV installation, codes, and rate structure issues and solutions.

Download the full report or click through the pages below.

Access the Excel model that goes along with the report.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary: A Look at Charging Station Investment………………..3
List of Terms and Definitions………………..4
Summary of Costs and Benefits of Charging Stations………………..6
Analyzing Scenarios Using the Investment Tool………………..12
Exploration of Other Stakeholder Discussions………………..14
Concluding Thoughts………………..15
Appendix A: Menu of Hardware Options………………..17
Appendix B: Assumptions for Investment Tool Runs………………..21
Appendix C: Federal and State Incentives for Charge Station Investment………………..22
Contact Information………………..26

Executive Summary:

Transportation accounts for a quarter of green house gas emissions, one third of household
spending, and a third of the fossil fuel consumption in the US. Major changes to the transportation
sector are overdue and could have positive impacts on our economy, security, health, and natural
environment if we make the right choices. Vehicle electrification is one way to reduce petroleum use
and has gained significant momentum as of late. With support from federal and local incentives as
well as huge investments from automakers, plug-in electric vehicles are a near term reality. The
successful penetration of plug-in vehicles depends greatly on the thorough build-out of both
residential and public charging infrastructure.1 Certain local businesses, municipalities, and other
local players can benefit from the prudent investment in charging infrastructure. This paper
describes key benefits of constructing charging infrastructure, situations in which such construction
proves a prudent investment, and situations in which it does not.
Plugging In: A Stakeholder Investment Guide for Public Electric-Vehicle Charging Infrastructure is designed to
inform potential investors about the costs, revenues, and benefits of charging infrastructure. It
presents some overarching conclusions while the accompanying model allows investors to examine
the likely costs, revenues, and benefits for their specific investment scenario. While we applaud
groups who install charging stations out of good will, this guide is for those stakeholders who want
to understand the business case for infrastructure build-out. This report puts forward a business
analysis and pathway to profitability for plug-in vehicle charging station investment. For more
information on the environmental and community-based benefits that vehicle electrification offers,
please see see RMI’s Project Get Ready work at http://projectgetready.com, which specifically helps
communities prepare for vehicle electrification.
To estimate the return on investment stakeholders can expect when investing in charging station
infrastructure, RMI created a user-friendly investment tool. Individuals can enter unique stakeholder
information, and the tool will then estimate future cash flows. This paper discusses and analyzes the
results generated by this investment tool for general scenarios. Interested stakeholders can use the
tool to explore the results of various investments for their personalized scenarios.
The tool allows the users to determine which key inputs drive charging infrastructure profitability. A
few factors stand out as particularly critical to a successful investment. Stakeholders should
investigate thoroughly hardware installation costs, as these can vary considerably depending on the
chosen installation site. Installations costs and time vary greatly depending on existing infrastructure
and available conduit. For example, a hardware installation with adequate existing conduit should be
relatively inexpensive as opposed to a job that includes upgrades to the electrical system, destruction
of sidewalks or walls, and large distances to existing conduit. For this reason, investors may decide
to include charging infrastructure build-out in planned construction or retrofit projects. Hardware
choice is also critical, especially if the investor hopes to track users and charge a fee to help offset
initial capital costs. Federal, state, and local incentives, sometimes offsetting half of the hardware
costs, reduce the burden of initial capital costs, and may also lower operating costs (for example,
some incentives provide discounted electricity rates). These factors alone can affect costs by
thousands of dollars, making the different between a loss and profitable investment.
The profitability of charging station investment will be heavily dependent upon the penetration of
electric vehicles within the next decade. However, this penetration remains an unknown variable.
Automotive companies are lining up to introduce 2010 and 2011 model year plug-in electric vehicles
(PEVs) to the U.S.. The success of these vehicles will depend on a multitude of interdependent
factors such as the strength of the economy, the price of gasoline, the continuation of federal and
state subsidies, consumer education, the possible emergence of breakthroughs in internal
combustion engine technology and platform efficiency, and the existence of public and residential
charging infrastructure. Every major automaker is planning to release a PEV in the next few years
and the current administration established a goal of one million plug-in vehicles on the road by
2015. However, neither this nor building charging infrastructure guarantee widespread consumer
adoption, but they will help relieve range anxiety and build interest in plug-in electric vehicles.

The cost of Plug-in Electric Vehicles (PEVs) has been touted as ‘the 800lb gorilla in the room’ when it comes to the viable adoption of this new technology. High estimated sticker prices come as a shock to consumers, but what does the total cost of owning a PEV look like? The PGR Calculator allows you to consider the purchase cost (including financing) and the fuel cost of a PEV compared to a Prius or a regular Internal Combustion Engine vehicle over a lifetime of fifteen years. Purchase price and fuel costs are two of the biggest cost drivers, but should be taken as only an estimate of the actual lifetime cost of a vehicle. Consumers should also consider driving habits, maintenance costs, insurance, resale value, and for PEVs- potential battery and charging infrastructure costs.

To download a pdf document outlining all of the funding opportunities below click here.

Federal Incentives:

Compiled using the U.S. DOE Alternative Fuels & Advanced Vehicles Data Center

Clean Cities FY09 Petroleum Reduction Technologies Projects for the Transportation Sector

The intent of the FOA modification will be to further domestic manufacture and use of energy efficient advanced transportation vehicles (ATVs), alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs), and alternative fuels (AFs). As required by section 721 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, prospective applicants shall be limited to heads of state or local governments or a metropolitan transportation authority, or combinations of these, and a designated Clean Cities Coalition (designated Coalition list is at Clean Cities Coalitions) in order to apply. Areas of Interest (AOI) include (1) funds for refueling infrastructure for AFs on cost-shared projects (funding minimum of $1.3 million to maximum of $2.6 million); (2) funds for incremental costs of dedicated AFVs purchased from original equipment manufacturers (funding min. of $800K to max. of $1.6 million); (3) funds for education, outreach, and workshops for petroleum reduction fuels and technologies to raise awareness and foster a greater understanding of alternative fuels and advanced vehicle technologies (funding min. $900K to $1.8 million); (4) funds for cost-shared projects that expand the use of alternative fuel and advanced vehicle technologies including the installation or acquisition of infrastructure necessary to directly support these vehicles (funding max. is $300 million). Minimum DOE funding represents FY09 funding.

Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit

A tax credit is available for the cost of installing alternative fueling equipment placed into service after December 31, 2005. Qualified alternative fuels are natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, electricity, E85, or diesel fuel blends containing a minimum of 20% biodiesel. The credit amount is up to 30% of the cost, not to exceed $30,000, for equipment placed into service before January 1, 2009. The credit amount is up to 50% not to exceed $50,000, for equipment placed into service on or after January 1, 2009. Fueling station owners who install qualified equipment at multiple sites are allowed to use the credit towards each location. Consumers who purchase residential fueling equipment may receive a tax credit of up to $1,000, which increases to $2,000 for equipment placed into service after December 31, 2008. The maximum credit amount for hydrogen fueling equipment placed into service after December 31, 2008, and before January 1, 2015, is $200,000. The credit expires December 31, 2010, for all other eligible fuel types. Form 8911 (PDF 247 KB) provides additional information and must be used in order to claim the tax credit. Download Adobe ReaderPublic Law 111-5, Section 1123, and 26 U.S. Code 30C)

Qualified Plug-in Electric Drive Motor Vehicle Tax Credit

A tax credit is available for the purchase of a new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle that draws propulsion using a traction battery that has at least four kilowatt hours of capacity, uses an external source of energy to recharge the battery, has a gross vehicle weight rating of up to 14,000 pounds, and meets specified emission standards. The minimum credit amount is $2,500, and the credit may be up to $7,500, based on each vehicle’s traction battery capacity and the gross vehicle weight rating. The credit will begin to be phased out for each manufacturer in the second quarter following the calendar quarter in which a minimum of 200,000 qualified plug-in electric drive vehicles have been sold by that manufacturer for use in the U.S. This tax credit applies to vehicles acquired after December 31, 2009, and expires December 31, 2014. Through December 31, 2011, qualified plug-in electric vehicle conversions are also eligible for a tax credit for 10% of the conversion cost, not to exceed $4,000. Additionally, a tax credit of up to 10% of the cost of qualified low-speed electric vehicles, electric motorcycles, and three-wheeled electric vehicles, not to exceed $2,500, is available through December 31, 2011. (Reference Public Law 111-5, Sections 1141-1144, and 26 U.S. Code 30D)

Voluntary Airport Low Emission (VALE) Program

The goal of the VALE program is to reduce ground level emissions at commercial service airports located in designated ozone and carbon monoxide air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas. The VALE program provides funding through the Airport Improvement Program and the Passenger Facility Charges program for the purchase of low-emission vehicles, development of fueling and recharging stations, implementing gate electrification, and other airport air quality improvements. (Reference 49 U.S. Code 40101)

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program

The CMAQ Improvement Program provides funding to state departments of transportation (DOTs), municipal planning organizations (MPOs), and transit agencies for projects and programs in air quality non-attainment and maintenance areas that reduce transportation-related emissions. Eligible activities include transit improvements, travel demand management strategies, traffic flow improvements, purchasing idle reduction equipment, development of alternative fueling infrastructure, conversion of public fleet vehicles to operate on cleaner fuels, and outreach activities that provide assistance to diesel equipment and vehicle owners and operators regarding the purchase and installation of diesel retrofits. State DOTs and MPOs must give priority to projects and programs to include diesel retrofits and other cost-effective emissions reduction activities, and cost-effective congestion mitigation activities that provide air quality benefits. For more information, visit the CMAQ Web site. (Reference 23 U.S. Code 149)

Clean Fuel Fleet Program (CFFP)

The CFFP was implemented under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and applies to fleets in ozone nonattainment areas. The CFFP requires that a percentage of new cars, and light- and medium-duty trucks purchased by certain fleets meet lower hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emission standards. Individual states must ensure that appropriate fuels are available for operating these clean-fueled fleet vehicles. For more information, visit the Clean Fuel Fleets Web site. (Reference 42 U.S. Code 7586)

Air Pollution Control Program

The Air Pollution Control Program assists state, local, and tribal agencies in planning, developing, establishing, improving, and maintaining adequate programs for prevention and control of air pollution or implementation of national air quality standards. Plans may emphasize alternative fuels, vehicle maintenance, and transportation choices to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Eligible applicants may receive federal funding for up to 60% of project costs to implement their plans. (Reference 42 U.S. Code 7405)

Point of Contact

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Phone (202) 272-0167
http://www.epa.gov

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program

The CMAQ Improvement Program provides funding to state departments of transportation (DOTs), municipal planning organizations (MPOs), and transit agencies for projects and programs in air quality non-attainment and maintenance areas that reduce transportation-related emissions. Eligible activities include transit improvements, travel demand management strategies, traffic flow improvements, purchasing idle reduction equipment, development of alternative fueling infrastructure, conversion of public fleet vehicles to operate on cleaner fuels, and outreach activities that provide assistance to diesel equipment and vehicle owners and operators regarding the purchase and installation of diesel retrofits. State DOTs and MPOs must give priority to projects and programs to include diesel retrofits and other cost-effective emissions reduction activities, and cost-effective congestion mitigation activities that provide air quality benefits. For more information, visit the CMAQ Web site. (Reference 23 U.S. Code 149)

Point of Contact

Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/index.html

Clean Construction USA

Clean Construction USA is a voluntary program that promotes the reduction of diesel exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles by encouraging proper operations and maintenance, use of emission-reducing technologies, and use of cleaner fuels. Clean Construction USA is part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Clean Diesel Campaign, which offers funding for clean diesel construction equipment projects.

Point of Contact

Trish Koman
National Clean Diesel Campaign
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Phone (734) 214-4955
Fax (734) 214-4869
koman.trish@epa.gov
http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/

Clean Ports USA

Clean Ports USA is an incentive-based program designed to reduce emissions by encouraging port authorities and terminal operators to retrofit and replace older diesel engines with new technologies and use cleaner fuels. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Clean Diesel Campaign offers funding to port authorities and public entities to help them overcome barriers that impede the adoption of cleaner diesel technologies and strategies.

Point of Contact

Trish Koman
National Clean Diesel Campaign
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Phone (734) 214-4955
Fax (734) 214-4869
koman.trish@epa.gov
http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/

Clean Fuels Grant Program

The Clean Fuels Grant Program assists designated ozone and carbon monoxide air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas in achieving or maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards through grant funding. The program accelerates the deployment of advanced bus technologies by supporting the use of low-emission vehicles in transit fleets. The program assists transit agencies in purchasing low-emission buses and related equipment, constructing alternative fuel stations, modifying garage facilities to accommodate clean fuel vehicles, and assisting with the use of biodiesel. For more information, see the Clean Fuels Grant Program fact sheet. (Reference 49 U.S. Code 5308 and 49 CFR 624)

Point of Contact

Federal Transit Administration, Office of Program Management
U.S. Department of Transportation
Phone (202) 366-4020
http://www.fta.dot.gov/index.html

State Energy Program (SEP) Funding

The SEP provides grants to states to assist in designing, developing, and implementing renewable energy and energy efficiency programs. Funding from the SEP is directed to state energy offices, and each state’s energy office manages all SEP-funded projects. States may also receive project funding from technology programs in the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) for SEP Special Projects. EERE distributes the funding through an annual competitive solicitation to state energy offices. For more information about the SEP, including SEP project descriptions, visit the SEP Web site.

Point of Contact

U.S. Department of Energy
Phone (800) 342-5363
Fax (202) 586-4403
http://www.energy.gov

Improved Energy Technology Loans

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) provides loan guarantees through the Loan Guarantee Program (Program) to eligible projects that reduce air pollution and greenhouse gases, and support early commercial use of advanced technologies, including biofuels and alternative fuel vehicles. The Program is not intended for research and development projects. DOE may issue loan guarantees for up to 100% of the amount of the loan for an eligible project. For loan guarantees of over 80%, the loan must be issued and funded by the Treasury Department’s Federal Financing Bank. For additional Program guidelines and solicitation announcements, please visit the Loan Guarantee Program Web site. (Reference 42 U.S. Code 16513)

Point of Contact

U.S. Department of Energy
Phone (800) 342-5363
Fax (202) 586-4403
http://www.energy.gov

State-Level Incentives

Compiled using the U.S. DOE Alternative Fuels & Advanced Vehicles Data Center

Alaska

Alternative Fuel Use

The state Department of Transportation (DOT) is required to consider using alternative fuels for automotive purposes whenever practicable. The DOT may participate in joint ventures with public or private partners that will foster the availability of alternative fuels for all consumers of automotive fuel. (Reference Alaska Statutes 44.42.020)

Arizona

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) License Tax

The initial annual vehicle license tax on an AFV is lower than the license tax on conventional vehicles. The vehicle license tax on an AFV is $4 for every $100 in assessed value. The assessed value of the AFV is determined as follows: during the first year after initial registration, the value of the AFV is 1% of the manufacturer’s base retail price (as compared to 60% for conventional vehicles); during each succeeding year, the value of the AFV is reduced by 15%. The minimum amount of the license tax is $5 per year for each motor vehicle subject to the tax. (Reference Arizona Revised Statutes 28-5805 and 28-5801)

Electric Vehicle (EV) Equipment Tax Credit

A tax credit of up to $75 is available to individuals for the installation of EV recharging outlets in a house constructed by a taxpayer. (Reference Arizona Revised Statutes 43-1090 and 43-1176)

California

Employer Invested Emission Reduction Funding – South Coast

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) administers the Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP). The AQIP provides funding to allow employers within SCAQMD’s jurisdiction to make annual investments into an administered fund to meet employers’ emission reduction targets. The revenues collected are used to fund alternative mobile source emission/trip reduction programs, including alternative fuel vehicle projects, on an on-going basis. Programs such as procurement of low-emission, alternative fuel or zero emission vehicles, and old vehicle scrapping may be considered for funding.

Point of Contact

Shashi Singeetham
Air Quality Specialist
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Phone (909) 396-3298
Fax (909) 396-3608
ssingeetham@aqmd.gov
http://www.aqmd.gov/trans/aqip.html

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) License Fee

In order to equalize the vehicle license fee between AFVs and conventional fuel vehicles, the incremental cost of purchasing an AFV is exempt from the vehicle license fee (of 2%) when the costs are more than the most comparable conventional fuel vehicle, as determined by the California Energy Commission. This reduction applies to new, light-duty AFVs that are certified to meet or exceed Ultra Low Emission Vehicle standards. This program expires January 1, 2009. (Reference California Revenue and Taxation Code 10759.5)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (AFV) Insurance Discount

Farmers Insurance provides a discount of up to 10% on all major insurance coverage for HEV and AFV owners. To qualify, the automobile must be: 1) a vehicle designed to use a dedicated alternative fuel as defined in the Energy Policy Act of 1992; or 2) an HEV. A complete Vehicle Identification Number is required to validate vehicle eligibility.

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Grants

The Assembly Bill (AB) 2766 Motor Vehicle Registration Fee Program provides funding for projects that reduce air pollution from on- and off-road vehicles. Eligible projects include purchasing AFVs and developing alternative fueling infrastructure. Contact local air districts for more information about available grant funding and distribution from the AB 2766 Motor Vehicle Registration Fee Program. (Reference Health and Safety Code 44220 (b))

Point of Contact

Yvette DiCarlo
Motor Vehicle Registration Fee Program
California Air Resources Board
Phone (916) 322-0285
ydicarlo@arb.ca.gov
http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/tsaq/mvrfp/mvrfp.htm

Low-Emission Vehicle Incentives and Technical Training – San Joaquin Valley

The REMOVE II Program (Program) is administered by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and provides incentives for the purchase of low-emission passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, small buses, and trucks with Gross Vehicle Weight Ratings of 14,000 pounds or less. The purpose of the Program is to encourage the early introduction of low-emission vehicles in the San Joaquin Valley. The Program offers between $1,000 and $3,000 per vehicle and varies according to the emission certification level and size of the vehicle. Vehicles must be powered by alternative fuel, electric, or hybrid electric engines/motors. The Program also includes an Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Mechanic Training Component that provides incentives for the education of personnel on the mechanics, operation safety, and maintenance of AFVs, fueling stations, and tools involved in the implementation of alternative fuel technologies.

Technology Advancement Funding – South Coast

The South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Clean Fuels Program provides funding for research, development, demonstration, and deployment projects that are expected to help accelerate the commercialization of advanced low-emission transportation technologies. Eligible projects have included: power trains and energy storage/conversion devices (e.g., fuel cells and batteries); and implementation of clean fuels (e.g. natural gas, propane, and hydrogen), including their infrastructures. Projects are selected via specific requests for proposals on an as-needed basis or through unsolicited proposals. Approximately $10 million in funding is available annually with expected cost-share from other project partners and stakeholders.

Point of Contact

Dipankar Sarkar
Technology Demonstration Manager
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Phone (909) 396-2273
Fax (909) 396-3252
dsarkar@aqmd.gov
http://www.aqmd.gov/tao/Demonstration/index.htm

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Rebate Program

The Fueling Alternatives vehicle rebate program is funded by the California Air Resources Board and provides grants of up to $5,000 to consumers who purchase or lease eligible zero emission vehicles (ZEVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and AFVs between May 24, 2007, and March 31, 2009. For the purposes of this program, ZEVs include full function battery electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, low-speed or neighborhood electric vehicles, and zero emission motorcycles.

Point of Contact

Mary Venables
Fueling Alternatives Program Manager
California Center for Sustainable Energy
Phone 866-984-2532
Fax (858) 244-1178
fuelingalts@energycenter.org
http://www.fuelingalts.energycenter.org

Alternative Fuel and Vehicle Research and Development Incentives

The Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (Program), administered by the California Energy Commission, aims to increase the use of alternative and renewable fuels and innovative technologies. The Program provides grants and loans for projects that:

* develop and improve alternative and renewable low-carbon fuels;
* optimize alternative and renewable fuels for existing and developing engine technologies;
* produce alternative and renewable low-carbon fuels in California;
* decrease the overall impact of an alternative and renewable fuel’s life-cycle carbon footprint and increase sustainability;
* expand fuel infrastructure, fueling stations, and equipment;
* improve light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicle technologies;
* retrofit medium- and heavy-duty on-road and non-road vehicle fleets;
* expand infrastructure connected with existing fleets, public transit, and transportation corridors; and
* establish workforce training programs, conduct public education and promotion, and create technology centers.

(Reference Assembly Bill 109, 2008, and California Health and Safety Code 44270-44274.7)

Point of Contact

Peter Ward
Manager, Alternative and Renewable Fuel & Vehicle Technology Program
California Energy Commission
Phone (916) 654-4639
Fax (916) 654-4676

pward@energy.state.ca.us

http://www.energy.ca.gov/altfuels/index.html
Colorado
Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit

For tax years beginning prior to January 1, 2011, the Colorado Department of Revenue offers an income tax credit for the cost of construction, reconstruction, or acquisition of an alternative fueling facility that is directly attributable to the storage, compression, charging, or dispensing of alternative fuels to motor vehicles. The credit value is as follows:
Tax Year    Tax Credit
2009-2011    20%
2006-2009    35%

For an alternative fueling facility that will be generally accessible for use by the public, in addition to the person claiming the credit, the percentages specified above will be multiplied by 1.25. If at least 70% of the alternative fuel dispensed annually is derived from a renewable energy source for a period of 10 years, the credit percentages specified above will be multiplied by 1.25. Certification for the percentage of renewable energy must be presented, as requested, to the Department of Revenue. The credit has a maximum value of $400,000 in any consecutive five-year period for each fueling facility. For more information about this credit, see the Colorado Department of Revenue’s Alternative Fuel Income Tax Credits Web site.

(Reference Colorado Revised Statutes 39-22-516)

Point of Contact

Tax Information Call Center
Colorado Department of Revenue
Phone (303) 238-7378
http://www.revenue.state.co.us/main/home.asp

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Tax Credit

An income tax credit is available from the Colorado Department of Revenue for the purchase of an AFV or the conversion of a vehicle to operate using an alternative fuel, based on the incremental or conversion cost. HEVs also qualify for this incentive. This credit is only available in the year during which the vehicle was purchased or converted, and a vehicle may only qualify for this credit one time. For an AFV purchase or conversion that permanently replaces a motor vehicle or power source that is ten or more years old, the percentage specified in the table below is doubled, up to a maximum of 100% of the incremental or conversion cost. To the extent the allowable credit exceeds the person’s tax liability for that year the excess may be carried forward for up to five years. Lessees or lessors of qualifying vehicles are also eligible for the credit. The value of the credit depends on the emissions affiliated with the vehicle (low vs. ultra low emission, for example) and the tax year during which the credit is utilized.

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Rebate

A rebate is available from the Colorado Department of Revenue for the purchase of an AFV or for the conversion of a vehicle to operate using an alternative fuel. Vehicles must be owned by the State of Colorado, a political subdivision of the state, or a tax-exempt organization, and be used in connection with the official activities of the entity. HEVs also qualify for this incentive. The rebate is a percentage of the incremental cost if used toward purchasing a new AFV, or is a percentage of the conversion cost if used towards the cost of converting a vehicle to operate using an alternative fuel. For an AFV purchase or conversion that permanently replaces a motor vehicle or power source that is ten or more years old, the percentage specified in the table below is doubled, up to a maximum of 100% of the incremental or conversion cost. Each qualified entity is limited to $350,000 per state fiscal year in total rebates paid. The rebate value depends the emissions affiliated with the vehicle (low vs. ultra low emission, for example) and the year during which the costs are incurred.

For more information about this rebate, see the Colorado Department of Revenue’s Alternative Fuel Income Tax Credits Web site.

(Reference Colorado Revised Statutes 39-33-101 through 39-33-106)

Point of Contact

John Doty
AFV/Hybrid Taxes and Rebates
Colorado Department of Revenue
Phone (303) 205-8211
jdoty@spike.dor.state.co.us
http://www.revenue.state.co.us/mv_dir/home.asp

District of Columbia

Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption

The District of Columbia Department of Motor Vehicles Reform Amendment Act of 2004 allows for the exemption of vehicle excise taxes for owners of HEVs, AFVs, electric, fuel cell and lean-burn vehicles, provided that the vehicle qualifies for the federal tax credit under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Additionally, vehicle registration fees for qualified HEVs and AFVs are reduced to $36 per year. (Reference District of Columbia Code 50-2201.03(j)(3) and 50-1501.03)

Georgia

Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Tax Credit

An income tax credit is available for up to 20% of the cost to purchase or lease a ZEV, or $5,000, whichever is less. ZEVs include, but are not limited to, battery-only electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Low-speed vehicles do not qualify for this credit. The credit cannot exceed the taxpayer’s income tax liability, but any portion of the credit not used in the year the ZEV is purchased or leased can be carried over for up to five additional years. (Reference Georgia Code 48-7-40.16)

Point of Contact

James Udi
Environmental Specialist
Georgia Environmental Protection Division
Phone (404) 363-7046
Fax (404) 362-2534
james_udi@dnr.state.ga.us

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Credit

An income tax credit is available for the purchase, lease, or conversion of a vehicle that operates solely on an alternative fuel and meets the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certification of a Low Emission Vehicle (LEV). The credit is worth up to 10% of the cost of a new AFV or up to 10% of the cost of converting the vehicle to operate on an alternative fuel, or $2,500, whichever is less. The credit cannot exceed the taxpayer’s income tax liability, but any portion of the credit not used in the year the AFV is purchased or converted can be carried over for up to five additional years. This incentive does not apply to hybrid electric vehicles. (Reference Georgia Code 48-7-40.16)

Point of Contact

James Udi
Environmental Specialist
Georgia Environmental Protection Division
Phone (404) 363-7046
Fax (404) 362-2534
james_udi@dnr.state.ga.us

Electric Vehicle (EV) Charger Tax Credit

An income tax credit is available to any eligible business enterprise for the purchase or lease of each EV charger that is located in the state. The amount of the credit is 10% of the cost of the charger or $2,500, whichever is less. (Reference Georgia Code 48-7-40.16)

Point of Contact

James Udi
Environmental Specialist
Georgia Environmental Protection Division
Phone (404) 363-7046
Fax (404) 362-2534
james_udi@dnr.state.ga.us

Hawaii

Alternative Fuels Promotion

The state of Hawaii has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) to establish the Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative. DOE and the state pledge to collaborate to produce 70% of the state’s energy needs from renewable sources by 2030. The goals of the partnership include defining the structural transformation required to transition the state to a clean energy-dominated economy; demonstrate and foster innovation in the use of clean energy, including alternative fuels; create opportunities for the widespread distribution of clean energy benefits; establish an open learning model for other states and entities to adopt; and build a workforce with cross-cutting skills to support a clean energy economy in the state. For more information about Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative, see the full text of the MOU (PDF 108 KB). Download Adobe Reader

Illinois

Fleet User Fee Exemption

An annual user fee of $20 per vehicle is imposed on fleets with 10 or more vehicles in defined areas. Owners of state, county, or local government vehicles or electric vehicles are exempt from this fee. Fees are collected into the Alternate Fuels Fund. (Reference 415 Illinois Compiled Statutes 120/35)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Alternative Fuel Rebates

The Illinois Alternate Fuels Rebate Program (Program) provides a rebate for 80% of the incremental cost of purchasing an AFV (up to $4,000), 80% of the cost of federally certified AFV conversions (up to $4,000), and for the incremental cost of purchasing alternative fuels. Eligible fuels for the program include E85, diesel fuel blends containing at least 20% biodiesel (B20), natural gas, propane, electricity, and hydrogen. A vehicle is only eligible to receive one rebate in its lifetime. The AFV or conversion system must be purchased from an Illinois-based company or vendor, except if the vehicle is a heavy-duty specialty vehicle that is not sold in Illinois. Only hybrid electric vehicles fueled with alternative fuels are eligible. To be eligible for a fuel rebate, the majority of fuel purchases must be made from Illinois retail stations or fuel suppliers. The E85 fuel rebate is up to $450 per year (depending on vehicle miles traveled) for up to three years for each flexible fuel vehicle that uses E85 at least half the time. The biodiesel fuel rebate (for B20 and higher blends) is for 80% of the incremental cost of the biodiesel fuel, as compared to conventional diesel. The Program is open to all Illinois residents, businesses, government units (except federal government), and organizations located in Illinois. (Reference 415 Illinois Compiled Statutes 120/30)

Point of Contact

Darwin Burkhart
Manager, Clean Air Programs
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and Chicago Area Clean Cities Coalition
Phone (217) 524-5008
Fax (217) 557-2559
darwin.burkhart@illinois.gov
http://www.illinoisgreenfleets.org

Indiana

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Manufacturer Tax Credit

The Indiana Economic Development Corporation (IEDC) may award tax credits under the Hoosier AFV Manufacturer Tax Credit to foster job creation, reduce dependency on imported energy sources, and reduce air pollution resulting from the manufacture or assembly of AFVs in Indiana. AFV manufacturers are eligible for tax credits of up to 15% of the qualified investment for which the credit is claimed. Qualified investments include expenditures in the state that are reasonable and necessary for the manufacture or assembly of AFVs. For the purpose of this incentive, AFVs are defined as vehicles designed to operate on E85, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, coal-derived liquid fuels, non-alcohol fuels derived from biological material, P-Series fuels, or electricity. Applications for this incentive must be reviewed and approved by the IEDC. The credit applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006, and before December 31, 2012. Unused credits may be carried forward for up to nine consecutive taxable years. (Reference Indiana Code 6-3.1-31.9)

Vehicle Research and Development Grants

The Indiana 21st Century Research and Technology Fund is administered by the Indiana Economic Development Corporation and provides grants and loans to support proposals for economic development in areas including alternative fuel technologies and fuel-efficient vehicle production. (Reference Indiana Code 5-28-16-2)

Point of Contact

Linda Peterson-Roe
Program Manager
Indiana 21st Century Research and Technology Fund
Phone (317) 234-4652
Fax (317) 232-6786
lpeterson-roe@iedc.in.gov
http://www.21fund.org/

Iowa

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Demonstration Grants

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources conducts marketing and education outreach to encourage the use of alternative fuels and, contingent upon funding, also awards demonstration grants to individuals who purchase vehicles that operate on alternative fuels, including but not limited to, high ethanol content blends, compressed natural gas, electricity, solar energy, or hydrogen. (Reference Iowa Code 214A.19)

Louisiana

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Tax Credit

The state offers an income tax credit worth 20% of the cost of converting a vehicle to operate on an alternative fuel, 20% of the incremental cost of purchasing an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) AFV or hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), and 20% of the cost of constructing an alternative fueling station. Only vehicles registered in Louisiana can receive the tax credit. For the purpose of this incentive, alternative fuels include compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, methanol, ethanol, electricity, and any other fuels which meet or exceed federal clean air standards. (Reference Louisiana Revised Statutes 47:38 and 47:287.757)

Point of Contact

Taxpayer Services Division
Louisiana Department of Revenue
Phone (225) 219-0067

Maine

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Loans

The Clean Fuel Vehicle Fund is a non-lapsing revolving loan fund managed by the Finance Authority of Maine and may be used for direct loans to finance all or part of any clean fuel vehicle project. The Finance Authority of Maine may also insure up to 100% of mortgage payments with respect to mortgage loans for clean fuel vehicle projects. (Reference Maine Revised Statutes Title 10, Sections 1023-K and 1026-A)

Maryland

Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) and Electric Vehicle (EV) Tax Credit

A tax credit is allowed against the excise tax imposed for the purchase of qualified HEVs and EVs. For qualified EVs, the tax credit may not exceed $2,000. For qualified HEVs, the credit may not exceed: a) $250 if the vehicle battery provides at least 5% but less than 10% of maximum power available; b) $500 if the vehicle battery provides at least 10% but less than 20% of maximum power available; c) $750 if the vehicle battery provides at least 20% but less than 30% of maximum power available; d) $1,000 if the vehicle battery provides at least 30% of maximum power available. A qualified EV must meet the definition set forth in the Internal Revenue Code. A qualified HEV must meet the current vehicle exhaust standard set under the federal Tier 2 program for passenger vehicles. (Reference Maryland Statutes, Transportation Code 13-815)

Michigan

Alternative Fuel and Vehicle Research, Development, and Manufacturing Tax Credits

Effective January 1, 2008, taxpayers certified by the Michigan NextEnergy Authority (MNEA) may claim a nonrefundable credit for tax liability attributable to research, development, or manufacturing of qualified alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) and renewable fuel. For the purpose of this incentive AFVs include fuel cell, electric, hybrid electric, natural gas, E85, liquefied petroleum gas, and hydrogen vehicles. Renewable fuels include biodiesel blends of at least 20%. Additionally, businesses located within the designated Alternative Energy Zone that are engaged in qualified activities may claim a credit for the taxpayer’s qualified payroll amount. (Reference Michigan Compiled Laws 207.821-207.827 and 208.1429)

Alternative Fuel Development Property Tax Exemption

A tax exemption may apply to industrial property which is used for, among other purposes, high-technology activities or the creation or synthesis of biodiesel fuel. High-technology activities include those related to advanced vehicle technologies such as electric, hybrid, or alternative fuel vehicles and their components. In order to qualify for the tax exemptions, an industrial facility must obtain an exemption certificate for the property from the State Tax Commission. (Reference Michigan Compiled Laws 207.552 and 207.803)

Montana

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Conversion Tax Credit

An income tax credit is available to businesses or individuals for up to 50% of the equipment and labor costs for converting vehicles to operate on alternative fuels. Qualified alternative fuels are compressed and liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, electricity, and fuel that is at least 85% ethanol or methanol. A maximum credit of $500 is available for the conversion of vehicles with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds (lbs.) or less and $1,000 for vehicles with a GVWR of more than 10,000 lbs. The credit must be applied in the year the conversion is made, and the seller of an alternative fuel may not receive a credit for converting their own vehicles to operate on the alternative fuel they sell. (Reference Montana Code Annotated 15-30-164)

Nebraska

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Loans

The Nebraska Energy Office administers the Dollar and Energy Saving Loans Program (Program). The Program makes low-cost loans available for a variety of alternative fuel projects, including: the replacement of conventional vehicles with AFVs; the purchase of new AFVs; the conversion of conventional vehicles to operate on alternative fuels; and the construction or purchase of a fueling station or equipment. Dedicated AFVs are eligible, and loans may go towards a portion of the cost of dual-fuel vehicles. The maximum loan amount is $150,000 per borrower, and the interest rate is 5% or less.

Point of Contact

General Inquiries
Nebraska State Energy Office
Phone (402) 471-2867
Fax (402) 471-3064
energy@nebraska.gov
http://www.neo.ne.gov/loan/index.html

Nevada

Provision for Establishment of Alternative Fuel Incentives

In conjunction with the Nevada Department of Business and Industry, the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources is authorized to develop and administer a program to provide incentives to encourage the use of alternative fuels in motor vehicles, specifically by individuals and others not required by state statute to purchase alternative fuel vehicles. (Reference Nevada Revised Statutes 486A.200)

New Hampshire

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Project Funding

The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) and the Granite State Clean Cities Coalition (GSCCC) provide competitive funding to expand the use of alternative fuels, AFVs, and advanced technology vehicles in New Hampshire. Only projects located in the ozone non-attainment or maintenance areas in the state are eligible for funding. For more information see the GSCCC Web site.

New Jersey

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV)Rebate

New Jersey’s AFV Rebate Program offers rebates to local government entities that convert vehicles to operate on alternative fuels or purchase original equipment manufacturer (OEM) AFVs. The rebate amounts, shown in the table below, can be used to cover the cost of converting a vehicle to operate on an alternative fuel or to cover the incremental cost of purchasing an OEM AFV, and vary according to the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) and whether the vehicle is dedicated or bi-fuel. HEVs may also qualify for the rebates. Eligible entities include local governments, state colleges and universities, school districts, and governmental authorities. The initial funding for this program was provided by a federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program grant.

Grant amount depends on weight class and type of alternative fuel vehicle (dedicated or hybrid vs. bi-fuel).

Point of Contact

John Zarzycki
Project Manager
New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, Office of Clean Energy
Phone (973) 648-4967
john.zarzycki@bpu.state.nj.us

Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Rebate

New Jersey’s Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Program has funding available to reimburse eligible local governments, state colleges and universities, school districts, and governmental authorities for 50% of the cost of purchasing and installing refueling infrastructure for alternative fuels. Up to $50,000 is available per applicant. Eligible fuels include natural gas, propane, electricity, ethanol (E85), and hydrogen.

Point of Contact

John Zarzycki
Project Manager
New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, Office of Clean Energy
Phone (973) 648-4967
john.zarzycki@bpu.state.nj.us

New Mexico

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Manufacturing Tax Credit

The Alternative Energy Product Manufacturers Tax Credit provides a credit against combined reporting taxes (gross receipts, compensating, and withholding) for manufacturing alternative energy products, which include hydrogen and fuel cell vehicle systems, and electric and hybrid electric vehicles. The credit is limited to 5% of qualifying expenditures, and manufacturers must fulfill job creation requirements to be eligible. (Reference New Mexico Statutes 7-9J)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Grants

The Energy Conservation and Management Division of Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) provides grants on a competitive basis to eligible applicants to support alternative fuel activities including the purchase of AFVs, infrastructure development, alternative fuel training, or related activities in New Mexico. Eligible applicants must submit proposals within specified dates as determined by the EMNRD. Funds are available on an annual basis; this program is supported by federal funding.

In addition, the Advanced Energy Technologies Economic Development Act established the Clean Energy Grants Program, which provides state grants for projects utilizing clean energy technologies and providing clean energy education, technical assistance, and training programs. Qualifying entities are municipalities and county governments, state agencies, state universities, public schools, post-secondary educational institutions, and Indian nations, tribes and pueblos. No single entity is eligible to receive more than $100,000. (Reference New Mexico Statutes 71-7-1 to 71-7-7)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Acquisitions and Loans

The Alternative Fuel Acquisition Act of 1992 requires that 75% of state government and educational institution fleet vehicles purchased be bi-fuel or dedicated AFVs or HEVs. Certified law enforcement pursuit vehicles and emergency vehicles are exempt from this requirement. Up to $5 million is authorized for a revolving loan fund for AFV acquisitions by state agencies, political subdivisions, and educational institutions. The maximum amount of a loan to acquire a vehicle must not exceed the actual cost of acquiring the vehicle or $3,000, whichever is less. Projected fuel cost savings from using the AFV is considered when the loan repayment schedule is developed. (Reference New Mexico Statutes 13-1B)

New York

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Funding

The New York State Clean Cities Challenge, administered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), awards funds to members of New York’s Clean Cities Coalitions that acquire AFVs or install AFV fueling or recharging infrastructure. Funds are awarded on a competitive basis, and can be used to cost-share up to 75% of the proposed project, including the incremental cost of purchasing AFVs, the cost of installing fueling and recharging equipment, and the incremental costs associated with bulk alternative fuel purchases. Consideration, in ranking order, will be given to projects that:

* Offset the greatest amount of petroleum per year;
* Result in the greatest emissions reduction;
* Affect Clean Air non-attainment areas or areas targeted by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) regulations;
* Result in new fueling or recharging facilities;
* Benefit more than one fleet;
* Provide a high level of visibility and innovation; and/or
* Comprise unique public/private partnerships.

Point of Contact

Patrick Bolton
Senior Project Manager, Alternative Fuels & Vehicles
NYSERDA
Phone (518) 862-1090 x3322
Fax (518) 862-1091
ppb@nyserda.org
http://www.nyserda.org/programs/transportation/

Alternative Fuel and Advanced Technology Vehicle Funding – New York City

The New York City Private Fleet Alternative Fuel/Electric Vehicle Program, administered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) in cooperation with New York City Department of Transportation, helps private companies and non-profit organizations operating vehicles in New York City to acquire alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles. Funds are awarded on a competitive basis for up to 50% of the incremental cost of purchasing new light-duty natural gas vehicles (NGVs) or electric vehicles (EVs), and up to 80% of the incremental cost for purchasing new or converting medium- and heavy-duty NGVs (dedicated and bi-fuel), EVs, or hybrid electric vehicles. In addition, up to 50% of the costs for alternative fueling or EV charging station equipment and installation may be eligible.

Point of Contact

Patrick Bolton
Senior Project Manager, Alternative Fuels & Vehicles
NYSERDA
Phone (518) 862-1090 x3322
Fax (518) 862-1091
ppb@nyserda.org
http://www.nyserda.org/programs/transportation/

Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Tax Credit

A state tax credit is available for the installation of alternative fuel vehicle fueling infrastructure located in the state. The tax credit is equal to 50% of the cost of the infrastructure. This includes infrastructure for storing or dispensing an alternative fuel into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle powered by that fuel, as well as infrastructure used for recharging electric vehicles. Eligible alternative fuels include natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, electricity, and any other fuel that is a least 85% ethanol or other alcohol. This credit does not apply after December 31, 2010. (Reference New York Tax Law 187-b)

North Carolina

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Grants

The Clean Fuel Advanced Technology (CFAT) project focuses on reducing transportation related emissions in North Carolina’s non-attainment and maintenance counties for National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Projects that are adjacent to areas may also be eligible if emissions will be reduced in the eligible counties. The project is funded by the North Carolina Department of Transportation, State Energy Office, and the Division of Air Quality, and covers three broad areas: education and outreach; project funding; and recognition of exemplary activities. Although funding is not currently available, future financial support may be available for AFVs, fueling infrastructure, idle reduction technologies, heavy-duty HEVs, heavy-duty buses, and diesel retrofits.

Point of Contact

Anne Tazewell
Alternative Fuels Program Manager
North Carolina Solar Center, North Carolina State University
Phone (919) 513-7831
Fax (919) 515-6159
cleantransportation@ncsu.edu

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Grants

Grants from the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality are available for the incremental cost of purchasing Original Equipment Manufacturer AFVs, vehicle conversions, implementing idle reduction programs, and constructing or installing public alternative fueling facilities. More than $500,000 in funding is available.

Point of Contact

Anne Galamb
Environmental Specialist
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Phone (919) 715-6296
Fax (919) 733-1812
anne.galamb@ncmail.net
http://www.daq.state.nc.us/motor/ms_grants

Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund

The North Carolina State Energy Office administers an energy credit banking program which enables the state to generate funds from the sale of Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) credits. The monies generated by the sale of EPAct credits are deposited into the Alternative Fuel Revolving Fund (Fund), which enables state agencies to offset the incremental costs of purchasing alternative fuel, developing fueling infrastructure, and purchasing AFVs. Funds are distributed to state departments, institutions, and agencies in proportion to the number of EPAct credits generated by each. For the purposes of this program, the definition of alternative fuel includes biodiesel (minimum of 20% biodiesel or B20), ethanol (minimum of 85% ethanol or E85), compressed natural gas, propane, and electricity, and includes hybrid electric vehicles. The Fund also covers additional projects approved by the Energy Policy Council. (Reference North Carolina General Statutes 143-58.4, 143-58.5, 143-341(8)i, and 136-28.13)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Loans

State and local government credit unions offer green vehicle loans for new AFVs and HEVs. The loans are offered at a 1% interest rate discount as compared to traditional new vehicle loan rates.

Oklahoma

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Credit

For tax years beginning before January 1, 2010, Oklahoma provides a one-time income tax credit for 50% of the cost of converting a vehicle to operate on an alternative fuel, or for 50% of the incremental cost of purchasing a new Original Equipment Manufacturer AFV. The state also provides a tax credit for 10% of the total vehicle cost, up to $1,500, if the incremental cost of a new AFV cannot be determined or when an AFV is resold, as long as a tax credit has not been previously taken on the vehicle. The alternative fuels eligible for the credit are compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, methanol, and electricity. For qualified electric vehicles propelled by electricity only, the basis for the credit is the full purchase price of the vehicle. For vehicles also equipped with an internal combustion engine, such as a hybrid electric vehicle, the basis for the credit is limited to the portion of such motor vehicle which is attributable to the propulsion of the vehicle by electricity. For more information, see Oklahoma Income Tax Form 511CR (PDF 219 KB). (Reference Senate Bill 1558, 2008, and Oklahoma Statutes 68-2357.22) Download Adobe Reader

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Loans

The Oklahoma Department of Central Services has an Alternative Fuels Conversion Loan program to help convert government-owned fleets to operate on alternative fuels. This program provides 0% interest loans for vehicle conversions, for the construction of fueling infrastructure, and for the incremental cost associated with the purchase of an Original Equipment Manufacturer AFV. The program provides up to $10,000 per converted or newly purchased vehicle and up to $150,000 for the development or installation of fueling infrastructure. Repayment of the loan has a maximum seven-year period. If the price of alternative fuels does not remain below the price of the conventional fuel that was replaced, repayment is suspended. Eligible applicants include state and county agencies and divisions, municipalities, school districts, mass transit authorities, and public trust authorities. (Reference Oklahoma Statutes 74-130.4)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Loans

Oklahoma has a private loan program with a 3% interest rate for the cost of converting private fleets to operate on alternative fuels, for the incremental cost of purchasing an Original Equipment Manufacturer AFV, and for the installation of AFV fueling infrastructure. The repayment of the loan has a maximum six-year period.

Point of Contact

Carolyn Sullivan
Energy Program Manager
Oklahoma Department of Commerce, State Energy Office
Phone (405) 815-5347
carolyn_sullivan@odoc.state.ok.us

Oregon

Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit Information

Business owners and others who invest in alternative fuel production and fueling infrastructure projects in Oregon may be eligible for a state tax credit of up to 50% of eligible project costs through the Business Energy Tax Credit Program. Some projects (e.g. propane, compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas) may only qualify for a tax credit of 35% of eligible costs. The tax credit is filed over five years. For projects with eligible costs of $20,000 or less, the tax credit may be taken in one year. Unused credits can be carried forward up to eight years.

An eligible applicant (a project owner) must meet the following requirements:
1. Be a trade, business, or rental property owner with a business site in Oregon or be an Oregon non-profit organization, tribe, or public entity that partners with an Oregon business or resident;
2. Own or be the contract buyer of the project; and
3. Use the equipment or lease it to another person or business in Oregon.

Non-profit organizations, schools and other public entities that do not have an Oregon tax liability may participate in the Business Energy Tax Credit Program by using the Pass-through Option. Project owners may “pass-through” or transfer their tax credit project eligibility to a pass-through partner in exchange for a lump-sum cash payment. The Oregon Department of Energy determines the rate that is used to calculate the cash payment. The Pass-through Option is also available to a project owner with an Oregon tax liability who chooses to transfer his or her tax credit. For additional information on possible tax implications in using the Pass-through Option, please consult a tax professional.

(Reference Oregon Revised Statutes 316.116, 317.115, 469.160-469.180, and 469.185-469.225)
Point of Contact

Matt Hale
Clean Cities Coordinator
Columbia Willamette Clean Cities Coalition, Inc.
Phone (503) 373-7560
Fax (503) 373-7806
matt.hale@state.or.us
http://www.cwcleancities.org

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Tax Credit

The Oregon Department of Energy offers two income tax credits for AFVs and HEVs, one for residents and one for business owners. Oregon residents are eligible for a Residential Energy Tax Credit, which provides credits of up to $1,500 toward the purchase of qualified AFVs and HEVs; currently, flexible fuel vehicles are not eligible. A credit of up to $750 is also available for the cost of converting vehicles to operate on an alternative fuel.

Oregon business owners who invest in new HEVs for business use are eligible for a Business Energy Tax Credit of up to 35% of the incremental cost of the HEV. Business owners without an Oregon tax liability, non-profit organizations, and public entities may choose to transfer their tax credit eligibility to a business or individual with an Oregon tax liability in exchange for a cash payment equal to the pass-through rate at the time of application. Business owners with a tax liability may also choose to transfer their tax credit.

(Reference Oregon Revised Statutes 316.116, 469.160-469.180, and 801.375)

Point of Contact

Deby Davis
Program Analyst
Oregon Department of Energy
Phone (503) 378-4040 x291
Fax (503) 373-7806
deby.s.davis@state.or.us
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/TRANS/hybridcr.shtml

Alternative Fuel Loans

The Oregon Department of Energy offers a loan program for energy efficiency, renewable resource, and alternative fuel projects. Eligible alternative fuel projects include fuel production facilities, dedicated feedstock production, fueling stations, and fleet vehicles. The program issues Oregon general obligation bonds to provide funds for the loans. Loan recipients must complete a loan application and pay a loan application fee. (Reference Oregon Revised Statutes 470.050)

Point of Contact

Jeff Keto
Assistant Director for Finance
Oregon Department of Energy
Phone (503) 373-7981
Fax (503) 373-7806
jeff.s.keto@state.or.us
http://egov.oregon.gov/energy/loans

Rhode Island

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Loans

The Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources offers loans for up to five years, with low administrative fees, to state agencies and municipal governments to cover the incremental cost of purchasing original equipment manufactured AFVs.

Point of Contact

Tim Howe
Program Manager
Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources
Phone (401) 574-9104
Fax (401) 222-1260
timh@energy.ri.gov
http://www.energy.ri.gov/programs/efficiency.php

Electric Vehicle (EV) Tax Credit

A taxpayer entitled to a federal qualified EV tax credit is also entitled to a state tax credit equal to 25% of the federal qualified EV tax credit. (Reference Rhode Island Code 44-30-2.6)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption – Warren

The town of Warren may allow excise tax exemptions of up to $100 for qualified AFVs registered in Warren. Qualified vehicles must be primarily fueled by one of the following: an electric motor drawing current from rechargeable batteries or fuel cells; gas produced from biomass, where biomass is defined as any organic material other than oil, natural gas, and coal; liquid, gaseous or solid synthetic fuels produced from coal; or coke or coke gas. (Reference Rhode Island Code 44-34-14)

South Carolina

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Credit

A state income tax credit equal to 20% of the federal fuel cell, advanced lean burn, HEV, and AFV credits is available to South Carolina resident taxpayers who are eligible for and claim the federal credits. If the amount of the credit exceeds the taxpayer’s liability for the applicable tax year, any unused credit may be carried forward and claimed in the five succeeding taxable years. The state tax credit is calculated without regard to the phase out period limits of Internal Revenue Code Section 30(B)(f). (Reference South Carolina Code of Laws 12-6-3377)

Tennessee

Infrastructure Development Program

FastTrack Infrastructure Development Program funds may be used for alternative fueling infrastructure improvements. Funds may be used in situations where there is a commitment by certain private sector businesses to locate or expand in the state and to create or retain jobs for Tennesseans.

Point of Contact

Philip Trauernicht
Director, Program Management, Community Development
Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development
Phone (615) 253-1903
Fax (615) 253-1870
philip.trauernicht@state.tn.us
http://www.state.tn.us/ecd/progman_tiip.htm

Texas

Clean Vehicle and Equipment Grants

The Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) provides grants for various types of clean air projects in 41 counties to improve air quality in the state’s non-attainment areas. Grants are available to purchase, convert, or repower on- and off-road vehicles and equipment. For complete information on the types of projects and expenses that may be eligible for a grant, refer to the TERP Web site. (Reference Texas Statutes, Health and Safety Code 386)

Point of Contact

Steve Dayton
Team Leader, Grant Contract Development
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Phone (512) 239-6824
Fax (512) 239-0077
sdayton@tceq.state.tx.us
http://www.terpgrants.org

Alternative Fuel Grants

The Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) provides grants for alternative fuel and advanced technology demonstration and infrastructure projects under the New Technology Research and Development (NTRD) Program, which provides incentives to encourage and support research, development, and commercialization of technologies that reduce pollution. For more information, see the NTRD Program Web site. The NTRD Program is administered by the Texas Environmental Research Consortium, with support from the Houston Advanced Research Center. (Reference Texas Statutes, Health and Safety Code 386)

Point of Contact

Yiqun Huang, PhD
Program Director, New Technology Research and Development
Houston Advanced Research Center
Phone (281) 364-4036
Fax (281) 363-7935
yhuang@harc.edu
http://www.harc.edu

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Program Support and Technician Training

The Texas State Energy Conservation Office’s (SECO) Alternative Fuels Program provides administrative support for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Clean Cities program and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean School Bus Program, grant writing training for public and private entities, and funding for training and certification program development to educate mechanics on the technical aspects of alternative fuel vehicles. SECO promotes the reduction of petroleum use through four technology areas: fuel blends, fuel economy, hybrid electric vehicles, and idle reduction. (Reference Texas Statutes, Government Code 2305.035)

Point of Contact

Mary-Jo Rowan
Program Manager
Texas State Energy Conservation Office, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
Phone (512) 463-2637
Fax (512) 475-2569
mary-jo.rowan@cpa.state.tx.us
http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us

Electric Vehicle (EV) Rebates

Central Texas Clean Cities and Austin Energy offer an EV rebate to Austin Energy customers who purchase qualifying EVs, electric scooters, or electric bicycles from approved dealers. Applicants may receive the following rebates: $500 for all-electric vehicles including neighborhood electric vehicles; $250 for all-electric scooters or motorcycles capable of achieving more than 40 miles on a single charge at street-legal speeds; $100 for all-electric scooters capable of achieving up to 20 miles on a single charge; and $150 for all-electric bicycles capable of achieving up to 20 miles on a single charge. Rebate funding is limited and valid until March 31, 2009.

Point of Contact

Stacy Neef
Clean Cities Coordinator
Central Texas Clean Cities Coalition
Phone (512) 482-5343
Fax (512) 482-5454
stacy.neef@austinenergy.com
http://www.cityofaustin.org/cleancities

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Grants – Houston-Galveston

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program Grants are available through the Houston-Galveston Area Council, via the Greater Houston Clean Cities Coalition, for up to 75% of the incremental cost for purchasing new original equipment manufactured clean fuel vehicles, clean fuel vehicle conversions/repowers, or establishing publicly accessible alternative fueling infrastructure. This grant is for government and private entities in the eight-county Houston-Galveston non-attainment area.

Point of Contact

Christine Smith
Clean Cities Coordinator
Greater Houston Clean Cities Coalition
Phone (832) 681-2556
cleancities@h-gac.com
http://www.houston-cleancities.org

Utah

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Grants and Loans

The Utah Clean Fuels and Vehicle Technology Grant and Loan Program, funded through the Clean Fuels and Vehicle Technology Fund, provides grants to assist businesses and government entities in covering: 1) the cost of converting a vehicle to operate on clean fuels; 2) the incremental cost of purchasing an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) clean fuel vehicle; and 3) the cost of retrofitting diesel vehicles with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency verified closed crankcase filtration devices, diesel oxidation catalysts, and/or diesel particulate filters. The Clean-Fuels Grant and Loan Program also provides loans for the cost of converting a vehicle to operate on a clean fuel, for the purchase of OEM clean fuel vehicle, and for the purchase of fueling equipment for public/private sector business and government vehicles. Finally, the program can provide grants and loans to serve as matching funds for federal and non-federal grants for the purpose of vehicles to operate on a clean fuel, purchasing OEM clean fuel vehicles, or retrofitting diesel vehicles. (Reference Utah Code 19-1-401 through 19-1-405)

Point of Contact

Mat Carlile
Energy Program Coordinator
Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality
Phone (801) 536-4136
Fax (801) 536-0085
mcarlile@utah.gov

Clean Fuel Vehicle Tax Credit

The state provides an income tax credit for 50% of the incremental cost (up to $3,000 maximum) of a clean fuel vehicle built by an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) and/or an income tax credit for 50% of the cost (up to $2,500 maximum) of converting the vehicle to operate on an alternative fuel for vehicles purchased after January 1, 2001, and registered in Utah. If not previously used, the tax credit may be claimed on used vehicles. Tax credits are available for businesses and individuals, may be carried forward up to five years, and are not available for hybrid electric vehicles. Documentation must be provided as described in the Utah state tax form TC-40V. Effective January 1, 2009, the credit amount for OEM vehicles will decrease to 35% of the vehicle purchase price (up to $2,500) for compressed natural gas vehicles registered in Utah; other clean fuel vehicles may be eligible for a credit of up to $750. (Reference House Bill 106, 2008, Utah Code 59-7-605 and 59-10-127)

Point of Contact

Mat Carlile
Energy Program Coordinator
Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality
Phone (801) 536-4136
Fax (801) 536-0085
mcarlile@utah.gov

Incentive for Airport Alternative Fuels Use

The Salt Lake City Department of Airports provides incentives to commercial ground transportation providers who purchase and operate clean fuel vehicles exclusively using approved clean fuels (as designated by State of Utah Statute 59-13-102). Eligible vehicles are those that operate on compressed natural gas, propane, hydrogen, electricity, or hybrid electric vehicles. The incentives are in the form of a credit against ground transportation fees. Incentive credit amounts are $2,500 for each Original Equipment Manufacturer vehicle or certified vehicle converted to operate on an alternative fuel. (Reference Salt Lake City Department of Airports Clean Fuel Policy Number 10.07.100)

Point of Contact

Ann-Marie Yoshida
Accountant
Salt Lake City Department of Airports
Phone (801) 531-3525
Fax (801) 575-2817
ann-marie.yoshida@slcgov.com

Vermont

Alternative Fuel and Advanced Vehicle Research and Development Tax Credit

Vermont businesses, that qualify as a high-tech business, involved exclusively in the design, development, and manufacture of alternative fuel vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles, and electric vehicles (EVs) or energy technology involving fuel sources other than fossil fuels, are eligible for up to three of the following tax credits: 1) payroll income tax credit; 2) qualified research and development income tax credit; 3) export tax incentive; 4) small business investment tax credit; and 5) high-tech growth tax credit. Certain limits and restrictions apply. (Reference Vermont Statutes Title 32, Chapter 151, Section 5930k)

Virginia

Alternative Fuel Job Creation Tax Credit

Businesses involved with the manufacture of components for alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs), AFV conversions, or the production, storage, or dispensing of hydrogen as a vehicle fuel are eligible for a job creation tax credit worth $700 per full-time employee. The credit is allowed in the taxable year in which the job is created and in each of the two succeeding years in which the job is continued. Qualifying businesses include AFV component manufacturers and vehicle conversion companies. Qualified AFVs include vehicles that operate using natural gas, hydrogen, or electricity. This credit is effective for taxable years through December 31, 2011. (Reference Virginia Code 58.1-439.1)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Reduction

Local governments have the option of reducing personal property taxes paid on AFVs, for vehicles that operate using natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, or electricity. (Reference Virginia Code 58.1-3506)

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Loans

The Virginia Board of Education may use funding from the state Literary Fund to grant loans to school boards that convert school buses to operate on alternative fuels or construct alternative fueling stations. (Reference Virginia Code 22.1-146)

Washington

Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Tax Exemption

Beginning January 1, 2009, new passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles that are dedicated AFVs are exempt from the state sales and use tax. Qualified vehicles must operate exclusively on natural gas, propane, hydrogen, or electricity, meet the California motor vehicle emissions standards effective January 1, 2005, and comply with the rules of the Washington Department of Ecology. In addition, all new passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles that utilize hybrid electric technology and have a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimated highway fuel economy of at least 40 miles per gallon are exempt from state sales and use tax. This tax exemption expires January 1, 2011. (Reference Revised Code of Washington 82.08.809 and 82.08.813)

Electric and Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Demonstration Grants

The Vehicle Electrification Demonstration Grant Program is established within the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (CTED), and administered by the Director of the CTED. Eligible applicants are state agencies, public school districts, public utility districts, or political subdivisions of the state. Grants may be awarded to projects involving the purchase or conversion of existing vehicles to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles or battery electric vehicles for use in an applicant’s fleet or operations; additional eligibility requirements apply. (Reference Revised Code of Washington 43.325.110)

To view web links associated with the companies below, click here.

Charging Stations

eVco

Aerovironment

Coulomb Technologies

Shorepower

Ecotality

eTec

Project Better Place

Aker Wade Power Technologies

Clipper Creek Inc.

Park and Power

Connectors (software and communication platforms)

Gridpoint/V2Green

Arcadian Networks

Cisco

Current Communications Group

IBM

iTron

VPT

JCI

Coulomb Technologies

Project Better Place

GE

SemaConnect

Battery and Component Companies

A123 Systems

Electro Energy Inc.

Nanoexa

Nilar

Valence Technology

Electrovaya

Altairnano

Enerdel

Panasonic/ Sanyo

NEC/TOKIN

LG/STMicroelectronics

BYD

Vehicle Conversions

3ProngPower

AC Propulsion

Amberjac Projects

Hymotion

EnergyCS

Hybrids Plus

Project Get Ready Cities follow a general three step process in taking action to accelerate the adoption of plug-in vehicles in their communities.

1. Get Ready: Form a coalition of leaders in your community, including utilities, municipal government, citizen activists, auto dealers, transportation authorities, local employers. Select a “champion” for your coalition.
2. Get Set: Create a charter, or five year plan, for your city readiness with clear goals and milestones. Project Get Readyʼs menu can provide a foundation for this charter, which can be amended to fit your community. Share ʻlessons learnedʼ and progress in your region with other partner cities.
3. Go!: Start executing your charter.

In order to become an official Partner city, the ‘Get Ready‘ phase of the three step process must be completed. When cities sign on to Project Get Ready (PGR) we also ask that the local champion submit a one-page description of their plug-in readiness plans for us to post on the PGR website. This one-pager is basically an executive summary of a regional five year plan and should include the following components:

* Outline work in progress: What’s the current status of your region’s plug-in readiness efforts? Who’s currently involved?
* Who is and will be represented in your initiative: Moving forward, who will be partnering with your local PGR initiative?
* Goals/milestones: For years 2009-2013, what major milestones will your city/region reach? What goals must be attained to reach these milestones?
* Working groups: If possible, outline initiative working groups that will be facilitating action in your region (vehicle acquisition or infrastructure planning for example).
* Contact information for regional champion.

What’s next?

Partner cities have also asked us to break down the ‘Get Set’ and ‘Go’ steps of PGR. Once a city has written their one-page description plan the following steps are recommended:

* Convene regional coalition of stakeholders to discuss the PGR menu, work through each ‘must have’ line item, describe how to make each item regionally specific and attach action items with a leader to drive deliverables (include stakeholders such as city administrators, state/province representatives, planning department members, building/inspection officials, local business leaders, car dealers, utility representatives, fleet owners etc).

* The local champion then develops the first iteration of a 5-10 page charter outlining a 5 year plan and defining working groups, milestones and goals. For example, in Raleigh the following steps were taken:

1. A meeting in Raleigh was convened  where each ‘must have’ line item of the PGR menu was addressed in 4 discussion groups: vehicle acquisition, infrastructure planning, project structure and consumer adoption. Each menu item was discussed and reformatted to be “Raleigh specific”. During this time the following questions were answered: Who in Raleigh could make this action item
happen? What regulations/laws would need to change/be activated? What are potential funding sources? Who else in this region should be involved in this discussion? What next steps need to be pursued in order to execute? Who will be responsible for these next steps? When do these next steps need to be completed?

2. Based on this meeting, the Raleigh champion is writing up a 5-10 page charter. It is the 5-year plan for Raleigh readiness, with milestones, goals, and it defines four working groups. The first is a builders forum (to interact with developers, contractors, etc.), then a charging infrastructure group, a fleet purchasing group, and a citizen outreach/education group. Working groups may differ depending on the region!

* After an initial charter has been drafted, convene a wider group of stakeholders to gain feedback, iterate and finalize the charter.
* Gain signatures of regional stakeholders on charter essentially saying: “I believe that this is the best path forward and will support region x’s Project Get Ready effort by doing y (funding working group 4 with $2000, for example)”.
* Share progress and lessons learned with Project Get Ready and participating cities/regions.
* Execute!

For a list of companies active in the plug-in space, click here.

(NEV)- Neighborhood electric vehicle

(EREV)- Extended-range electric vehicle

(PHEV)- Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle

(EV)- Electric vehicle

Available now
BMW Mini-E (EV)
Columbia ParCar Mega (NEV)
Chrysler Global Electric Motorcars (NEV)
Miles Electric ZX40 (NEV)
Myers NmG (NEV)
REVAi (available in India) (EV)
Tesla Roadster (EV)
Think City (available in Norway) (EV)
ZAP Xebra (NEV)

Late 2009
Fisker Karma/Sunset (EREV)
Mitsubishi iMiEV (to be available in the U.K.) (EV)

2010
Pininfarina B0 (EV)
BYD E6 (EV)
Chevy Volt (EREV)
Daimler Smart EV (pilot testing now in the U.K.) (EV)
Ford Transit (EV)
Lightning GT (available in the U.K.) (EV)
Miles Electric XS500 (EV)
Optimal Energy Joule (EV)
Persu Mobility (only in California) (PHEV)
Saturn Vue (PHEV)
Toyota Prius Plug-in (PHEV)
Visionary Vehicles (PHEV)

2011
Ford Focus EV (EV)
Opel Ampera (EREV)
Renault ZE (EV)

2012
Bright Automotive (PHEV)
Nissan (EV)
Toyota FT-EV (EV)
Venturi Volage (only 25 to be built) (EV)
Volvo ReCharge (PHEV)

To review an additional resource outlining current funding and procurement opportunities, browse the ITECS insider website.

To view a detailed breakdown of plug-in related stimulus grants as of March 26, 2009, click here.

Overview of implications of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for plug-in vehicles (by Laura Schewel)

• $2 billion for advanced battery manufacturing,
• 30% credit for advanced energy investments, such as plug-in vehicle manufacture,
• A credit of $2,500 to $7,500, depending on size of battery,1 for electric-drive vehicles under 14,000 pounds GVWR sold after December 31, 2009:
  • The credit will phase out by maker. Each maker will get to give their consumers 100% credit  for 200,000 vehicles, and all additional vehicles sold in the first quarter after the quarter containing the date at which the manufacturer hits the 200,000 limit. The “phaseout” period begins in the following quarter.
  • In the first and second quarter of the “phaseout,” all consumers buying electric-drive vehicles sold by this manufacturer get 50% of the previous credit.
  • In the third and fourth quarter of the “phaseout,” all consumers buying electric vehicles sold by this manufacturer get 25% of the previous credit.
  • After the fourth quarter, there is zero credit for electric drive vehicles from this manufacturer.
  • There does not appear to be a termination date for this portion of the bill (unlike the low speed and conversion kit terminations.
  • There does not appear to be a limit to the number of vehicle manufacturers that can qualify for this process.
• 10% credit for low speed electrified vehicles, up to $2,500 until December 31, 2011.
• 10% separate consumer tax credit for 2-3 wheeled vehicles (up to $25,000 for a $2500 tax credit). This incentive helps the already available vehicles including electric motorcycles and enclosed 3 wheelers like Aptera, Persu Mobility, and Myers Motors. Vehicles must have a minimum of 2.5 kWH or battery energy.  Sunsets 12/31/2011.
• $400 million for deployment of plug-in infrastructure and vehicles.
• $300 million to regional deployment of electric drive and alternative fuel vehicles.
• $300 million for the federal purchase of commercially available high-efficiency vehicles (including hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric vehicles) to remain available until September 30, 2011.
• 10% credit for conversion kits up to $40,000 credit until December 31, 2011. To qualify, conversion kits must still meet Clean Air requirements.
• $10 million additional for administration of Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturer Loan Program and $6 billion additional to Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee program which could go to plug-ins.
• $54M for tax credits on Alternative Refueling Property (including EV/PHEV charging: they raised the limit from 30% and $30,000 to 50% and $50,000 until 1/1/2011)
• Increased the residential refueling property tax credit to 50% capped at $2000. This is a TARP modification.

View as spreadsheet in HTML:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pKZ3CuikjrJqAALWqf_JTbg

Download as XLS:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pKZ3CuikjrJqAALWqf_JTbg&output=xls

Executive Summary: Charrette Designed to Accelerate the Build Out of Smart Garage

Introduction:

What is this Document? What is Smart Garage? What is a Charrette? Smart Garage brings transport, the electricity grid, and
the built environment together via the enabling technology of electrified vehicles (including electrified vehicle hybrids, extended-range EVs, and electric vehicles) and their smart integration with the grid.
Historically, our transport and electricity infrastructures have operated independently. With the rapid commercialization of a new generation of electrified vehicles—that will not just plug into the grid but communicate with it, help firm and regulate its
operation, and possibly act as a storage resource—our major energy infrastructures are about to conjoin. If implemented with foresight and care, the Smart Garage will integrate building, vehicle, and grid energy systems to improve the efficiency of all, and increase transparency for the consumer, leading to a complete shift in the way consumers use and make decisions about energy.

Economically, Smart Garage can reduce operating costs for vehicles, avoid large investment costs for utilities, and open up new business opportunities in fields such as software to manage communication between vehicles and the grid. Importantly, Smart Garage is much broader than bidirectional charging (commonly known as “vehicle to grid” or V2G) as vehicles and the grid can integrate in many different ways (such as Smart Charging or V2B) that can provide economic and environmental benefits. Smart Garage requires collaboration between many players, from utilities and OEMs to battery makers, grid service providers,  entrepreneurs and start-ups, retailers, car share companies, and more.

The goal of this pre-read is to prepare Charrette participants for the unusual and exciting three-day event with information on what we’ll be doing, and background on the topic at hand: the Smart Garage.

Smart Garage—the convergence of electrified vehicles, the smart and clean electricity grid, and advanced building energy systems—has the potential to significantly improve the efficiency of the transportation and electricity sectors and help make renewable energy available via the grid. Implemented carefully, it may also be highly profitable to key stakeholders like utilities.
However, many implementation challenges still exist, and critical questions remain: e.g., How do you facilitate integration among industries that to date have largely operated independently? How do you bring together the multiple “visions” of vehicle and grid interaction into a cohesive technology roadmap? How do you align incentives between stakeholders to facilitate the financing and scaling of infrastructure and electrified vehicles? How do you bring together large, established players with smaller,  entrepreneurial firms and nontraditional sectors to accelerate development?

This document contains an overview of these and other critical questions, while providing background on relevant technologies and developments in the market; findings from RMI’s financial analysis on Smart Garage scenarios; and an environmental benefits discussion. Document updates and in-depth appendices are available at move.rmi.org/smartgarage. If you have comments or additions to the documents, please add them at smartgarage.rmi.org/tiki-forums

Our goal is to accelerate the build-out of Smart Garage, focusing on the U.S., in the most environmentally and economically beneficial way by aligning the vision of critical and diverse stakeholders and designing collaborative next steps. Employed for centuries in the architecture field, today a charrette is a structured process in which a critical number (80 in our case) of experts from diverse backgrounds and industries come together for an an immersive and interactive problem-solving session.

During a charrette, participants alternate between breakout sessions focused on a solving a clearly defined challenge and plenary sessions where they share output from their breakout groups and get feedback and input from the other groups. The breakout sessions and plenaries in our Charrette will build upon each other and lead participants to the final goal: identifying 3–5 specific and collaborative projects that can be started immediately and that are a meaningful first step to realizing the Smart Garage
vision, as defined by the participants earlier.

Day One will Ground participants in consumer experience, expose differences in participants’ near-term visions, begin to rectify differences, and flesh out a value chain for the longer-term Smart Garage roadmap.
Day Two will test the value chain’s robustness in extreme scenarios, use lessons from this exercise to select the top ~10 barriers, and identify solutions. On Day Three we will create 3–5 concrete project plans that tackle the top barriers, reinforce commitments and alignment among participants, and kick off the new projects.

Executive Summary (cont’d): Research and Financial Modeling Highlight the Need for Integration
Technology
Most of the major requisite technologies for Smart Garage are “ready for prime time,” with the possible caveat of advanced batteries. Batteries have made steady improvements in the past two decades, enabling a recent surge of interest in electrified vehicles, but they have a bit farther to go to reach the price/performance point required to fully realize the benefits of Smart
Garage.
Even though most of the key technologies (for communications, IT, conversion, etc.) are available, installing them in an integrated infrastructure will be expensive and will require the commitment from many stakeholders, including the government.

Economics: What is the Value of Smart Garage?

RMI estimates the net present value (NPV) of vehicle and grid integration would be from -$63B to +$34B under our current set of assumptions. The first major driver of value is how vehicles connect to the grid:

• V0G (-$63B), i.e., doing nothing, maximizes risk to the grid and would be the most costly scenario,
• Timed Charge (-$32B), would be roughly half the cost of convenience charging, avoiding many of V0G’s pitfalls;
• V1G (-$11B) would even be less costly, enabling communications in real-time with utility, allowing utility benefits with unidirectional charging;
• V2B ($34B) would actually be profitable, confining bidirectional integration to buildings systems, maximizing benefits while minimizing cost and difficulty, and
• V2G ($15B) would also be profitable, utilizing vehicles’ capacity to act as grid storage, but this regime could require significant investments in infrastructure and advances in battery chemistries.

Our “default” assumptions are based on RMI research and interviews with participants. However, by changing certain key assumptions, the system can become much more profitable. For example, even costly scenarios could get to a $10B positive NPV, if:
• Give V0G a $6700/vehicle gov’t subsidy
• Give Timed Charge $6/gallon gas, or
• Give V1G $325/kwh batteries.

V2G NGU, because it relies on a future, renewables heavy generation scenario, is the most sensitive to assumptions. However, it does show the potential synergies from Smart Garage when the utilities move towards wind and solar.
While we find that Smart Garage can be profitable in the long run, there will be winners and losers. The utility and battery makers appear to be clear winners in all scenarios, as is any third party who can capitalize on the enormous amount of money and information that will be changing hands. The high capital costs on the vehicle side indicate that either the OEM or the consumer (or both) will lose money. The consumer may put value on the lifetime fuel savings at purchase and/or the differentiated benefits of electric drive, but it is highly unlikely that the OEMs will be able to capture the fuel savings for themselves. This indicates the value of exploring novel vehicle ownership/sales models. Current subsidies being explored in congress could alleviate this problem, as could sharing profits from other sectors.

Industry
Almost every major automaker has announced some form of electrified vehicle during the past year, led by GM, Toyota, and Nissan-Renault. Electrified vehicles are also the source of a flowering of start-up OEMs. Implementation of the Smart Grid finally appears to be a reality, and several cities have set up pilot projects. Internationally, Israel, Denmark, and Japan are leading
in electrified vehicle pilots and grid integration.
Environment
The scope of potential climate benefits of Smart Garage significantly exceeds the scope of financial benefits. Smart Garage represents a shift in the transportation energy use paradigm to greater efficiency while enabling deep penetration of renewables onto the electric grid. In other words, the Smart Garage is a single system that can significantly reduce the GHG
emissions from multiple sectors simultaneously.

• Top 15 actions that a city must take to be ready, organized by primary actor
• 10 second-tier actions that a city could take to be ready
• Financial assessment of each action, where possible

Download the Project Get Ready Menu

You can also download our very detailed research document, which explains how we developed this menu.

Summary:

15 “Must Have” Actions*

Barrier: Not enough cars in the pipeline, OEMs need proof of future consumer demand

1. Corporate/city/state fleets commit to buy a certain number of plug-ins (RFPs for major purchases).

Suggested target: 180 vehicles, or five fleets purchasing or converting 30 plug-ins each

2. Stakeholder group provides a place for interested consumers/fleets to register early, and put cash down to reserve plug-ins (cash used for readiness where possible).
Suggested target: 5,000 commitments in first 2 years

Barrier: How can we manage this as a multi-sector, city-wide project?

3. Create collaborative stakeholder group within the community to help regulatory, commercial, and community interests align. Sign on to a clear regional plan (based on this menu!). Plan should give consideration to BEVs, PHEVs, EREVs, LS-EVs, and conversions.

4. Have one “champion” whose job it is to keep this group moving forward, who has authority
Suggested target: part time job, 20 hours/week

Barrier: How can we bring down upfront costs for consumers?
5. Work with banks and dealers to offer low-interest loans for plug-ins, based on projected lower operating costs from gas savings.

6. Bundle all key incentives at vehicle point of purchase (home charger vouchers, rebates, etc.)

Barrier: Consumer hesitation at diving into a new paradigm for mobility
7. Perks: access to HOV lanes, free tolls/downtown parking, reserved airport parking.

8. Create consumer, city government, local business and utility education plans including test drives and “quick lease” options to individual and fleet consumers as well as high profile drivers.

9. Reduced (or free) electricity rates for charging.

Barrier: Red tape around infrastructure installation
10. Fast-track permitting for charging stations.

11. Ensure new and reconstruction/renovation building codes support the operation of plug-ins.

Barrier: What if these cars exacerbate my peak load?
12. Tie provisions of free home and public charge spots, as well as free or cheaper electricity, to either utility override power or “no charge” times.

Barrier: Who will pay for infrastructure?
13. Local employers/retailers provide some charge stations at parking decks.
Suggested target: 4,000 workplace stations (because 60% of car-owners are assumed to have home stations)

14. Install public charge spots in high-traffic zones and parking areas, either with public money (via utility or gov’t for the first 2% of vehicles) or private money that uses the stations to market.
Suggested target: 1 charging station for every 100 vehicles not including workplace charging stations

15. Provide affordable and available—or free—Level 2 home-charger/driveway circuit installation.
Suggested target: 6,000. We assume 60% of our 10,000 car-owners have driveways/garages.