By Elliot Negin
There has been a spike in good news recently when it comes to the future of electric vehicles (EVs). That's encouraging, given the transportation sector is now the largest source of US carbon emissions and vehicles are the main culprits.
Late last month, President Biden signed an executive order directing federal officials to come up with a plan to convert all federal, state, local and tribal fleets to "clean and zero-emission vehicles." That amounts to roughly 645,000 vehicles, which currently travel some 4.5 billion miles every year, consume nearly 400 million gallons of gasoline and emit more than 7 billion pounds of carbon pollution.
This is a big deal. If every vehicle in the federal fleet were electric, the number of all-electric EVs in the United States would jump by more than 50 percent. Biden's announcement alone, by guaranteeing greater demand, should spark automakers to amp up their investments in EV technology.
As if on cue, just a day after Biden signed the executive order, General Motors (GM) announced it hopes to stop selling gas- and diesel-powered passenger cars and light sports utility vehicles (SUVs) by 2035. That target date is likely no accident. Last fall, China announced that 50 percent of the new cars sold in the country by 2035 will have to be electric, plug-in hybrid, or fuel cell vehicles, while California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order banning the sale of gasoline-powered passenger cars and pickup trucks in his state by then.
Of course, transitioning from gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles to EVs will not happen overnight. Cars remain on the road for an average of 12 years and trucks average 15, so it will take some time to turn over the entire US fleet of 280 million cars, light trucks and heavy duty rigs. In the meantime, a UCS member from Terre Haute, Indiana, who used to work in the auto industry, wanted to know if it would make the most sense to promote gasoline-powered hybrids and stronger fuel efficiency standards, not pure EVs, for the time being.
"There is certainly a lot of hype about electric vehicles," Terry S. wrote. "If electricity production were 100 percent renewable, then electric vehicles would be a big step in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. But transitioning to electric vehicles is likely to take decades. I applaud UCS for working to accelerate that transition. However, it seems a larger emphasis should be on pushing the adoption of hybrids, such as the Prius, and higher mileage standards over the next decade."
Does the US electricity grid have to be completely carbon pollution-free before EVs can make a significant difference? And would it make more sense to recommend that car buyers purchase hybrids instead of EVs for the next 10 years or so? These are good questions.
I turned to David Reichmuth, a senior engineer in the UCS Clean Transportation Program to respond. Reichmuth, who holds a PhD in chemical engineering, is an expert on California's Zero Emission Vehicles regulation and has authored several reports on the benefits of EVs.
EN: Let's start with Terry S.'s comments. Based on your research, what would be the best way to go over the next decade? Do EVs make sense when some parts of the country still get their electricity from coal-fired power plants? Would it make more sense to buy a hybrid instead of an EV?
DR: To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we'll need stronger gasoline fuel efficiency and emissions standards and a quick transition from gasoline-powered vehicles to EVs. It will take both at the same time. But for nearly everyone in the United States, the best option today for reducing carbon emissions is an EV.
Last year, we updated our analysis of EVs by comparing lifecycle emissions from EVs and gasoline-powered cars. For gasoline cars, we calculated the total emissions from extracting crude oil, shipping it to a refinery, manufacturing gasoline, and then trucking it to filling stations, in addition to their tailpipe emissions. For EVs, our calculation included electric power plant emissions as well as the emissions from producing coal, natural gas and the other fuels that power plants use.
We found that the average EV is responsible for lower carbon emissions than a 50 miles-per-gallon gasoline car for 94 percent of the US population. But that's for the average EV, because the most efficient EVs currently available are better than any gasoline-powered car virtually anywhere across the country. And in regions with cleaner electricity grids, EVs are also much cleaner than gasoline cars. For example, the carbon emissions associated with an average EV driven in California are equivalent to the emissions from a hypothetical 122-mpg gasoline car, while an EV in upstate New York is even better. It would have emissions equivalent to a 231-mpg gasoline car.
It's also important to consider that a new EV purchased today will be powered by an electricity grid that is getting increasingly cleaner as the nation moves away from coal and adds renewable sources like solar and wind power. The amount of electricity from coal-fired plants dropped from 45 percent of all US output to 28 percent between 2009 and 2018, which helped make driving on electricity cleaner. Unlike gasoline cars, EVs already on the road are going to get "cleaner" over time.
EN: Let's turn to some of the recent developments. What's the significance of President Biden's recent executive order? What challenges will be have to be overcome to make his administration's goal a reality?
DR: First off, it's an important signal from the new administration that it recognizes the need to move rapidly to electric vehicles. The federal government's purchasing power will help push automakers to offer more EV models at higher production volumes, given the certainty of demand. It won't be easy to make Biden's executive order a reality, though. While there are a lot more EV models available now, there are some types of vehicles, like pickups and full-size vans, where electric options aren't yet available. The government also will have to install infrastructure at federal facilities across the country to recharge these EVs.
EN: GM won plaudits for its recent announcement, but unlike BMW, Ford, Honda and Volkswagen, the company has not agreed to comply with California's emissions standards, which are more stringent than the Trump administration's watered-down targets. How do you see GM's commitment, and how does the company stack up against other automakers?
DR: I'm all for auto companies setting targets to electrify their vehicle offerings. However, GM only said that it aspires to getting rid of tailpipe pollution. At the same time, it still supports the last administration's weakened emissions standards and has decided not to join the four automakers that have agreed to comply with California's emissions standards. And while GM has announced plans to release new electric models, less than 1 percent of its US sales last year were EVs. If the company were serious about committing to an electric future, it would support standards that ensure the country will have 100-percent zero-emission vehicles on the road by 2035.
EN: What needs to happen to enable the switch from gasoline cars to EVs?
DR: To accelerate the transition from gasoline to electricity, several barriers have to be overcome.
First, automakers have to manufacture more EV models, including sedans, full-size SUVs, pickups and minivans. Regulation is powerful tool to make that happen. There are more options for EV buyers in Europe right now because their emissions standards are ahead of the United States.
Second, EV owners need a lot more recharging infrastructure to support long-distance travel and options if they can't charge at home because, for example, they live in an apartment building and have to park on the street. Private charging companies will play a role, but electric utility and government investments can help ensure that infrastructure is available so more people can buy an EV and not have to worry about where they can charge it.
Finally, automakers have to provide car buyers with the information and resources they need to have the confidence to choose an EV over a gasoline car. Virtually every driver knows how to refuel a gasoline car. Charging an EV isn't hard, but EV owners will understandably have questions about where they can plug in.
EVs are cheaper to drive and maintain than gasoline cars, but they still have a higher upfront cost. Battery—and therefore EV—costs are coming down quickly as production volume increases, but federal and state incentives will be critical during this transition period to address both the upfront cost and consumer uncertainty over a new technology. It will also be important to make it easier for low- and moderate-income households to go electric by, for example, providing incentives for used EV purchases and ensuring that renters in apartment buildings have access to nearby charging stations.
EN: What else should car buyers be thinking about when considering an EV?
DR: We want to get to the point where everyone in the United States can choose an EV and meet their mobility needs. We're not there yet. We need more EV models and charging availability for everyone. Even so, a lot of people could make their next car purchase or lease an EV, either a fully electric vehicle or a plug-in hybrid, especially given the fact there are more affordable long-range models available this year. Switching to an EV is a step people can take right now to make a significant reduction in their carbon emissions. Plus, owning an EV has real advantages: They are cheaper to refuel, have lower maintenance costs, run quietly, and often perform better than a gasoline car. The bottom line: Buying an EV will save car owners money, reduce toxic air pollution, and cut carbon emissions at the same time. That sounds like a good deal to me!
Elliot Negin is a senior writer in the Communications Department at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
- GM Pledges to Eliminate Gas-Powered Vehicles by 2035 - EcoWatch ›
- Report Offers Roadmap for Electric School Bus Transition - EcoWatch ›
- How Norway Convinced Drivers to Switch to Electric Cars - EcoWatch ›
- 11 Facts About Clean Vehicles to Counter Gas Lobbyists - EcoWatch ›
- COVID-19 Lockdown Study Previews Electric Vehicle Future ›
- New USPS Fleet to Include Some Electric Vehicles, Some Gas With Electric Retrofit Potential - EcoWatch ›
- We Had Electric Cars in 1900 ... Then This Happened - EcoWatch ›
- 3 Truths About Electric Vehicles - EcoWatch ›
- Electric Semi Trucks Are Actually Cheaper Than Diesel Trucks ›
- Electric Cars Are Powered by Tidal Energy on This Island ›
FedEx's entire parcel pickup and delivery fleet will become 100 percent electric by 2040, according to a statement released Wednesday. The ambitious plan includes checkpoints, such as aiming for 50 percent electric vehicles by 2025.
To reach this goal, the delivery company will commit more than $2 billion to vehicle electrification, sustainable energy and carbon sequestration, according to the statement.
"We have a responsibility to take bold action in addressing climate challenges," Frederick W. Smith, chairman and CEO of FedEx Corp. said in the release. "This goal builds on our longstanding commitment to sustainability throughout our operations, while at the same time investing in long-term, transformational solutions for FedEx and our entire industry."
FedEx will also continue to invest in sustainable fuels to power its planes -- the biggest contributor to its carbon footprint, Fast Company reported. But switching to sustainable fuel won't be easy, Mitch Jackson, chief sustainability officer for FedEx Corp, told Fast Company. "The question is, will sustainable aviation fuels be here in sufficient quantities for the aviation industry in the near term?"
The news comes just a week after the United States Postal Service announced a 10-year, $485-million contract for new mail trucks, planning to transform only 10 percent of its fleet into electric vehicles, Sierra Club reported. This plan falls short of President Biden's vow to covert all "Federal, State, local, and Tribal government fleets" to "clean and zero-emission vehicles."
"From undermining our democracy to delaying climate action, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy continues to fail the United States Postal Service and the American public," Gina Coplon-Newfield, director of Sierra Club's Clean Transportation for All campaign said in a statement. "The lack of commitment from the USPS to electrify its fleet directly contradicts the Biden administration's goals and executive order to clean up pollution from the US government's vehicles."
The United States Postal Service has increasingly struggled to outcompete large corporations like FedEx that use the same networks and markets, the Economic Policy Institute wrote in a report. This is partly because the USPS is limited in entering new markets and pays its workers with middle-class wages and provides benefits, unlike private competitors like FedEx that cut costs by relying on independent, contract workers, The Washington Post reported. Yet the drastically different de-carbonization goals between USPS and FedEx highlight the necessary role private companies can play in pioneering efforts towards a clean energy future.
"While we've made great strides in reducing our environmental impact, we have to do more," Jackson said, according to Business Insider. "The long-term health of our industry is directly linked to the health of the planet, but this effort is about more than the bottom line – it's the right thing to do."
Included in FedEx's plan is a $100 million gift to Yale University to establish a Center for Natural Carbon Capture to research and develop natural solutions to reduce and sequester atmospheric carbon safely, YaleNews reported.
"My hope is that others will recognize the scale and importance of this problem and the significance of this center's mission by joining in our efforts to address a global challenge," Smith said, according to YaleNews.
Environmental groups urge other delivery services to quickly follow suit, committing to more sustainable and efficient operations in the face of a rapidly damaging climate. "This is a critical moment to shift the status quo of the US delivery truck. We urge all delivery companies — including USPS — to not let it pass them by," Coplon-Newfield added in a statement.
- 11 Facts About Clean Vehicles to Counter Gas Lobbyists - EcoWatch ›
- BMW’s Iconic Mini Cars to Go All-Electric From 2030 - EcoWatch ›
Each product featured here has been independently selected by the writer. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.
The bright patterns and recognizable designs of Waterlust's activewear aren't just for show. In fact, they're meant to promote the conversation around sustainability and give back to the ocean science and conservation community.
Each design is paired with a research lab, nonprofit, or education organization that has high intellectual merit and the potential to move the needle in its respective field. For each product sold, Waterlust donates 10% of profits to these conservation partners.
Eye-Catching Designs Made from Recycled Plastic Bottles
waterlust.com / @abamabam
The company sells a range of eco-friendly items like leggings, rash guards, and board shorts that are made using recycled post-consumer plastic bottles. There are currently 16 causes represented by distinct marine-life patterns, from whale shark research and invasive lionfish removal to sockeye salmon monitoring and abalone restoration.
One such organization is Get Inspired, a nonprofit that specializes in ocean restoration and environmental education. Get Inspired founder, marine biologist Nancy Caruso, says supporting on-the-ground efforts is one thing that sets Waterlust apart, like their apparel line that supports Get Inspired abalone restoration programs.
"All of us [conservation partners] are doing something," Caruso said. "We're not putting up exhibits and talking about it — although that is important — we're in the field."
Waterlust not only helps its conservation partners financially so they can continue their important work. It also helps them get the word out about what they're doing, whether that's through social media spotlights, photo and video projects, or the informative note card that comes with each piece of apparel.
"They're doing their part for sure, pushing the information out across all of their channels, and I think that's what makes them so interesting," Caruso said.
And then there are the clothes, which speak for themselves.
Advocate Apparel to Start Conversations About Conservation
waterlust.com / @oceanraysphotography
Waterlust's concept of "advocate apparel" encourages people to see getting dressed every day as an opportunity to not only express their individuality and style, but also to advance the conversation around marine science. By infusing science into clothing, people can visually represent species and ecosystems in need of advocacy — something that, more often than not, leads to a teaching moment.
"When people wear Waterlust gear, it's just a matter of time before somebody asks them about the bright, funky designs," said Waterlust's CEO, Patrick Rynne. "That moment is incredibly special, because it creates an intimate opportunity for the wearer to share what they've learned with another."
The idea for the company came to Rynne when he was a Ph.D. student in marine science.
"I was surrounded by incredible people that were discovering fascinating things but noticed that often their work wasn't reaching the general public in creative and engaging ways," he said. "That seemed like a missed opportunity with big implications."
Waterlust initially focused on conventional media, like film and photography, to promote ocean science, but the team quickly realized engagement on social media didn't translate to action or even knowledge sharing offscreen.
Rynne also saw the "in one ear, out the other" issue in the classroom — if students didn't repeatedly engage with the topics they learned, they'd quickly forget them.
"We decided that if we truly wanted to achieve our goal of bringing science into people's lives and have it stick, it would need to be through a process that is frequently repeated, fun, and functional," Rynne said. "That's when we thought about clothing."
Support Marine Research and Sustainability in Style
To date, Waterlust has sold tens of thousands of pieces of apparel in over 100 countries, and the interactions its products have sparked have had clear implications for furthering science communication.
For Caruso alone, it's led to opportunities to share her abalone restoration methods with communities far and wide.
"It moves my small little world of what I'm doing here in Orange County, California, across the entire globe," she said. "That's one of the beautiful things about our partnership."
Check out all of the different eco-conscious apparel options available from Waterlust to help promote ocean conservation.
Melissa Smith is an avid writer, scuba diver, backpacker, and all-around outdoor enthusiast. She graduated from the University of Florida with degrees in journalism and sustainable studies. Before joining EcoWatch, Melissa worked as the managing editor of Scuba Diving magazine and the communications manager of The Ocean Agency, a non-profit that's featured in the Emmy award-winning documentary Chasing Coral.
The average American household spends about $175 a month on gasoline. That means billions of dollars to oil companies, refiners, and others — and a huge incentive for them to block policies that move America to clean, zero-emissions electric vehicles.
We're already seeing a coordinated push to stop President Biden and Congress from boosting American clean cars, trucks and buses — even though these policies will create jobs and a more just and equitable economy, clean the air, and are popular with the public.
EDF experts have assembled these facts to counter the lobbyists who want to make sure Americans keep paying at the pump.
1. Moving to Clean Electric Vehicles Will Help America Win the Race for Good Jobs Today and Tomorrow.
The question isn't electric vehicles versus gas-powered vehicles — the global industry is already moving to EVs, and spending at least $257 billion this decade to make the switch. The issue is whether American workers will get these jobs. We can build these vehicles in places like Hamtramck, MI and Spartansburg, SC or have them shipped to us from Hamburg and Shanghai. Switching to zero-emissions electric trucks, buses, and cars will create jobs today and help us compete with Europe and China in this rapidly expanding market.
Right now 95% of zero emission heavy duty vehicles are made in China, and Europe is making major investments. We need to act if we are going to ensure U.S. manufacturing is competitive in this growing zero emitting vehicles market.
2. Building More Electric Cars, Trucks, and Buses Here in the U.S. Can Mean Hundreds of Thousands of Good Paying Jobs.
Companies in the clean cars, trucks, buses industry and EV battery supply chain are already in operation and development all around the country. From Michigan to South Carolina, from Missouri to Texas, companies are building zero emission cars, EV batteries and charging infrastructure. As the shop chairman of United Auto Worker 598 recently said, companies like General Motors that are powered by union labor being on the forefront of this shift will mean "increased sales and customers… it means more jobs."
3. EVs Are Much Better for the Climate.
Electric vehicles in the U.S. emit less climate pollution than fully gasoline-powered cars, even when powered by today's mixed sources of electric power. Their engines are just much more efficient. And as we move to 100% clean power nationwide, EVs will be even better. That transition is already underway: 1 in 3 Americans are already getting service from a utility that's moving to 100% clean electric generation.
Transportation is the biggest source of climate pollution in the U.S. — and switching to zero emissions EVs are a big part of the solution. In the face of damaging and costly storms, floods, heatwaves and wildfires, we need action.
4. Zero Emissions Vehicles Mean Healthier Communities and a More Equitable America.
Fully electric cars have zero tailpipe emissions, so transitioning trucks, buses, emergency vehicles, taxis and ridesharing fleets to electric vehicles will reduce air pollution for everyone. This means fewer hospitalizations related to asthma and associated health problems — and can especially benefit people of color who, due to discrimination in housing, zoning and economic opportunity, more often live near ports, highways and other industrial sites where they are more likely to be exposed to harmful pollution from diesel and gasoline-powered vehicle traffic.
5. Achievable: The Speed of Technology Advancement, Along With Investments and Other Smart Policies, Will Let Us Reach Our Goal of All Zero Emission New Cars by 2035 and New Trucks and Buses by 2040.
More than 175 zero-pollution truck, bus, car and SUV models are in production or development for the U.S. market. Companies from Amazon and FedEx to Pepsi are looking to switch to clean vehicles. Every major car manufacturer is making significant investments in electric cars, with many aiming for a fully electric future. General Motors recently announced a goal of eliminating tailpipe pollution from all of its cars and pickup trucks by 2035. The faster we move, the faster we can put people to work building the cars of today and tomorrow
U.S. companies have proven time and time again, they can rise to meet any challenge — but they need a predictable business climate to scale up production and plan for the long term.
6. With Investment and Focus, Our Power Grid Can Manage and Support All Demand From Electric Vehicles.
Growth in electric cars and trucks will increase electricity demand. This can help increase investments in clean electricity, bolstering American energy independence and a reliable energy grid. With smart charging, EVs can actually help grid operators integrate higher levels of renewable energy. Energy regulators, electric utilities and grid operators are well aware of this and are monitoring and investing in the clean vehicle transition in real time – and Congress must prioritize and support incentives and policies to increase both EV and clean electricity deployment to ensure we maximize the benefits EVs can offer.
A cleaner grid means less dependence on polluting power plants, which are most often located near communities of color and low-income communities. It also means increased expansion of cleaner sources like rooftop solar in these neighborhoods. This can create good jobs in areas where they are desperately needed.
7. Electric Options Expand Consumer Choice.
Electric cars are being built and developed in as many varieties, from pick-ups to sports cars, as gasoline-powered cars. And their performance is better — some models can go from zero to sixty in 2.3 seconds, stats no gasoline-powered car off the lot can match.
Before too long, gas-powered cars will seem old-fashioned. Sure, some people will still enjoy their vintage cars. But technology moves quickly — and brings with it lower costs, higher performance and more fun.
8. Affordable: EVs Costs Are Declining and Will Save Consumers Thousands on Gas and Other Costs.
For years we've had debates about gas prices. With EV's you pay zero at the gas station. Just about the only people arguing against the switch to EVs are the oil companies, refiners and their allies — they're grasping to preserve their profits. Of course they want people to pay to fill up their cars with gasoline every week.
Analysts predict EVs will reach price parity with gasoline-powered cars by 2025. Research suggests that by 2030, the buyer of a new battery electric vehicle will save more than $7,000 over the life of the car compared to a gasoline-powered car. Our investments will also mean zero-emitting vehicles will be more affordable for local governments that want to create healthier communities.
9. We Can Produce Cleaner Car Batteries in the USA and Work to Recycle Their Components.
As we build more clean cars, we should also make producing batteries cleaner. A report from the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) says that the place where a battery is made has a lot to do with the amount of emissions from the manufacturing process. Batteries made in the US, with American manufacturing techniques, produce 65% less emissions than those currently made in China.* It's another reason for policies to boost American production of electric vehicles and their components and create jobs here at home.
We should continue to increase battery life and recycling. USA Today reports that "researchers found that recycling car batteries on a large scale was 'very promising'" and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory says that lithium-ion car batteries could last up to 15 years.
*Vehicles with Chinese-made batteries are still cleaner than gas vehicles.
10. To Combat Child Labor in the Overseas Mining Industry, We Need Strong Monitoring and to Build More Batteries Here Under U.S. Labor Laws.
Mineral sourcing from countries with gross human rights abuses, including child labor, is unacceptable. But the solution isn't sticking to a broken system of relying on polluting transportation that carries its own unacceptable human toll. Instead, we need standards supported by credible third-parties that verify minerals are being sourced sustainably and ethically. Those who are truly concerned about labor standards overseas should be advocating zero emission vehicle standards paired with domestic manufacturing incentive programs in the US.
11. The U.S. EPA and the State of California Have Clear Authority to Establish Pollution Safeguards That Rely on the Increasing Availability of Zero-Emitting Vehicles.
The Environmental Protection Agency has time tested authority under the Clean Air Act to adopt pollution standards that rely on the increasing availability of zero-emitting vehicles. California can set more protective standards for cars and trucks (and other states can adopt these standards).
Clean transportation is the future. It brings with it economic, health and environmental benefits. Still, lots of big interests make significant profits by ensuring that Americans open their wallets every week at the gas station. This gives us a big fight ahead to secure a quick transition to EVs.. But it's a fight we need to win.
Copyright © 2020 Environmental Defense Fund. Used by permission. The original material is available here.
- U.S. Utilities, Tesla, Uber Form Lobbying Group for Electric Vehicles ... ›
- Koch Brothers Plotting Multimillion Dollar War on Electric Vehicles ... ›
- Ask a Scientist: Electric Vehicles are the Cleanest Option Today ... ›
- FedEx to Electrify Entire Fleet by 2040 - EcoWatch ›
- 3 Truths About Electric Vehicles - EcoWatch ›
- Will the Race for Electric Vehicles Endanger the Seafloor? - EcoWatch ›
- $73 Billion Clean Bus Plan Unveiled by Senators Brown, Schumer ›
Six major U.S. electricity utilities will collaborate to build a massive EV charging network across 16 states, they announced Tuesday.
Transportation is the country's largest source of greenhouse gas pollution, and electrifying the sector is a major opportunity to reduce those emissions through increased efficiency and renewable-generated electricity. Utilities stand to benefit from massively-increased electricity demand driven by widespread EV adoption, but range anxiety — the fear of running out of battery power without being able to reach a convenient charging station — is a barrier to many customers who might purchase (or consider purchasing) an EV.
The newly-formed Electric Highway Coalition — made up of American Electric Power, Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, Entergy, Southern Company, and the Tennessee Valley Authority — is seeking to ameliorate those concerns by creating a network of charging stations from Texas to Indiana to Virginia to Florida. The announcement follows a similar initiative by major midwest utilities last year.
As reported by Earther:
"It's exciting to see utilities engaging more in this space," said Kathy Harris, the Eastern clean vehicles and fuels advocate at Natural Resources Defense Council. Harris pointed out that while utility investment in electric vehicle infrastructure "isn't a new concept," most of the billions of dollars spent around the country on it have been focused in California and the Northeast. Last year, for example, a coalition of West Coast utilities announced they're working on a plan to electrify shipping routes to phase out diesel trucks.
The announcement didn't specify whether or not customers would have to pay for the charging stations, or how much costs could be, which actually isn't surprising given the number of different states covered by the coalition. Harris said that different states have different laws on the books regarding paying for EV charging stations. Some states require customers to pay a set dollar amount to use stations, while others have them pay directly for the electricity used.
For a deeper dive:
For more climate change and clean energy news, you can follow Climate Nexus on Twitter and Facebook, sign up for daily Hot News, and visit their news site, Nexus Media News.
- U.S. Utilities, Tesla, Uber Form Lobbying Group for Electric Vehicles ... ›
- Fees on Electric Cars, Influenced by Koch Network, Unfairly ... ›
- Everybody Wants EV Charging Stations. Almost Nobody Wants to ... ›
- BMW’s Iconic Mini Cars to Go All-Electric From 2030 - EcoWatch ›
By Jessica Corbett
While some students are still learning remotely or on hybrid schedules due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, the climate emergency hasn't suddenly disappeared because of the devastating public health crisis—meaning neither has the need to radically and rapidly transform society.
The sweeping transformation that study after study signals is necessary for the future of the planet and all of its inhabitants includes electrifying the transportation sector. A report out Tuesday details opportunities to aid that effort by shifting to zero-emissions electric school buses.
The new report from the Environment America Research & Policy Center and U.S. PIRG Education Fund notes that "the vast majority of school buses in the United States run on diesel, a fossil fuel that has been shown to cause numerous health problems, including asthma, bronchitis, and cancer."
Along with the impacts on human health, diesel exhaust is also a greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. While there are multiple benefits to shifting to more health- and climate-friendly buses, there are also barriers. As the report explains:
The technology is here, and electric school buses are ready to roll, but the question remains: how do schools pay for them? While electric buses can save schools money over the lifespan of the bus, the initial price tag of a new electric bus can turn many schools off to the idea of electrification. In many cases, assistance from federal grant programs and loans are needed in order to finance such a purchase. In addition to these programs, utility investment, financing strategies, and vehicle-to-grid technology provide promising opportunities that can help schools ease the transition and accelerate toward a zero-emission electric future.
Ethan Evans, U.S. PIRG Education Fund Transportation associate, emphasized in a statement Tuesday that "while electric buses can save and even earn schools money over the lifespan of the bus, the initial price tag often presents a hurdle for cash-strapped districts. Utility investment would help ease the transition and accelerate us toward a zero-emission electric future."
The report points out that not only is a large-scale shift to electric buses better for public health and the planet, it could also benefit school districts as well as utility companies that could assist with transition costs. "Electric buses can expand and stabilize the grid, provide surplus energy storage, and increase energy demand," the report says. "By providing discounted rates on electric bus charging and building charging infrastructure, utilities can help speed the adoption of electric buses."
"Utilities can also support electric buses by investing in infrastructure for bus charging in depots and on routes, helping to finance the upfront purchasing costs of electric buses, and introducing smart charging systems to maximize integration of renewable energy," the report adds, noting examples where such efforts are already underway in Oregon and Virginia.
The report highlights vehicle-to-grid technology that enables buses to send stored energy back to the grid and Pay-As-You-Save (or PAYS) agreements in which a utility company covers the initial cost of shifting to new technology that the customer repays over the buses' lifespans as "particularly promising options."
"By pairing vehicle-to-grid technology and PAYS, each electric bus could save school districts up to $130,000 per electric bus," according to the report, which includes lists of recommendations for school districts, lawmakers, and utility companies to boost the use of electric buses on a national scale.
Upgrading to 100% electric school bus fleets by 2030 is achievable and affordable, our new report from finds. Pay-a… https://t.co/YxDwwDlu55— U.S. PIRG (@U.S. PIRG)1612274141.0
As Morgan Folger, Environment America Research and Policy Center Destination: Zero Carbon campaign director, put it: "Only by working together can we tackle the existential threat of climate change and accelerate the process towards a zero-emission future."
Schools are urged to "commit to transitioning to 100% all-electric buses by 2030, with a plan to phase out the purchase of new diesel buses immediately." District leaders should "use any and all financing methods available" to deliver on their pledges—including by engaging with local utility companies.
Utility companies are called on to commit to renewable energy, reduce emissions, increase grid capacity, and assist in transition efforts, including with vehicle-to-grid technology and PAYS pilot programs. Lawmakers, the report says, must "work with utilities and regulators to develop effective electric bus investment programs that protect ratepayers and consumers."
The report further calls on elected officials to develop grant programs for the transition to electric buses, tighten fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions standards, and subsidize research and development in related technology, including vehicle-to-grid.
As the groups published their joint report on Tuesday, the Senate confirmed Pete Buttigieg, President Joe Biden's pick to run the Department of Transportation. The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana—who faced off against Biden in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary race but ultimately dropped out and endorsed him—has vowed to make climate a key priority in his new role.
"Ultimately, we cannot afford not to act on climate," Buttigieg told senators at a confirmation hearing when asked about his support for the Green New Deal. "The question becomes: How can we do that in a way that creates economic benefit in the near term, as well as preventing catastrophe in the long term?"
Part of the solution, the report suggests, is greening the way students get to school.
"Our kids deserve a world without diesel emissions," said Folger. Evans concurred, declaring that "getting to school shouldn't include a daily dose of toxic pollution."
"With school districts, lawmakers, and utilities all working together," Evans added, "we can make the switch to all-electric school buses and give our kids a healthier ride to school."
Reposted with permission from Common Dreams.
- Buses Are the Electric Vehicle Everyone Should Be Talking About ... ›
- Nation's First Electric Bus Picks Up California Students - EcoWatch ›
- San Francisco Seeks 100% Electric Bus Fleet by 2035 - EcoWatch ›
- Ask a Scientist: Electric Vehicles are the Cleanest Option Today - EcoWatch ›
- $73 Billion Clean Bus Plan Unveiled by Senators Brown, Schumer ›
General Motors pledged Thursday to stop selling fossil-fuel-powered cars and light trucks by 2035.
The move is part of the automaker's plan to become carbon neutral by 2040 and to join the Business Ambition Pledge for 1.5⁰C, in which companies promise to go carbon neutral in time to limit global warming to only 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
"General Motors is joining governments and companies around the globe working to establish a safer, greener and better world," GM Chairman and CEO Mary Barra said in a statement. "We encourage others to follow suit and make a significant impact on our industry and on the economy as a whole."
To make this happen, GM has promised to invest $27 billion in autonomous and electric vehicles in the next five years. The company said that by 2025 it would offer 30 global electric models and that 40 percent of its U.S. models would be electric. It plans to offer the new vehicles across a range of price points.
GM's pledge also includes a promise to power all of its U.S. sites with renewable energy by 2030 and all of its global locations by 2035. Any carbon emissions GM cannot cut from its business model it plans to offset.
The news comes as the political winds for climate action in the U.S. have shifted. In the past two weeks, President Joe Biden has signed an executive order reversing the Trump administration's decision to relax tailpipe emissions standards, and another mandating that all federal vehicles be electric.
The news also marks a departure for GM. Barra previously met with former President Donald Trump about relaxing Obama-era emissions standards, which Biden is now moving to reinstate, The New York Times reported. Because of this history, some environmental organizations are skeptical of the new announcement.
"GM's announcement is important to see from a Big Three automaker. GM must back it up with strong action," the Sierra Club wrote in a Facebook post. "We won't soon forget that GM sided with Trump against cleaner vehicles and clean air and has been hostile to protecting the planet and their own workforce for decades. We will continue to track their efforts, and hold them accountable."
However, GM worked with the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) to craft its goal.
"EDF and GM have had some important differences in the past, but this is a new day in America — one where serious collaboration to achieve transportation electrification, science-based climate progress and equitably shared economic opportunity can move our nation forward," EDF president Fred Krupp said in the press release.
Analysts say that GM and other automakers that are shifting to electric reflects both technological improvements that are cutting electric vehicle prices, as well as political developments, Inside Climate News reported. Biden has set a 2035 deadline for many of his administration's climate goals, which is also the target date California Gov. Gavin Newsom has established for banning new gas and diesel car sales in the state.
Not least, Barra's decision may also be financially driven. Auto industry analyst Ferdinand Dudenhöffer told The New York Times that European carmakers generally agreed that electric cars would rule the market in 10 to 15 years.
"Mary Barra is a good C.E.O.," Dudenhöffer told The New York Times. "She has the right strategy."
- Auto Giants Knew About Car Emissions and Climate Change — in ... ›
- Are Electric Vehicles Finally Taking Off? Here's What You Need to ... ›
- GM Is Bringing Back the Hummer — as an Electric Vehicle - EcoWatch ›
- These Are the ‘Positive’ Tipping Points That Could Slow Global Warming - EcoWatch ›
- Ask a Scientist: Electric Vehicles are the Cleanest Option Today - EcoWatch ›
When it came time to create this year's Super Bowl ads, company executives and ad makers were faced with a unique challenge, The New York Times reported.
Advertising their company to the Super Bowl's expected 100 million viewers is a hard opportunity to pass. But concerns that their Super Bowl ad, usually light-hearted and goofy, could come off as insensitive considering the COVID-19 pandemic have caused a few companies like Coca-Cola to skip this year's tradition, The New York Times reported.
Companies that did decide to go ahead with an ad were left questioning how they should approach it. Do they acknowledge the pandemic, which has killed over 450,000 people in the United States? Or do they continue on as normal, offering a visual and emotional break for their viewers who may be looking for a taste of normalcy this coming weekend?
But Americans faced more crises than just the pandemic this year. Wildfires scorched American West, hurricanes ravaged and flooded the southeast, thunderstorms and tornadoes blasted through the states of Iowa, Mississippi and Tennessee and winter storms continue to pummel the northeast, The Washington Post reported.
While addressing the climate crisis in a Super Bowl ad could incite a similar dilemma to that of addressing the COVID-19 crisis, one company is taking advantage of the event's large audience to promote climate solutions.
General Motors released a Super Bowl commercial Wednesday, featuring Will Ferrel in flannel with overgrown hair. Gathering other celebs like Awkwafina and Kenan Thompson, Will Ferrell encourages his co-stars to buy electric cars in order to beat Norway's higher electric vehicle count.
"We're gonna crush those lugers!" Ferrel says in the commercial, according to Grist – a line well-suited for Sunday's competitive game.
The GM commercial follows its recent pledge to stop selling fossil-fuel-powered cars and light trucks by 2035. But while General Motors' ambitious goal is indeed a climate victory, pushing other automakers to follow suit, critics don't want viewers to forget about GM's role in climate change.
"In October of 2019, General Motors sided with the Trump administration in a legal battle, pushing back against California's stricter requirements to cut climate-warming pollutants from cars," Grist reported, adding to the decades the company has "resisted pollution rules," Jody Freeman, a professor at Harvard Law, wrote in an opinion piece for The New York Times.
Some commenters on Twitter agreed.
"Love the mainstreaming of EVs, featuring Will Ferrell... but isn't part of the reason Norway is "beating us" because US automobile manufacturers like GM actively fought supporting policies (emissions rules, climate policy, etc) in the US for decades?" Ben Inskeep, principal energy policy analyst at EQ Research, tweeted Wednesday.
Despite Americans' competitive nature, the country won't outrun Norway's electric vehicle count "anytime soon," Grist reported. In Norway, 6.5 percent of its vehicles on the road are electric, compared to the United States' minimal 0.3 percent.
Whether or not the Super Bowl provides an opportunity for automakers to cover up decades of environmental negligence or advertise their eco-friendly products, it could also provide an opportunity for Americans to find a common ground, like their love for football, to talk about a disruptive topic like climate change.
In one case, the NFL has taken climate matters into its own hands. Each year, the NFL's environmental and sustainability program holds a "Green Week" before the Super Bowl, executing environmental projects that will benefit the Super Bowl's host community, like recycling and waste management projects and donating used building materials from the event, EcoWatch reported Thursday.
Another recent initiative that is using football to address climate change is led by Florida's Environmental Defense Fund. Arranged to go up in Tampa, billboards with white letters will read, "94% of Floridians Agree that Climate Change is Real," on a football field backdrop, the Tampa Bay Times reported.
"Football is a great unifier in Florida, and it was really important for us to get past all of the partisan rhetoric," said Dawn Shirreffs, the organization's director in Florida, according to the Tampa Bay Times. "Because climate is actually non-partisan."
- Auto Giants Knew About Car Emissions and Climate Change — in ... ›
- GM Is Bringing Back the Hummer — as an Electric Vehicle - EcoWatch ›
10 Ways to Tell if You're Dehydrated
David Wolfe: 10 Natural Antibiotics That Fight Infection
Today in Pittsburgh, President Biden will outline his American Jobs Plan, proposals for major infrastructure investments in clean energy, water system updates, and other economy-growing initiatives designed to create millions of jobs, address aging infrastructure and lessen racial and other inequities throughout the economy.
Biden's $2 trillion plan to fight climate change and revitalize the American economy includes calls for Congressional funding to the tune of: $16 billion to employ union oil and gas workers to cap orphaned oil and gas wells and clean up mines, $35 billion in clean tech R&D to address the climate crisis, $85 billion to modernize public transit systems, $174 billion to promote electric vehicles through consumer incentives, supply chain support, charging network build outs, school bus electrification, and electrifying the federal fleet, $100 billion for power grid modernization and resilience, and $213 billion to build, modernize, and weatherize affordable housing.
Biden's plan also calls for investing $111 billion to improve the country's drinking water systems, including eliminating all lead water pipes and service lines in the country. Labor and environmental groups called for even greater ambition and spending to "build a more just, equitable, clean and more prosperous American economy" in a letter to Biden and Democratic Congressional leaders. Funding will pay for itself over 15 years, the administration says, by a combination of eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, raising corporate taxes, ending offshore-tax havens and strengthening corporate tax enforcement.
The plan also calls for passage of a bill aimed at significantly strengthening workers' rights to organize. The $2 trillion plan push is just the first of the administration's massive two-part infrastructure investment agenda as Biden is expected to release part two, the "American Families Plan" in two weeks.
For a deeper dive:
The Washington Post, POLITICO Pro, The New York Times, POLITICO, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Vox; Labor and green groups: Bloomberg; Pay-fors and taxes: The Washington Post, POLITICO, The New York Times
For more climate change and clean energy news, you can follow Climate Nexus on Twitter and Facebook, sign up for daily Hot News, and visit their news site, Nexus Media News.
A coalition launched the Zero Emission Transportation Association on Tuesday with plans to push for 100% EV sales across all sectors by 2030.
The coalition of corporate entities that stand to benefit from broader electric vehicle adoption includes Uber, Tesla, utilities like Duke Energy and Southern Company, EV component suppliers, charging companies, and EV startups.
The group's launch came the same day as UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson pledged to ban the sale of new cars wholly powered by gas and diesel by 2030, a decade earlier than previously planned. On Monday, S&P Global announced Tesla will be added to the S&P 500 Index on December 21.
For a deeper dive:
EV group: Axios, E&E, Politico Pro, Houston Chronicle, Reuters, The Atlantic
Tesla: CNN, Wall Street Journal, FT, Bloomberg, Reuters
For more climate change and clean energy news, you can follow Climate Nexus on Twitter and Facebook, and sign up for daily Hot News.
By Christian Brand
Globally, only one in 50 new cars were fully electric in 2020, and one in 14 in the UK. Sounds impressive, but even if all new cars were electric now, it would still take 15-20 years to replace the world's fossil fuel car fleet.
The emission savings from replacing all those internal combustion engines with zero-carbon alternatives will not feed in fast enough to make the necessary difference in the time we can spare: the next five years. Tackling the climate and air pollution crises requires curbing all motorized transport, particularly private cars, as quickly as possible. Focusing solely on electric vehicles is slowing down the race to zero emissions.
This is partly because electric cars aren't truly zero-carbon – mining the raw materials for their batteries, manufacturing them and generating the electricity they run on produces emissions.
Transport is one of the most challenging sectors to decarbonize due to its heavy fossil fuel use and reliance on carbon-intensive infrastructure – such as roads, airports and the vehicles themselves - and the way it embeds car-dependent lifestyles. One way to reduce transport emissions relatively quickly, and potentially globally, is to swap cars for cycling, e-biking and walking – active travel, as it's called.
Active travel is cheaper, healthier, better for the environment, and no slower on congested urban streets. So how much carbon can it save on a daily basis? And what is its role in reducing emissions from transport overall?
In new research, colleagues and I reveal that people who walk or cycle have lower carbon footprints from daily travel, including in cities where lots of people are already doing this. Despite the fact that some walking and cycling happens on top of motorized journeys instead of replacing them, more people switching to active travel would equate to lower carbon emissions from transport on a daily and trip-by-trip basis.
What a Difference a Trip Makes
We observed around 4,000 people living in London, Antwerp, Barcelona, Vienna, Orebro, Rome and Zurich. Over a two-year period, our participants completed 10,000 travel diary entries which served as records of all the trips they made each day, whether going to work by train, taking the kids to school by car or riding the bus into town. For each trip, we calculated the carbon footprint.
Strikingly, people who cycled on a daily basis had 84% lower carbon emissions from all their daily travel than those who didn't.
We also found that the average person who shifted from car to bike for just one day a week cut their carbon footprint by 3.2kg of CO₂ – equivalent to the emissions from driving a car for 10km, eating a serving of lamb or chocolate, or sending 800 emails.
When we compared the life cycle of each travel mode, taking into account the carbon generated by making the vehicle, fueling it and disposing of it, we found that emissions from cycling can be more than 30 times lower for each trip than driving a fossil fuel car, and about ten times lower than driving an electric one.
We also estimate that urban residents who switched from driving to cycling for just one trip per day reduced their carbon footprint by about half a tonne of CO₂ over the course of a year, and save the equivalent emissions of a one-way flight from London to New York. If just one in five urban residents permanently changed their travel behavior in this way over the next few years, we estimate it would cut emissions from all car travel in Europe by about 8%.
Nearly half of the fall in daily carbon emissions during global lockdowns in 2020 came from reductions in transport emissions. The pandemic forced countries around the world to adapt to reduce the spread of the virus. In the UK, walking and cycling have been the big winners, with a 20% rise in people walking regularly, and cycling levels increasing by 9% on weekdays and 58% on weekends compared to pre-pandemic levels. This is despite cycle commuters being very likely to work from home.
Active travel has offered an alternative to cars that keeps social distancing intact. It has helped people to stay safe during the pandemic and it could help reduce emissions as confinement is eased, particularly as the high prices of some electric vehicles are likely to put many potential buyers off for now.
So the race is on. Active travel can contribute to tackling the climate emergency earlier than electric vehicles while also providing affordable, reliable, clean, healthy and congestion-busting transportation.
Christian Brand is an Associate Professor in Transport, Energy & Environment, Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford.
Disclosure statement: Christian Brand received funding for this work from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme via the 'Physical Activity through Sustainable Transport Approaches' project and UK Research and Innovation via the Centre for Research on Energy Demand Solutions and the UK Energy Research Centre.
Reposted with permission from The Conversation.
- United Airlines Will Invest in Carbon Capture En Route to Net Zero ›
- U.S. could reach net-zero emissions by 2050 with more benefits ... ›
- Why corporate climate pledges of 'net-zero' emissions should trigger ... ›
For the first time, major companies are adding their voices to the call for a ban on deep-sea mining.
Google, BMW, Volvo and Samsung SD all signed a WWF statement last Wednesday calling for a moratorium on the controversial practice until its environmental impacts are thoroughly understood, Reuters reported.
"We welcome this important step, and call on other companies who care about the ocean to join these leaders by signing on to the statement," WWF International Global Ocean leader John Tanzer said in a press release. "It is a clear message to those who are swayed by the false promise that deep seabed mining is a 'green' and attractive investment proposition. It is not so."
Deep-sea mining would involve the extraction of mineral-rich, potato-sized nodules from the ocean floor, as BBC News explained. These nodules contain elements like cobalt that are necessary for building electric vehicle batteries. Proponents therefore argue that mining the seafloor is an important tool for fighting the climate crisis while being less damaging than mining on land.
But WWF counters that the practice could be extremely damaging for little-understood deep-sea ecosystems, harm fisheries and disrupt nutrient and carbon cycles. This argument has proved persuasive to some companies.
"It's the fear that everything we do down there could have irreversible consequences," senior BMW sustainability expert Claudia Becker told BBC News. "Those nodules grew over millions of years and if we take them out now, we don't understand how many species depend on them – what does this mean for the beginning of our food chain? There's way too little evidence, the research is just starting, it's too big a risk."
In signing WWF's statement, BMW and the other companies are pledging not to source minerals from the seabed, not to permit them into their supply chains and not to fund any mining exploration. They are asking the moratorium be kept in place until three conditions are met:
- The risks are clearly understood.
- All alternative mineral sources have been used up.
- It is clear the mining can be done in a way that preserves marine ecosystems and biodiversity.
Despite WWF's concerns, mining companies are moving ahead with exploring the possibilities of deep-sea mining. DeepGreen, GSR and UK Seabed Resources, a UK Lockheed Martin subsidiary, all hold exploratory licenses, Reuters reported. Norway has said it could license companies to begin the practice as soon as 2023.
DeepGreen, which plans to mine in the Pacific, argued that the mining was necessary to fight the climate crisis and was less harmful than other ways of accessing key minerals.
"Where exactly will BMW get the battery metals it needs to fully electrify its products, and with what impact to our climate?" the company said in a statement reported by BBC News. "Will Volvo customers really prefer rainforest metals in their EVs once they realise their dire impacts on freshwater ecosystems, indigenous peoples, charismatic megafauna and carbon-storing forests?"
However, WWF argued that these are the wrong questions.
"The pro-deep seabed mining lobby is creating their own narrative by choosing to portray only some of what we know and don't know. They are selling a story that companies need deep seabed minerals in order to produce electric cars, batteries and other items that reduce carbon emissions," Jessica Battle, leader of WWF's No Deep Seabed Mining Initiative, said in the press release. "But savvy companies that are committed to sustainability are seeing through that false narrative. Deep seabed mining is an avoidable environmental disaster. We can decarbonize through innovation, redesigning, reducing, reusing and recycling."
- Will the Race for Electric Vehicles Endanger the Seafloor? - EcoWatch ›
- David Attenborough Calls For Ban on Deep-Sea Mining - EcoWatch ›
General Motors is reintroducing the gas-guzzling, military-style vehicle known as The Hummer. This time, it's getting a green makeover as a zero-emissions, fully electric pickup truck, NPR reported.
"The irony is not lost on anyone that this former gas-guzzler is coming back as an electric vehicle," Ivan Drury, Edmunds' senior manager of insights, told NPR. "With that said, by demonstrating that 'big' doesn't necessarily mean inefficient, the Hummer EV also represents a monumental paradigm shift."
The original Hummer, popular in the 90s and 2000s, was discontinued in 2010. Of note, the new zero-emissions version will still be powerful, and going from 0 to 60 mph in three seconds thanks to its 1,0000-horsepower engine, Ars Technica reported.
As for size, Ars Technica added that it will measure more than 18 feet long and nearly 8 feet wide (when you include the mirrors), making it almost as big as a Cadillac Escalade.
The 2022 GMC Hummer EV will be available to the public starting in fall 2021. The first wave, called Edition 1, will retail for $112,595, including destination charges. Starting in 2022, later versions will start at $99,995, followed by models that will cost $10,000 less each year until 2024, CNBC reported.
While the top three vehicles in the country are pickup trucks, the average cost is about $51,000. However, General Motors, believes the target audience is not the average truck driver, but a client who appreciates technological advances.
"This is all about people who just love the best in automotive innovation, performance, capability and technology," GMC Vice President Duncan Aldred told CNBC. "These are the people who you may have seen buy the exotic sports car type brands. This will be the must-have item."
For example, the truck will be able to travel 350 miles on a single charge. It will also sport a new feature allowing it to drive diagonally in "CrabWalk" mode, CNet reported.
The new Hummer EV will have competition, including the Ford F-150 EV, scheduled to hit the market about the same time. Tesla's Cybertruck is also slated to start production in 2021, CNet reported.
"With all of these trucks launching over the next year or two, customers will have to debate whether it's worth rolling the dice and placing a reservation this far out without a test drive," Drury told NPR.
- Trump's Christmas Gift to Big Oil: Killing Hopes of Electric Car Tax ... ›
- Koch Brothers Launch Attack to Kill Electric Cars - EcoWatch ›
- How Norway Convinced Drivers to Switch to Electric Cars - EcoWatch ›
- GM Pledges to Eliminate Gas-Powered Vehicles by 2035 - EcoWatch ›
- Can a Super Bowl Ad Promote Climate Solutions? - EcoWatch ›