Incentives, not mandates, will fuel state’s transition to electric vehicles
As our nation seeks to combat climate chaos by reducing carbon emissions, several states have passed electric vehicle mandates that are poised to disrupt traditional transportation — and the transit-related economy — like no other era in modern history. As the Connecticut legislature considers a ban on internal combustion engine vehicles, the time has come to ask whether these mandates are sensible, and more importantly, will consumers buy in?
To be clear, New England’s service station owners and fuel distributors fully support reducing all forms of carbon emissions — including those from transportation — and seek to provide all customers with a convenient retail experience, regardless of their chosen drivetrain. Many of our members have already installed EV charging equipment, or plan to do so soon, despite an uncertain return on their investment. We understand that we have a critical role to play in meeting the fueling needs of the public, through traditional motor fuels, electricity, hydrogen fuel cells, or whatever comes next.
However, we are opposed to government mandates that will restrict vehicle choice for consumers. Mandates will unduly burden lower-and-middle class consumers, jeopardize regional competitiveness, reduce state tax receipts, and add additional strain to an electrical grid that is not ready for a sudden influx of electricity demand.
The question that advocates seek to put before the Connecticut legislature is whether the Nutmeg State should join neighboring Massachusetts and Rhode Island in adopting California’s emissions regulations. If so, then 35% of new car sales will need to be zero-emission vehicles by 2026 and 68% by 2030. By 2035, the sale of new gas-powered vehicles will be banned in the state altogether.
While these efforts are designed to force car buyers to make the jump to electric, there are major hurdles that will most impact low- and middle-income consumers.
The average cost of an electric vehicle is still far greater than a similar internal combustion engine vehicle, and many Connecticut residents will simply be priced out of this transition. Not everyone can afford to install a home charger, and those who do not own their own home will not even have that option. Those without home chargers will be forced to rely on public networks that are currently unreliable at best in most areas, and simply nonexistent in many places.
Connecticut residents are clearly not yet ready to fully embrace the transition to electric vehicles, largely because of a lack of consumer confidence but also due to the stark reality that overhauling a century-old industry ingrained in our culture does not happen in a few years. A recent poll of 500 registered likely voters in Connecticut found that 59% of those surveyed opposed a potential ban on the sale of new gas and diesel-powered cars and trucks, with 63% of independent voters, or nonpartisan voters, expressing their opposition. Importantly, 69% of respondents said that such a measure would disproportionately affect low-income families.
The poll illustrates that the average Connecticut voter seems to grasp what advocates have steadfastly refused to admit: mandates don’t work, and banning gas-powered vehicles will place the electrification burden firmly on those that can least afford it.
Our stations are located along many of the busiest roadways and intersections across New England and must be part of the plan as we create infrastructure to support the transition to electric transportation. If federal and state governments are serious about a transition to electric vehicles, then they should prioritize incentives that encourage the development of the infrastructure that is necessary to charge electric vehicles. Incentives, not mandates, will fuel this transition.
Rushing into pacts that most harm working families without considering economic fallout and potential hardships is a disservice to our most vulnerable. If we are to successfully make advances toward curbing emissions, we need to align interests, devise logical and rational strategies, and create true partnerships that work for all stakeholders.
We all want cleaner air, drinkable water, and a healthy planet, as well as safe roadways and convenient, reliable, and efficient transportation. Hastily forcing misguided and unrealistic policies onto consumers – without the proper infrastructure in place — is not only burdensome and unfair, it is a recipe for failure.