Bipartisan bills would stimulate electric vehicle infrastructure

By | May 28, 2010, 5:16am PDT

Summary: What’s this? Legislation that both Republicans and Democrats are pushing? Together? Too bad that the industry they are trying to support, automobile makers, appear less than excited about their idea. Both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate have proposed legislation calling for work on creating the foundation for electric vehicles to be used more broadly. [...]

What’s this? Legislation that both Republicans and Democrats are pushing? Together? Too bad that the industry they are trying to support, automobile makers, appear less than excited about their idea.

Both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate have proposed legislation calling for work on creating the foundation for electric vehicles to be used more broadly. Both bodies are proposing to set up pilot communities that would pay out consumer incentives to get residents to switch over to electric vehicles.

The House bill, called the “Electric Drive Vehicle Deployment Act of 2010,” is supported by Ed Markey (D.-Mass.), Judy Biggert (R.-Ill.) and Anna Eshoo (D.-Calif.) Markey is the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. The legislation would award $800 million to five communities around the United States, which the goal of deploying 700,000 electric vehicles over the next six years. Residents would receive $2,000 incentives to buy the cars (at least the first 100,000), and any American would be available for a tax credit that would reduce the cost of buying an electric vehicle by $7,500. Consumer and businesses would also get money for setting up charging stations.

In a statement, Rep. Biggert said: “The [act] will accelerate the deployment of electric vehicles and put new energy technologies within the reach of more consumers and motorists. It also will help regional communities establish themselves as models for the development and installation of the next generation of transportation infrastructure, including public charging stations.”

The Senate bill is backed by Byron Dorgan (D.-N.D.), Lamar Alexander (R.-Tenn.) and Jeff Merkeley (D.-Ore.) It would spend a bit less money, although it proposes selecting a larger number of communities (up to 15) that would receive grants of $250 million to get on board the early work in building out a viable electric vehicle infrastructure. Some larger hybrids would also be covered; there is also money set aside for research and development.

The Electrification Coalition, which is an organization that represents various members of the electric vehicle, is all sorts of happy about the legislation. The group actually released a suggested roadmap for infrastructure last fall. About a month ago, the group also published what is calls an economic impact study. Among its findings:

  • By 2030, electric vehicles would have the effect of creating 1.9 million new jobs, including 560,000 in manufacturing.
  • By that time, the typical household would be able to direct $3,687 saved in energy for transportation back into other spending.
  • Cumulatively, between 2011 and 2020, the study suggests that the United States would import nearly 11.9 billion fewer barrels of crude oil than it would otherwise have imported.

In some of the initial coverage of the new legislation, a spokeswoman for the Association of Automobile Manufacturers suggested it was too elitist. So, even though the bills have bipartisan backing, you can bet there will be the usual squawking associated with an established segment wanting to prevent upstarts from getting a leg up.

Personally speaking, I’m conflicted on electric vehicles. Despite the impact study, we as Americans drive around so much that we really need to address what sort of energy will juice up these charging stations. Sure, we’re decreasing our oil dependency; instead, we’re firing up the coal plants to create the electricity to charge up our cars and trucks.

Poll

The electric vehicle infrastructure and industry

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Heather Clancy is an award-winning business journalist with a passion for green technology and corporate sustainability issues.

Disclosure

Heather Clancy

Writing publicly about what the high-tech industry is actually doing to help itself and the world get greener or more sustainable is one way I figure I can contribute more meaningfully to said effort. I am also a big OMG-kind-of-fan of smart leadership, which is why the goodly folks who publish this blog let me go on about this topic and why I am always on the hunt for forward-looking business management ideas.

My daily writing is focused on looking for topics for my blogs, GreenTech Pastures and Business Brains. I also write often about emerging technology trends such as mobile computing, unified communications and cloud computing. Occasionally, I will pop up at an industry conference in some sort of speaking capacity. In cases where a speaking engagement involves a sponsor that may be covered in this blog, that fact will be disclosed in coverage as appropriate.

My corporate writing work usually consists of crafting research white papers about some aspect of technology. In the event that my commentary (in written, audio or video form) mentions a company for which I have provided consulting advice, I will disclose that fact. However, there is no connection between these projects and the topics that I am covering in my blog.

Biography

Heather Clancy

Heather Clancy is an award-winning business journalist with a passion for green technology and corporate sustainability issues. Her articles have appeared in Entrepreneur, Fortune Small Business, The International Herald Tribune and The New York Times. In a past corporate life, Heather was editor of Computer Reseller News, where she was a featured speaker about everything from software as a service to IT security to mobile computing.

Heather started her journalism life as a business writer with United Press International in New York. She holds a B.A. in English literature from McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, and has a thing for Lewis Carroll.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
12
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Bipartisan bills would stimulate electric vehicle infrastructure
ramdasviky 4th Jun 2010
@msd1107 EVs do not create more problems than IC engine vehicles. There are many no. of ways to produce electricity without creating environmental pollution. The increasing contribution of wind, solar and other renewables in elec. power production will only benefit the EVs. Further, its easier to control the emission of pollutants into the atmosphere, in a centralized power station compared to the present day vehicles, which are distributed sources of the pollutants.
Yes, some of the issues regarding frequent charging required for EVs has to be addressed, but improvements in the performance and design can be expected, only when the market size of EVs reach a critical mass. And thats exactly what the bill is trying to do.
Contrary to your point "...you can bet there will be the usual squawking associated with an established segment wanting to prevent upstarts from getting a leg up"...

General Motors spokesman Greg Martin praised the bills.
"We appreciate Congress' foresight and interest in electric vehicles," he said. "With the Chevrolet Volt just months away from the showroom, we believe the timing is right to start working on policies that can accelerate early consumer adoption of advanced electric vehicle technologies." Detroit News
http://www.autotalk.com/gm-unveils-en-v-concept-3630/

This is great for the people who are visually impaired to let the electric network vehicle auto-drive to any destination they want to go.

But I do like to use my bike to travel in the road, but the street near my apartment complex has the speed limit of 45 miles per hour. It won't let me, as a beginner cyclist. sad I do have trouble riding my bike in the sidewalk, but I don't like to be in a sidewalk, because I'll just walk my bike if I do choose to use the sidewalk. It's pointless.

The street I'm talking about is North Chickasaw Trail, where I can enter/leave the apartment complex.
0 Votes
+ -
It could be simpler,
No_Ax_to_Grind 28th May 2010
Cities could pass an ordanance that restricts gasoline powered autos.

No folks, you do NOT need a 300 HP gas burner to commute to work and back everyday.
0 Votes
+ -
get to the heart of the matter: They should get to tell you how to live your life. Because they are just so d@mned smarter and more moral than you are.
Some people are just stupid. It's why we have laws.
collapse and we still have idiot leftists in this government (in both parties) who think that artificially propping an economy with borrowed money will bring about utopia.
0 Votes
+ -
Thank the idiot rightists too...
jasonp@... 28th May 2010
after all, what have they done to help? Nada, that's what.
If you keep pushing environmentally toxic electric cars before they're ready for prime time you'll make matters worse not better. Build comfortably sized cars with comparable acceleration and speed as todays gas powered cars. Build them with capacity to go at least 400 miles between recharging/refuleing and the ability to fully do so in around 5 minutes. Build them with energy storage systems that aren't expensive, dont need to be replaced for 15-20 years of typical use, and don't require any hazardous or toxic materials that need special treatment during manufacture or recycling. Build them so we can repower them at home. Build them so they acheive this on about 10% of the energy that current electric cars use so we dont have to build thousands of new power generators to repower them.

Do this engineering up front so youre not losing so much switching and you wont have do this crap social engineering. People will flock to it on their own
The problem is that the amount of engineering that you want done 'up front', Johnny Vegas, is enormously expensive, and probably not economically viable.
Companies need to see a return on their investment in these vehicles, they can't tinker with them until they are perfect.
Combustion vehicles have been around for over 100 years, so of course we have had a LOT of time to refine them. Electric vehicles aren't going to be able to do everything you ask for right away, and if production of them was held until such time as they could do all of those things they probably would never even be released at all.
Progress usually comes in inches, not miles.
Well said Lokiio!!
Do not stimulate the production of EVs, they create more problems. Consider, a modern IC vehicle is SULEV or PZEV, often emitting pollution products less than the ambient air. Electric generators are not so well regulated. Electric generators are sophisticated businesses. They generate electricity for an optimum cost and/or pollution, whether in high demand times on a hot afternoon or a low demand time at night. Thus, if an EV plugs in to recharge, the electricity furnished will be, at a minimum, the currently most costly or most polluting. If more capacity needs to be brought on-line, the cost and/or pollution will be even higher. There is just no to escape this fact.

EVs consume more energy and/or generate more pollution except under favorable situations like low speed, short distance, and stop/go driving. But consider a Tesla and a Prius driving from San Francisco to LA on Interstate 5 at the prevailing 75 mph. THe Tesla will consume much more energy than the Prius, and will need recharging 6 times. Some high performance car! To see this, down load the spreadsheet at bit.ly/auHe4d which goes into this in more detail.
@msd1107 EVs do not create more problems than IC engine vehicles. There are many no. of ways to produce electricity without creating environmental pollution. The increasing contribution of wind, solar and other renewables in elec. power production will only benefit the EVs. Further, its easier to control the emission of pollutants into the atmosphere, in a centralized power station compared to the present day vehicles, which are distributed sources of the pollutants.
Yes, some of the issues regarding frequent charging required for EVs has to be addressed, but improvements in the performance and design can be expected, only when the market size of EVs reach a critical mass. And thats exactly what the bill is trying to do.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix