Virginia and Connecticut Slam the Brakes on Imposing California-Style EV Mandates
It turns out that the math behind EVs doesn’t compute.
Back in 2020, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law the California Air Resources Board phase-out plan that would require “100 percent zero-emissions personal use and drayage vehicles by 2035 and as many medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicle applications deemed feasible by 2045.”
The state began phasing in this insanity in 2022. Currently, 11 other states have essentially adopted California’s ludicrous rules: Oregon, New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Vermont, Virginia, Colorado, Maryland, Delaware, New Mexico, and New Jersey.
Earlier this year, Maine was poised to be Lucky 13, but those plans were nixed. Now, Connecticut lawmakers have jettisoned plans to follow California into the energy abyss.
Citing a lack of support for the more aggressive deadline, Connecticut’s Democratic leadership left out California’s mandate to require all new cars to be equipped with electric or plug-in hybrid engine technology by 2035 from the Constitution State’s long-awaited EV bill. This move follows the Biden administration’s decision to defer adoption of the federal EV transition timeline, which is significantly less aggressive than the California plan.
“For people that were skeptical that we could meet the harder standard, and then you have the president and the White House saying they cannot meet the lower standard, you can imagine how that caucus would have gone,” Connecticut House speaker Matt Ritter told CT Insider. “It’s like saying, if we can’t hit the 40 mph fastball, how’re we going to hit the 80 mph fastball?”
Furthermore, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin recently announced that his state will slash the breaks on its EV mandate at the end of the year.
“The idea that government should tell people what kind of car they can or can’t purchase is fundamentally wrong,” Youngkin said in a statement. “Virginians deserve the freedom to choose which vehicles best fit the needs of their families and businesses. The law is clear, and I am proud to announce Virginians will no longer be forced to live under this out-of-touch policy.”
…Ultimately, California’s more aggressive rules provided the legal justification for Virginia’s withdrawal. Youngkin’s press release claims that H.B. 1965 merely authorized the state to follow Advanced Clean Cars I, the rules in place at the time that went through 2025. “An opinion from Attorney General Jason Miyares confirms the law, as written, does not require Virginia to follow ACC II [the California-based standard that expanded the requirements],” the press release continues. “Therefore, the Commonwealth will follow federal emissions standards on January 1, 2025.”
The citizens of Connecticut and Virginia should be grateful for these moves. RealClearEnergy contributor Duggan Flanakin recently examined the math behind EV use and demonstrated that it simply doesn’t compute.
Without an EV in the garage, air conditioning uses nearly a fifth of household electricity, followed by space heating and water heating (a combined 25%). But adding just one home-charged EV changes that calculus dramatically. The EV takes up about 30% ot the much higher total electricity use, dropping the share for all other uses significantly.
Two home-charged EVs would eat up nearly half the household’s total electricity usage – and require thousands of dollars to upgrade the house’s electric panel. Today’s 50-kva transformers, which cost about $8,000 each, can power about 60 homes; that number drops closer to 40 if each of those homes houses one electric vehicle, closer to 30 with two EVs using home chargers.
For a city with 120,000 homes, which today may require about 2,000 transformers, the addition of 120,000 home-charged electric vehicles means adding 1,000 transformers, about $8 million. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg, because distributing 50 to 100% more household electricity requires generating 50 to 100% more electricity.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
its an election year
they know they are lying
we know they are lying
the vote counters only matta
fjb
The apartment complex where I live would need a bare minimum of 75 charging stations if every apartment had one EV. That’s assuming they all wouldn’t need to use them at the same time, which is probably a shaky assumption–since most of the tenants are commuters most will probably be charging them at night.
I wonder what it would cost to not only install the chargers but also to maintain them. With rent already skyrocketing I shudder to think what the impact of that will be.
Then they should implement the charger installations immediately before the election.
Raise those rents, triple them and let the renters know it was those who voted for the democrats that caused their rates to triple, and that future rates will only go higher and there isn’t a guarantee that the cost of using the chargers won’t triple as coal and gas are taken out of the electrical grid and solar, wind and political promises are all that is left.
Connecticut? That’s inconceivable.
Whenever Democrats create a stupid mandate, Connecticut is traditionally one of the first to lie back and spread ’em.
Connecticut saying no to the loony left is like NPR endorsing a Republican.
Maybe “smash the brakes” instead of “slash the breaks”?
“For a city with 120,000 homes, which today may require about 2,000 transformers, the addition of 120,000 home-charged electric vehicles means adding 1,000 transformers, about $8 million. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg, because distributing 50 to 100% more household electricity requires generating 50 to 100% more electricity.”
Somebody please inform Elon Musk.
But what the leftists really want is for that city with 120,000 homes to have zero cars.
The question is, is Musk foolish enough to get high on his own supply?
I think he just deals for the Benjamins, like any other successful dealer.
A problem that is just beginning to become apparent is the sharply increased insurance cost for parking garages and buildings with indoor parking if EV charging is permitted. With “gasoline cars” fires were rare and usually didn’t damage other cars or the structure significantly. However EV fires have the potential to do massive damage.
Many states currently have laws that won’t permit building owners to ban EVs but the insurers are still free to increase rates or even to decline coverage.
As (If) the EV fleet expands as diktat requires insurance is going to become a real issue.
https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20240501/NEWS06/912364039/Rising-fire-risks-drive-parking-garage-scrutiny
And to that we can add the increased cost of personal auto insurance. Even a minor accident that in any way damages the battery can result in the huge of cost of replacing the battery.
No they’ll just write it off in total the car.
Not a surprising outcome for Virginia because they actually have a fairly Common Sense guy in charge there. Connecticut I’m kind of surprised at. They must have let someone who can do basic arithmetic look at the problem.
What they are seeing in CA is that the 20-year design life of the transformers is shortened to 5 years because they were designed to cool down at night. With all the EVs charging at night the transformers never cool down. At our house in SF bay area we have lost power three times this past week for 3-5 hours each time…. it was only 105F outside……uuuugggh!
Rolling blackouts.
I am a retired Electrical Engineer. There are many issues with EVs: 1) Cost, 2) Charging Stations at home and about not being enough, 3) Insurance Cost, 4) Problems with accidents that will cause total replacement even if small accident, 5) Problems with batteries that cause outages for long periods and fires, 6) lack of time with battery before they start to degrade distance, 7) software problems, and 8) EVs are heavy which cause problems to roads and in accidents.
As there are more EVs our national electrical system cannot handle it. Most people are not buying EVs but if they want anything to help against fuel they will buy hybrid vehicles.
Question for you, JG. When the gas engine kicks in, is any part of the electricity generated by the alternator going to re-charging the battery for the electric motor? If so, is it a significant enough amount of electricity to offset the cost of the batteries should they need to be replaced?
I am waiting for the price of EVs to crash, then pick one or more up for their battery packs. The pack can stay in the EV, with its battery storing and powering stationary loads.
Then the EV can be used for short runs.
There is a lot of research going into battery tech, with very promising traits.
The most common battery tech for both stationary and EV use LiFePo4 batteries. These are fairly safe, but the Fe stands for iron, and that makes them heavy.
For EVs to be practical, we need at least 10 times the capacity at a quarter or less the current weight.
Current EVs are so heavy that they are a hazard to other motorists.
Dems:
1. slam brakes on Biden
2. slam brakes on supporting Israel
3. slam brakes on EV mandates
Must be an election year.
It’s not about “climate change” or “saving the planet.”
The “issue” is never the issue.
It’s about CONTROL, full stop.
The “issue” is never the issue
Reminds me of reporters asking lying Jean-Pierre a question—the “answer” is never the answer.
Random thought, if California is only permitting personal and drayage EVs to be sold by 2035, and potentially medium and heavy duty EV (trucks) by 2045, then fuel may no longer be sold in California. How will interstate trucking work then? Non-Californian trucks potentially won’t be able to refuel in California, and Californian EV trucks won’t be able to leave the state without running flat fast.
Is California going to end up being a de facto trade embargoed island where only EVs function, assuming the power is working? Will the rest of America simply leave California behind in the dust as a Third World Hellhole and example of how never to run a state?
I’m thinking CA will have to establish cargo exchange “ports” behind every “Welcome to California” sign on major highways.
Massive transfer stations at major border crossing. Trucks from America pull in, drop their trailers, and then go across the yard and pick up any outgoing freight from California. The electric trucks will then pick up the trailers to work headed from America into California and proceed over the border.
” Oregon, New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Vermont, Virginia, Colorado, Maryland, Delaware, New Mexico, and New Jersey.”
This is the list of insane states too lazy to look into this farce and come up with more practical and reasonable ideas. They killed Diesel cars in these states as well.
If you are going to copy someone’s work, pick the smartest kid in the class, not the dumbass in the back of the room (that’s you, Californica).
I like to think that Virginia is salvageable, but I fear the suburban DC cancer will just keep metastasizing. The rest of the list are terminal.
Wife’s company wanted to switch to an all electric truck fleet. Local power company laughed at them and told them there was no capacity in the grid for it.