By on February 10, 2022

us-capitol, public domain

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) announced today that it will distribute $5 billion to establish electric-vehicle charging along the interstate highway system. Managed by the newly formed  Joint Office of Energy and Transportation formed after the $1.2-trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) passed in Congress, the federal spend is a joint operation between the DOT and U.S. Department of Energy.

By 2030, the federal government is hoping to have a network of 500,000 charging stations in a bid to reduce range anxiety and spur EV adoption. But it wants individual states to make the necessary investments to connect the highway-based network to cities and towns. As you might have guessed, Democrat lawmakers have broadly supported the imitative while Republicans are calling it too expensive and a distraction from other aspects of U.S. infrastructure in need of maintenance. 

That’s nothing new. When IIJA (often referenced as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill” in the media) was under consideration in the Senate. Republican legislators repeatedly said they wouldn’t vote on it due to how expensive it was. But they still voted to pass an amended version (69–30) in August, with the House showing overwhelming support (228–206) in November. Unfortunately, passing the bill didn’t end the conflict.

Now that the Transportation Department has confirmed it’ll be handing federal money to states, nobody seems to know exactly how this will work. Though we do know that the DOT expects a majority of states to look to the private sector to establish and maintain charging stations. We also know how much each state will be getting thanks to the funding breakdown issued by the Federal Highway Administration, and some states get a lot more money than others. That’s been a touchy subject, as is the Biden administration’s general desire to advance electrification at all costs.

Critics have already chided the administration for Build Back Better, suggesting the revised EV tax credit structure was blatantly political and would have unfairly advantaged unionized automakers while blindly funneling money into the industry via incentives. But the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation literally exists to promote electric vehicle sales in the United States and the assumed plan is to hand over the funding to private companies anyway. Granted, it’s a new member of the “headless fourth branch” of the government and will undoubtedly see its role expand — especially since the DOT is looking to do the same with some additional funding of its own. It just doesn’t have anything else on its plate right now.

States can expect $615 million in 2022, with the rest of the money being rationed out over the next eight years. The government is targeting 50 miles between stations but admitted some rural routes might require wider spacing.

Car and Driver spoke with U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg in an effort to glean additional information on how the federal investment will be managed this week, starting with what the money can be used for. He said a majority of the funding has to be set aside for building chargers to ensure there’s enough to create a national network, adding that some of the cash can be reserved for their maintenance and operation. The investment cannot be used to fix up busted roads or rusty bridges, however.

“Clearly the trajectory here has to be toward a very high standard of reliability,” he said.

From C/D:

We had a few questions: What kind of charging technology is envisioned, and will they work for every EV? Buttigieg stated a preference to have such a network, mainly set up along major highways, to have “efficient fast chargers” but was light on details, saying “We’re going to look at all of this. I think we’re more interested in the standard than we are in picking and choosing technologies . . . It feels a bit like we’re living through the days when you still have VHS and Beta out there, and obviously over time that needs to be resolved.”

With a slew of electric pickup trucks due to hit the market, we inquired if there were plans to create pull-through chargers that could accommodate trailers. We had found in our recent test of the Rivian R1T that the current nature of most chargers, situated at the edge of parking lots, requires decoupling the trailer before plugging in. “These are the kinds of questions that I think [the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation] will take up,” Buttigieg responded. “I think we’re still as a country maybe a little bit too likely to assume [EV charging stations] are all the same as gas stations — just electrons instead of gas. The truth is that the profile for charging may look quite different.” That would seem to leave open the possibility that areas that see more commercial or recreational vehicles may get charging stations better suited for them to use.

He was also asked what’s to be done about the myriad of EV charging apps and their various payment structures.

“We’re taking a good look at this,” Buttigieg said. “Part of this program is going to be a shared standard. If we’re going to use taxpayers’ dollars to help private actors put in charging stations, then of course we need to make sure the citizen is getting good value out of it. There may be any number of network benefits through loyalty programs.”

“That’s fine,” he continued, “but we’ve got to make sure . . . everybody can benefit.”

Buttigieg said these were the also kind of issues that could be solved with more outreach and actually diving into the program. As time goes on, he feels these questions will be answered organically. Right now, he thinks it’s more important that the government create expectations for the public that will help assuage lingering fears about range anxiety so they’ll buy more battery-powered cars. Among these, he said, was issuing constant reminders that EVs can be charged at homes.

“The biggest thing [people] don’t know about charging infrastructure is they already have it: it’s the outlet on your wall,” Buttigieg explained.

With energy prices climbing and there being little talk of strengthening the grid to endure the heightened load, the government’s aggressive push toward electrification is bothersome to me. Surprisingly little of the Biden administration’s overarching infrastructure plan has anything to do with improving our existing roads and it’s pouring public money into the pockets of energy companies. Meanwhile, automakers are getting payouts for going green and receiving financial penalties for focusing on what sells. Perhaps it would be more palatable if the government offered a clearer vision of its plot or exercised even a modicum of restraint in terms of spending.

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has continued falling under harsh criticism among the opposition. Conservative lawmakers have started to accuse IIJA of being implemented politically and exceeding the limits of what could be considered a traditional infrastructure plan.

On Wednesday, the House Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth held a hearing to discuss how expanding infrastructure investments might fix social disparities. Florida Republican Rep. Bryan Donalds suggested that they probably couldn’t and that thinking otherwise was a distraction from other problems needing attention, representing the ideological fracture along party lines.

“Infrastructure is something that there is a public need for,” Donalds stated during the hearing. “I think the debate is starting to shift [away] from necessary public infrastructure … From a federal perspective now, we’re coming to the point where is it a public infrastructure project to help alleviate broad public good or now are we starting to get into intimate private aspects of infrastructure to rebalance playing fields in the United States? That’s a very different conversation.”

While enough Republicans ultimately voted for the $1.2-trillion plan (after some revisions) to get it passed, many lawmakers on both sides of the fence admitted they didn’t have time to read the entire bill. Then, the Federal Highway Administration issued a letter to all 50 states in December that appeared to discourage them from expanding or repairing highways while encouraging green and social initiatives. Things have been breaking down ever since with both sides getting their dander up.

“[The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s] implementation is being dictated often by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and not by local officials,” Ranking Member Bryan Steil (R-WI) said at the hearing. “Highway investments that don’t reach certain democratic guidelines and vague standards may not be prioritized for new grant money … This leaves potential projects vulnerable to a political motivation, underfunding if they don’t reach the social demands of the Department of Transportation.”

The bottom line? Republicans don’t like the direction Democrats have taken with infrastructure — even though a lot of them voted for this. Democrats don’t like the pushback they’re getting from Republicans — even though they don’t seem to have a clear understanding of how they intend to manage these investments. And we voted them all into office.

[Images: Architect of the Capitol/AOC.gov; Department of Transportation]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

84 Comments on “DOT Readies Billions for National EV Charging Network, Chaos Ensues...”


  • avatar
    dal20402

    A few thoughts:

    (1) The grid is going to be fine, for two reasons. First, the bulk of EV charging demand is happening during times of otherwise low load, so you don’t need as much added capacity as you might think from the raw numbers. Second, the utilities themselves have ample incentives to respond to this type of demand. They are going to be able to charge profitable rates for electricity provided at public chargers and they will probably want to keep their hands on as many of the chargers as possible.

    (2) I hope this sort of effort finally causes the entire world to standardize on a single connector, hopefully a beefed-up variant of J1772/CCS like the one Audi and Porsche are using for their 800v-capable models.

    (3) Some of these subsidized chargers will work out better than others. Categories that will likely work well are the following:

    – L3 chargers along highway corridors
    – L3 chargers in destination retail (e.g., Walmart) parking lots
    – L2 chargers in office garages and lots

    Categories that WON’T work well are streetside chargers in cities and L2 chargers out on the open highway.

    • 0 avatar
      SoCalMikester

      id imagine most if not all highway chargers are going to be placed at rest areas. and yes- more rest areas will be needed. calm down- everythings going to work out

      • 0 avatar
        Stanley Steamer

        It would be easier to run metal strips in the center of every lane and dangle pickups from the bottom of your car. And with all the left-over money they can cut a groove in to give every car mechanical self driving. Buy a pin extender kit at your local Autozone.

      • 0 avatar
        CaddyDaddy

        California will receive the bulk of this projects’s money. This will be administered as a well run project, on time, on budget and will reduce time and energy costs for the charging of electric cars. The CA public will be able to buy electric cars with confidence for expedient and reliable charge points.

        IE: Please research California High Speed Rail for the “how to” to implement this Glorious Project built by Glorious People.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Actually, Texas will receive more money than California, despite having about 10 million fewer residents.

          I’m sure Texas has never had a state funded high speed rail boondoggle.

    • 0 avatar
      Kendahl

      (1) Most of the kWh will come from home chargers. I suspect public chargers are high maintenance so I question whether power utilities will want that burden or would rather leave it to the likes of Electrify America.
      (2) The J-1772/CCS plug looks clunky. What’s wrong with Tesla’s plug?
      (3) Add L2 chargers at apartment complexes and hotels to your list.

      Tesla already has the interstates well covered. It’s rural areas off the interstates where chargers are lacking.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        @Kendahl: The oil/energy companies are getting into the game now. I suspect eventually they’ll take it all over. Electrify America etc. will become Shell Recharge or BP Pulse or another company.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      The infrastructure bill also includes $73 billion for electric grid upgrades, which – surprise! – was left out of this article.

      https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/biden-bipartisan-infrastructure-bill

    • 0 avatar
      redapple

      DAL..
      You are the site’s go to guy on BEV. So, I ll defer to you on most points.
      But, you say BEV will be charged mostly at times of low load.
      Understood. But, If a majority of power is wind or solar – that kinda doesnt work at night. Before you say – storage devices ! I say- screw that. Rube goldberg bird choppers and batteries and blah blah yields you $0.45/kWh electric. (true cost without incentives and govt freebies)

      I even still challenge the need to go to brandon-BEV.

      Oil Gas use total and the CO2 generated.
      25% of all CO2 is generated by transport
      of that 45% is for passenger vehicles.
      Therefore 10.8% of all CO2 is for passenger transport.

      Ok lets change the world and spend Billions and billions for 10.8%

      Oh- by the way, 63.3% of all electric is made by fossil fuel. 2/3 of your EV miles runs on fossil fuel.

      Jeez. Just jeez. i m at a loss for words.

    • 0 avatar
      Daniel J

      The highest demand on our grid here is when it hits 10 degrees at night and the heat pumps bring the electric grid down. Not sure how charging at night isn’t charging at peak time.

      Southern states in the summer peak is during the day, so sure. That’s not every where.

  • avatar
    ravenuer

    Coincidentally, my local newspaper had an article today about my states power authority had announced back in 2013 that they would install 10,000 public charging stations by 2021. Guess how many they’ve installed as of June 2021? 277. By the way they installed about 200 stations for their employees use only.

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    Will installing these along the side of bridges keep them from collapsing? Asking for a family member in Pittsburgh:)

  • avatar
    SoCalMikester

    fwiw- costco was installing chargers at locations in the 90s. rarely used, beat up and weathered, were taken out in the early 2000s. yes. this time will be different, but hey- an attempt was made. and yes- they were completely FREE

  • avatar
    Steve Biro

    To me, it’s quite simple. EV’s don’t meet my needs – yet. But, perhaps by the end of the decade, they might very well do so.

    But, until government and industry can draw up a realistic and practical plan to create a robust charging network – and decide whether they’re going with VHS or Beta in terms of connectors – I will just step back and stick with the internal combustion vehicle that I now have.

    I don’t want to hear about how I can charge at home – I know that. And I don’t want to hear about how “most” people have commutes that are X miles long. I am not “most” people and make long trips on weekends.

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    Non state media “Inflation just set another record not seen in over 40 years”

    Biden’s team “Quick, print more billions and pump them into donor pockets, tell the base it’s for infrastructure”

    • 0 avatar
      Margarets Dad

      Good that we have you to tell us that inflation is up, since anyone who’s not in the market for a car would never notice. Groceries seem to be about where they always were and gas is only up from the artificially low levels of the worst of the pandemic. Yes, new and used cars are expensive, but most people don’t see that or care. This isn’t the early ’70s when oil basically quadrupled in price overnight.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        “gas is only up from the artificially low levels of the worst of the pandemic.”

        There were no pandemics 2015-2019, but Brandon thanks you for trying to deflect from his failings.

        “This isn’t the early ’70s when oil basically quadrupled in price overnight.”

        Oh, the decade is young!

        Homework: If you were a government and thought oil had peaked thus skyrocketing in price, wouldn’t you want your society to partially retire the 20th Century concept of commuting?

      • 0 avatar
        kcflyer

        Is that you Brandon? Seriously dude unless you make your own food you must be kidding. Groceries are up by double digit percentages across the board. I know you think Fox news is prohibited by your cult but just google inflation.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Groceries seem to be about where they always were”

        The US Bureau of Labor Statistics does a good job of tracking grocery prices across the country, so there is no need to base things off “seems to”.

        bls.gov/cpi/data-overview.htm

      • 0 avatar
        Dartdude

        Are you on drugs? The prices of groceries have gone up at least 15% and the amount in a package is smaller. Look at the prices of fast food they are getting close to restaurant prices. Pretty soon you will pay full price of a gallon of gas and get 10% or less of fuel. This is Slow Joe’s world.

  • avatar
    pmirp1

    Tons of money spent on charging stations, to help support electric vehicles that are on average stuff wealthy city folks can only afford.

    In most of rest of country gasoline will be king.

    Even in cities majority of people are already hurting with high gas prices (and associated inflation for everything). Yet the Greenies and Branden team will still do all they can to limit oil and gas extraction and therefore increase its price for normal citizens.

    Not to mention, the lithium extraction and process is mainly controlled by China, so we are giving away the country’s independence to China.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Today’s gas prices are about average for the last 43 years:

      https://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html

      They were actually higher during the Bush Administration, but Fox won’t tell you that.

      • 0 avatar
        ponchoman49

        I never heard Fox or any other news outlet state that today’s gas prices are the highest ever. They state correctly that they are the highest since the latter term of the Obama years. And yes the current gas prices that continue to climb month over month and for the moment are not out of line with inflation factored in. By Summer it will surely be right back up to 4 bucks per gallon and 4.50 for higher grade in some places. The 100-120 dollar fils up will be reality for all these monster sized pickup trucks/SUV’s littering the roads

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        This, which is not from Fox News, says we currently have the highest fuel prices in the past 8 years.

        cbsnews.com/news/gas-prices-highest-since-2014-russia-ukraine/

        I’m not sure how useful your link is considering that it is an unverified personal dataset and the last plot point is from Feb 2021.

        However, I’d say the bigger issue isn’t the current price but that there is only upward pressure on the price. Whether you want to assign Biden 0% or 100% of the responsibility, does anyone anticipate we won’t be seeing increasing fuel and energy prices in 2022?

      • 0 avatar
        MitchConner

        When oil prices collapsed the US lost a number of independent oil producers who were loaded up with debt. So we were down about 3M bbl a day, roughly 25% of domestic output, in production when demand rebounded — so here we are. Still haven’t gotten all of it back.

        Instead of putting together a rescue package, this moronic president and the clueless idiots working for him, such as the useless baby butt wiping Mayor Pete, pressured banks not to loan money to the sector because fossil fuels are bad even though, oh, the health of our economy depends on it.

        Making matters worse, if you can believe this, is Biden called the Saudis and asked them to pump more to bring crude prices down. Again — while doing nothing to revive our production — as his administration hindered it. Of course, as you’d expect, they laughed in his senile face.

        Midterms can’t come fast enough. Frankly, this entire administration needs to be grabbed by the hair and drop kicked down a luge run with no sled. They stink and this EV charging nonsense needs to put on the back burner until real issues are resolved.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          “Biden hindered oil production.”

          Crude oil production (thousands of barrels per day):

          January 2021: 11056
          November 2021: 11753

          https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=M

          Yes, clearly Biden’s doing quite the job hindering production.

          (Political arguments usually go better when you’re not making s**t up.)

          • 0 avatar
            pmirp1

            FreedMike,
            That is weak. Putting a link with no context. Since you are weak, let me give you context.

            What part of Keystone pipeline being shut down day 1 by Branden don’t you understand?

            What part of The Branden administration is taking steps to block oil and gas leasing within a 10-mile radius around New Mexico’s Chaco Canyon, a site considered sacred to Native Americans DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND?

            In September 2021 Branden administration announced the creation of a task force “to detect, deter, and disrupt” hydrofluorocarbons, a category of potent greenhouse gases. That alternative phrase typically is reserved for countering weapons of mass destruction, rogue states and terrorists. Is that too hard to understand for you?

            Furthermore, Branden administration has sought to halt new leases on federal land, suspended leases in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and is expanding endangered-species protections to limit oil production on private land, among other policies designed to punish fossil fuels. Why is that too hard to understand?

            And Branden begs OPEC to increase production when Canada and Mexico and America can fix the problem. You can’t make these things up.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Keystone, eh?

            Fact: the cancelled “Keystone” pipeline you’re talking about is Keystone XL, which was never completed, and thus never delivered one drop of oil to the United States to begin with.

            The original Keystone pipeline is in operation and was never shut down.

            https://www.gem.wiki/Keystone_Oil_Pipeline

            You were saying something about “weak,” as I recall…

            (I’ll give you the same advice that I gave the other guy: political arguments tend to go better when you don’t make s**t up.)

          • 0 avatar
            pmirp1

            FreedMike,
            830,0000 Barrels of oil daily were not delivered because of Branden. Since you can’t connect the dots, here is a link (since you are a master of links) for you to understand.

            https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/09/keystone-pipeline-canceled-after-biden-had-blocked-permit/7627122002/

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            From the article you posted (emphasis mine):

            “It (Keystone XL) WOULD HAVE MOVED up to 830,000 barrels (35 million gallons) of crude daily…”

            Therefore: since it wasn’t completed, approving the pipeline never affected actual oil supply, and neither did cancelling it.

          • 0 avatar
            pmirp1

            FreedMike, you are trying to not comprehend the big picture. If the supply is in place, if production for all options (not withstanding Branden applied constraints) are in place, price of oil is now low. But hey, good luck hallucinating.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            So nonexistent supply affects prices.

            And I’m the one who’s hallucinating?

            LOL.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    The only “VHS/Beta” thing I’m aware of is CCS vs Tesla, at least in the US. Chademo is dead. Teslas can use CCS already, and I thought Tesla was going to make their chargers available to CCS cars fairly soon.

    No issue there.

    The grid has grown over the years. It will grow again, as the needs arise. You don’t think utilities want to make more money?
    https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us.php

    As for charger distribution, it’s weird that the Biden administration routinely ignores Tesla, which has filled almost the entire US (*on its own dime*):
    https://www.tesla.com/supercharger

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    I’m just glad the Secy found time to jam this fail in between his maternity days off.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      Is it just me, or does Pete give off a Trudeau vibe? In over his head, confused and not really sure what his job really is.

      This comment is coming off more like a Trudeau slam, which it’s not.

      Maybe I shouldn’t have watched the movie about Pete. He’s bush league on his best day.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      Here’s a little background on Pete’s father:

      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/buttigieg-father-marxist/

      Not, of course, that this could have anything to do with Pete’s getting his position.

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    I have a car friend that bought an EV 4 years ago and raved about how he was saving the planet and saving all this money on maintenance costs and on and on he went. Today his electric car sits in the driveway off to the side relegated to occasional trips. He now drives a hybrid crossover with AWD that is his daily driver. The reason- reality of all the drawbacks of EV’s set in and he just got tired of it. Well that and the fact his garage became a place of storage for all the crap this family has accumulated thus making it more difficult and a pain to remember pulling it in to charge, the lack of places to plug it in around the city and outer limits, the impracticality of it being a sedan based vehicle with less utility and worse the fact that his batteries don’t hold more than 80% charge anymore meaning far shorter distances 5-6 months of the year in cold weather. He says he likes the hybrid much better and can make 500 plus mile trips with ease on the weekends to visit his folks in PA, something that was a pipe dream with the current EV he has.

    When the day comes that I have to do the electric thing it will be a hybrid as it offers the best of both worlds. Putting all of your eggs in one basket is not smart unless your needs warrant this of course.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    “Surprisingly little of the Biden administration’s overarching infrastructure plan has anything to do with improving our existing roads…”

    Given that the largest single line item in the infrastructure bill – $109 billion – is for road and bridge spending, I’d be interested in what “surprisingly little” means.

    https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/biden-bipartisan-infrastructure-bill

    • 0 avatar
      Mike A

      Surprisingly little means about 10% of the spending going on roads and bridges. The other 90% going on a variety of other things. The percentage on raids should have been higher. Now you know what people mean by surprisingly little!

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        “Surprisingly little means about 10% of the spending going on roads and bridges. The other 90% going on a variety of other things. ”

        Your math is a bit off. Once you look at the actual spending, the total amount over five years is $550 billion. Of that, $109 billion is spent on roads/bridges. That’s about 20%.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      Mike, in 2020, there were about 40,000,000 gallons of gas sold in California. California gas tax collects about $1.18 in taxes per gallon, or $47,200,000. Any idea of how much of that goes to road repair vs being shuttled to the general fund? I don’t because the government won’t break out that number.

      Any guesses as to how much of the number you quoted will actually go to roads and bridges?

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Good point, jk, but that speaks more to how inefficiently states spend federal money. Valid topic of conversation, for sure.

        Regardless, the claim that “little” of the federal infrastructure bill went to roads and bridges is inaccurate, at best.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          But we don’t really know, and therein lies the problem. The bigger numbers the more prevalent the graft. Too many examples of this to ignore.

          The loss/reduction of trust has some wide reaching implications. It would be wise for more people just to ask the questions and demand more transparency.

      • 0 avatar
        SPPPP

        JKRoss22, I think you meant to say there were about 40,000,000 gallons of gas sold in California *per day*. About 14 billion gallons per year. There are about 40 million people in CA, so about 1 gallon of gas per day per person probably makes sense.

        It really does make you think, imagine that fire hose of money, 47 million dollars per day.

        As a person who cares at least something about the planet we live on, the scale of it makes my mind reel a bit. Sustainability is a real concern. There is a range of better and worse ideas on that topic, but I think EVs are one way we can improve our overall situation. Not necessarily for everyone, and not all at once.

  • avatar

    he’s a thief and a liar.

  • avatar
    la834

    > some states get a lot more money than others.

    Surprise, populous states will get more money than sparsely-populated states. Nothing corrupt or unethical about that.

    Those same sparsely-populated states get vastly disproportionate representation in the Senate and the electoral college.

  • avatar
    cimarron typeR

    I see no need for charging stations outside of heavily congested cities and CA. where short trips are the norm and apartment living is greater than home living.
    Other than that , I imagine all of the stations along rural interstates falling into disrepair and vandalized from lack of use.
    That and fix the bridges and roads while you’re at it.

  • avatar
    285exp

    “The biggest thing [people] don’t know about charging infrastructure is they already have it: it’s the outlet on your wall,” Buttigieg explained

    We are truly in the best of hands.

  • avatar
    Land Ark

    All right, so what did we decide we are going to do with all the used up and damaged batteries once everyone adopts EVs?

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    On a different note but transportation and auto related:

    “Auto groups, City of Windsor seek injunction to end Ambassador Bridge blockade of Ontario-U.S. traffic”

    And Ontario gets court order to freeze access to “GiveSendGo” donations for freedum convoy.

    • 0 avatar
      285exp

      The truckers should just say they are BLM protestors, then they could riot and burn the place down and all would be ok. COVID doesn’t spread during BLM protests either.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        “The truckers should just say they are BLM protestors”

        That would never happen since the key figures in the protest are a who’s who of Canadian white supremacy, Islamophobia, xenophobia, antisemitism , neonazi’s etc.

        Canada has had BLM protests with minimal issues.

        • 0 avatar
          285exp

          I didn’t say they actually needed to support BLM, just that they should say they did, because those protests are treated differently.

          I read that 4 Providences have rolled back their vaccine mandates now, is that where all the white supremicists, neo Nazis and anti semites in Canada live?

          • 0 avatar
            285exp

            And sorry about the Providences thing, stupid autocorrect

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @285exp – There have been more arrests with other protests than with the freedum convoy to this date.

            Don’t be patting yourself on the back there buddy.

            British Columbia’s head of our CDC in MID JANUARY said that the plan was to move towards managing Omicron COVID like influenza and other infectious respiratory diseases. “Follow the science” is alive and well. Her statements caught the “conservative” parts of the country off-guard since BC is governed by a left of centre political party.

            Alberta, the province adjacent to BC is arguably the most conservative province in Canada. They have politicized the Covid-19 response and have had some of the poorest outcomes in Canada. They were already planning on rolling back mandates.

            Saskatchewan is also conservative and were planning on roll backs.
            Quebec is cautiously rolling back mandates as planned.
            Other provinces are planning rollbacks AS PREVIOUSLY planned.

            I said that the ORGANIZERS of this protest are a well documented who’s who of right-wingers on the public record as white supremacist’s, neo Nazis, anti-Semites, Islamophobes and xenophobes. I did not label swaths of the populace as such.

            The freedum convoy stated they will stop their protests if our Prime Minister resigns and ALL COVID – 19 mandates are stopped. The Federal government only has authority over the borders and federal employees. Our constitution puts public health and healthcare EXCLUSIVELY in the hands of each province and territory.

          • 0 avatar
            285exp

            If all of the Provinces were following the science anyway, why is Trudeau insisting on the vaccine mandate for truckers? If 90% are already vaccinated and nearly as many US truckers are too, what is the point? Our President was never very bright, and now he’s senile to boot. What’s Prime Minister Blackface’s excuse? He could just admit that it’s not necessary, and remove the excuse the truckers have to continue their protest.
            Maybe he should try following the science too.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @285exp – Canada didn’t have mandates on cross-border trucking until after the USA imposed 100% vaccinated requirements.

            “What’s Prime Minister Blackface’s excuse?’

            I don’t know what the preforming arts major’s excuse happens to be.

          • 0 avatar
            285exp

            The US imposing vaccine mandates was stupid, doesn’t mean that Canada has to be stupid too.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    Why do we have this EV craze? World is not going to sink, I know 100%%
    Because O’bama has 2 seashore properties and he is not worried. Why would I be worried. He knows better about global climate warming change

  • avatar
    Ol Shel

    I am shocked that private industry hasn’t stepped up to provide this infrastructure. I heard that the free market always responds to need, putting the consumer first!

  • avatar
    probert

    If the republican states start to undermine the building of chargers along the highway, the federal government should step in and either withhold highway funding until a cogent plan is offered, or simply install chargers on federal land (the interstate highways) and be done with it. It just gets tiring.

  • avatar
    pickypilot

    PLEASE! Keep the government out of EV charging. Let private enterprises supply charging stations. I have zero range anxiety with my Tesla and I’ll have zero range anxiety with my EQS580 arriving in April and the Rivian RT1 arriving in November.
    Build back better my ass.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      @pickypilot: I agree. Let private enterprise handle this. An energy company that’s motivated to sell me $10 of food while I charge is more likely to keep the charger maintained.

      • 0 avatar
        285exp

        What if private enterprise decides that building a bunch of charging stations doesn’t make economic sense, unless they charge outrageous prices for a charge? It made sense for Tesla, the charging stations were more of an incentive to buy a Tesla, they used to give the charges away for free, because they wanted to build an infrastructure to support the cars they were selling, and giving away some electricity was no problem. Now, you have to make the charging a profit making operation. The price of a charge has to go up, a lot, because the number of charges you can sell is much lower than a gas station with the same number of pumps.

        If private enterprise thought this was a money maker, we wouldn’t have to print billions so the government could pay to help wealthy people buy and operate their toys.

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          Actually, they have decided this is a moneymaker. Shell and BP and I think other oil companies have entered into the charging business. Shell alone says they’re planning on deploying a half-million charging stations worldwide by 2025. Shell also bought the Greenlots charging network. So, it’s already happening.

          https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/bp-car-chargers-overtake-pumps-profitability-race-2022-01-14/

          “because the number of charges you can sell is much lower than a gas station with the same number of pumps.”

          Even though the number of charges you sell is less, the profit margin is much higher. If a station uses solar or something like a BloomEnergy natural gas fuel cell, they’ll make more on the electricity. With more time at the station and the fact that the driver doesn’t have to stand next to the pump, the driver can be in the store spending more money. You can also put charging points at every parking space at the station rather than just at the islands. Charing throughput isn’t as bad as you might think. On the Cannonball EV record, they spent an average of 18 minutes at the charger. No multi-hour sessions.

          https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a38095522/ev-cannonball-record-tesla-model-s/

          • 0 avatar
            kcflyer

            So it will be like the olden days when you spent the night on the trail while your horse ate, drank, pooped and slept.

            Progress!:)

          • 0 avatar
            285exp

            I have a feeling that BP and Shell are getting into the recharging business because they are being forced to, not because they see it as a superior business than selling petroleum products.

            If they’re going to be jacking up the rate they charge for electricity, that doesn’t help the argument that this is at all about saving money. And the number of charging locations that could generate any significant amount of solar, or who would invest in natural gas fuel cells is vanishingly small. Why not just buy it from the power companies and add the same markups and not have all the capital investment?

            Cannonball racing isn’t much like regular driving, and the EV Cannonball record is about 70% longer than the all time ICE powered record, so I guess that’s an awful lot of 18 minute stops

  • avatar
    Dartdude

    This bill reminds me of the neighbor who house is rundown and goes and buys a new jacuzzi instead repairing structural needs of the house. Highway infrastructure bill should fix all bridges and highways before spending on new infrastructure.
    Whose is going to maintain the EV charging stations?

  • avatar
    BSttac

    All that money we will never see again. Guarantee this will be like most chargers installed and never fully work. This will be a disaster. It always is when the government gets involved.

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    At $5 billion, 99.69% of your income taxes will *not* be going to fund the chargers.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Jeff S: Comrade EBFlex we could send you over to Afghanistan to deliver those motorcycles to the Taliban.
  • sgeffe: That premium for Diesel seems relatively cheap! Around Northwest Ohio, it’s about one dollar more per...
  • Jeff S: @Arthur–The Proud Boys, White Supremacists, and the Klan would definitely be against minorities...
  • Jeff S: @Lou_BC–Those politicians are against spending any money on mental health just like they are against...
  • sgeffe: Re: hybrid cold-starts: on the Honda hybrids, the engine, at cold-starts will run at a seemingly higher idle...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber