California Demands VW Build Electric Charging Stations in Poor Neighborhoods

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

As part of its emissions cheating penance, Volkswagen AG previously agreed to support clean vehicles by injecting a juicy $2 billion into green initiatives in the United States. A whopping $800 million of that sum was reserved for California. On Thursday, state legislators pressed the automaker to spend electric charging infrastructure funds in low-income areas, passing a bill included in a budget package supported by Governor Jerry Brown.

The reasoning behind forcing VW to install more charging stations in disadvantaged communities is twofold. First, and most obviously, is the fact that poorer neighborhoods typically don’t receive the same level of infrastructure advancement as affluent or high traffic areas. In fact, they’re probably the last place the state would bother installing EV charging stations. Secondly, it’s a good way to keep this punishment from becoming a business opportunity.

Criticism arose when rival automakers realized Volkswagen’s charging network could become profitable and give it an early advantage in a competitive new market, especially if it could handpick the sites.

Volkswagen initially proposed spending $120 million on about 400 highway and community charging stations by 2019. However, the locations it chose were often the same pieces of real estate competitors may have desired. While these stations would definitely have seen regular use, state officials have made it clear they want to promote clean cars in poorer communities.

Last month, the California Air Resources Board told VW to “make every attempt” to reserve 35 percent of its first 30-month investment cycle for disadvantaged communities “disproportionately affected by air pollution,” according to Reuters. Still, fears remained that Volkswagen would simply ignore the plea.

The California bill makes that 35 percent mandatory and requires the board of directors to approve all plans relating to the charging network to be approved at public hearings. It also provides additional oversight for VW’s Electrify America — the unit responsible for the infrastructure project. While we cannot authoritatively say Volkswagen would not have adhered to CARB’s initial appeal to support economically downtrodden areas, Electrify America’s photo of a gentleman wearing trendy salmon-colored slacks while charging his car suggests it might not have been their first priority. All things considered, California passing legalization on the matter was probably in its best interest.

Governor Brown has not yet signed the bill, though he has previously indicated his full support the budgeting package.

[Image: Electrify America]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 62 comments
  • 6250Claimer 6250Claimer on Jun 17, 2017

    What next, Jerry Brown? Require Church's Chicken to open in Beverly Hills??

  • Dukeisduke Dukeisduke on Jun 18, 2017

    I can see both sides, but, isn't there a better idea? Instead of building standalone electric charging stations, why not add these to existing gas station mini-mart locations? Add a couple of charging stations off to the side, where cars could be left. The stations would have to be 24/7 locations, and would have (or could add) surveillance cameras. Charging stations will naturally become more ubiquitous as the electrification of cars increase, but what's the point of building standalone stations without any idea of how many people will use them?

    • Ricegf Ricegf on Jun 18, 2017

      Fast charging on a long trip usually takes 15 to 40 minutes. My impression is that 40 minutes in a gas station is a really long time, while 40 minutes in a shopping and entertainment facility with a Starbucks, a bookstore, or a chain discount store can go by very fast!

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next