Trump order freezes funding for Illinois EV charging network

[Jim Lewis]

I'm not going to offer pros and cons on anything else, but as to whether climate change will ever be a factor for anyone, I'd suggest it's just a matter of time until most people wake up to it, if they haven't already. I've lived 35 years in Texas, and it's become noticeably hotter and drier during that time. It will take a while for folks who live in more northern states to get the same wake-up call, but it will come eventually. Let's hope it's not like driving a car off a cliff. You only hit the brakes when it's already too late...

Sponsored

 

[Grumpy2]

Let's hope it's not like driving a car off a cliff. You only hit the brakes when it's already too late...

Amen to that. I have come to believe the greatest threat to our way of life isn't China, or Russia, but it is Big Oil.

 

[Firn]

So what do you propose here. 5 more years? 10 more years? $10 billion? $20 billion? What does it take for these legacy beasts to be able to create a viable product. Is your subsidy never ending. They had plans. Ford put two pure EV's on the road. They built them the most stodgy legacy way they can. So Ford squandered that opportunity. They got their money, I guess they didn't succeed.

Is that what the government should do for other industries. Just keep pouring more money in.? It doesn't work that way.

Oh give me a break with these arguments. Where is your information? Reasoned argument? This is just fear mongering "oh god the government will just spend money forever".

How long? Until manufacturing costs reach parity with legacy autos. I said this already. You could have researched that instead of trying to claim i was proposing 10 years of subsidies, or worse claiming I was proposing a subsidy that never ends.

Then you claim Ford failed in manufacturing them? They made them how they make cars. So did GM. And claiming they didn't succeed? They were the second most popular electric truck last year AND competed against Teslas highly anticipated truck. And yeah, that's looking like it might be a dud, but it still had a few hundred thousand pre-orders and was first year in production.

If those industries compete on the word stage against other players who ARE making progress, and those companies and their related industries are also a SIGNIFICANT portion of the American workforce, then yes, you may need to keep putting money into them. That might eventually stop if you don't have a bipolar government that changes direction every couple years. But It's not like another American company just pops up to replace them here, those jobs will go away and foreign counties will take them. If Forbes can be trusted the IRA contributed to what is now the highest number of auto manufacturing jobs in over three decades. And that doesn't count the jobs building and maintaining the charging networks or building and enhancing the electrical grid.

Bottom line, we are WAY behind the Chinese when it comes to building out electric vehicle manufacturing and that is the way the WORLD is going. Guess where that leaves us...in the dust.

 

[Joneii]

And yet Tesla lost money for what, near fifteen years even WITH those subsidies.

Tesla is an amazing business and DESTROYS the legacy automakers, but even as revolutionary as they are they would not be here today without government subsidies.

The beauty of America is that we can have different ideas and it is ok—in fact, I would argue that it is good. It encourages critical thinking.

I don’t think there is a way to know if Tesla would have succeeded without government interference. My opinion is that they would have. They had strong, dedicated leadership, a good product and they supported it well.

In fact, their charging network is a good example of how a superior product with proper support is superior to government interference. The government chose CCS and mandated that VW build a charging network. I think we need a standard, but I’m a fan of letting the market sort it out. You get a better result (in most cases). Some people may prefer EA to the Supercharger network, but not me.

 

[sotek2345]

I'm not going to offer pros and cons on anything else, but as to whether climate change will ever be a factor for anyone, I'd suggest it's just a matter of time until most people wake up to it, if they haven't already. I've lived 35 years in Texas, and it's become noticeably hotter and drier during that time. It will take a while for folks who live in more northern states to get the same wake-up call, but it will come eventually. Let's hope it's not like driving a car off a cliff. You only hit the brakes when it's already too late...

Unfortunately look at the data, we may already be over the cliff with the accelerator firmly pressed down. We just haven't hit bottom yet.

 

[sotek2345]

So what do you propose here. 5 more years? 10 more years? $10 billion? $20 billion? What does it take for these legacy beasts to be able to create a viable product. Is your subsidy never ending. They had plans. Ford put two pure EV's on the road. They built them the most stodgy legacy way they can. So Ford squandered that opportunity. They got their money, I guess they didn't succeed.

Is that what the government should do for other industries. Just keep pouring more money in.? It doesn't work that way.

Not who you were replying too, but personally I would like to see it go the other way. No subsidies for anything, but the full cost of environmental damage added as a purchase tax to all things, with the price set at the cost to recapture the CO2 and any other chemicals from the environment (very big number). Then let people readjust their spending priorities accordingly.

Those captured tax dollars should either be used directly for environmental cleanup and/or given as a flat credit to everyone.

 

[GDN]

Not who you were replying too, but personally I would like to see it go the other way. No subsidies for anything, but the full cost of environmental damage added as a purchase tax to all things, with the price set at the cost to recapture the CO2 and any other chemicals from the environment (very big number). Then let people readjust their spending priorities accordingly.

Those captured tax dollars should either be used directly for environmental cleanup and/or given as a flat credit to everyone.

It’s an open forum and conversation and I don’t disagree with you.

 

[Firn]

Not who you were replying too, but personally I would like to see it go the other way. No subsidies for anything, but the full cost of environmental damage added as a purchase tax to all things, with the price set at the cost to recapture the CO2 and any other chemicals from the environment (very big number). Then let people readjust their spending priorities accordingly.

Those captured tax dollars should either be used directly for environmental cleanup and/or given as a flat credit to everyone.

I think that the cost of environmental damage is hard to quantify, and also unfortunately may raise much anger as a "green tax".

The alternative I have heard, and like, is that the purchase price must also include the end of life cost, the disposal or recycling cost. Now that is also very hard to quantify, but at least will drive manufacturing and design to consider what is done when the product is no longer usable. This may help prevent situations like Apple and Samsung gluing in their batteries, or Tesla filling the WHOLE BATTERY with foam that is very difficult to remove. Products that have a high recycling cost, aka integral batteries, cost more. Products that are easily recycled cost less. But in either case that cost is paid for at the time of purchase by the consumer.

 

[Brons2]

I for one think NEVI was a disastrous waste of taxpayer money, but I understand that opinion is not popular on an EV forum.

based on what criteria? don't tell me it's the dog whistle that "only 8 chargers have been put in for x billion $"

 

[Brons2]

All this being said, we will never not need fossil fuels. Let‘s just use them in the most efficient way possible. Generating electricity and other things with fossil fuels makes sense. Using petroleum for automobiles is not efficient. This has always seemed like a sensible discussion. Unfortunately now we have all the “EVs, they don’t go very far” crowd convincing folks otherwise. Really stinks to have people just turning their backs on science and innovation. Foolishness

Nuclear and renewables. People just can't get past the construction costs of nuclear for baseload.

 

[luebri]

based on what criteria? don't tell me it's the dog whistle that "only 8 chargers have been put in for x billion $"

Historically, Too inefficient with the money both from a speed and a spend standpoint.

There were dozens coming online every week when the current admin pulled the plug. Government contracting takes a long time. What else is new?

Dozens a week? Source? Genuinely curious where that data is coming if you have a good source.

This site someone on here posted a few months back stated 32 overall installed as of late November 2024. As I taxpayer I do not think 32 stations in 3 years is good execution and government should not get a pass because there always inefficient. That is an interesting square to settle on. Pushing government to run efficiently should be the goal of every taxpayer. Thats not a dog whistle. That is data.

https://www.paren.app/blog/32-nevi-funded-dc-fast-charging-stations-are-now-open

 

[Firn]

There were dozens coming online every week when the current admin pulled the plug. Government contracting takes a long time. What else is new?

This is what folks don't understand. The government process is awful. Yeah, we can all point at it, we can identify that it sucks, but that doesn't actually make it go faster and you can't just go around it. We all wish we could fix it, but we cant fix it or ignore it to make this happen.

But that isn't even half the point. This isn't "oh, look, money, go install chargers". The states had to institute their own processes, and that started with even formulating a REQUEST to the government for the money. And some of those took time. You don't want to have some junior person, or any person really, just suddenly decide that chargers are going to go here, there, and over there. You need to understand traffic patterns. you need to understand where chargers would be useful. You need to understand where there are chargers, you also need to understand where there will be chargers. What are we expecting here, just drop more chargers in big cities? Great, that isn't really helping since most already have chargers. So maybe drop them in rural areas. Does that make sense? Are there even any EVs there? Each and every one of these decisions takes time, needs a process, has to garner inputs, consolidate inputs and review. And THEN there is execution, which also includes site surveys, site purchasing, etc. I'm not trying to justify the delay, but this is not some guy handed money and he just runs and puts down chargers where he feels like it.

Oh, and each one of those steps is likely handled by someone who still has another job to do. And IF its contracted, well guess what, contracting also has others contracts. Heck, where I work we start contracts 6 months before we need them in effect.

 

[Firn]

Pushing government to run efficiently should be the goal of every taxpayer. Thats not a dog whistle.

It doesn't matter. It is what it is. Nobody could go around it, and this in itself won't fix it. The people executing this process cant fix it. There are hundreds of layers that need to be fixed and if money going through the process could fix it then that would already be done.

Because the government could not execute quickly does not mean it wasn't taking place or that it shouldn't be done. Those sites will be active for decades, 3 years is annoying, and stupid, but doesn't decrease the utility any.

 

[luebri]

This is what folks don't understand. The government process is awful. Yeah, we can all point at it, we can identify that it sucks, but that doesn't actually make it go faster and you can't just go around it. We all wish we could fix it, but we cant fix it or ignore it to make this happen.

But that isn't even half the point. This isn't "oh, look, money, go install chargers". The states had to institute their own processes, and that started with even formulating a REQUEST to the government for the money. And some of those took time. You don't want to have some junior person, or any person really, just suddenly decide that chargers are going to go here, there, and over there. You need to understand traffic patterns. you need to understand where chargers would be useful. You need to understand where there are chargers, you also need to understand where there will be chargers. What are we expecting here, just drop more chargers in big cities? Great, that isn't really helping since most already have chargers. So maybe drop them in rural areas. Does that make sense? Are there even any EVs there? Each and every one of these decisions takes time, needs a process, has to garner inputs, consolidate inputs and review. And THEN there is execution, which also includes site surveys, site purchasing, etc. I'm not trying to justify the delay, but this is not some guy handed money and he just runs and puts down chargers where he feels like it.

Oh, and each one of those steps is likely handled by someone who still has another job to do. And IF its contracted, well guess what, contracting also has others contracts. Heck, where I work we start contracts 6 months before we need them in effect.

I understand everything you stated. You make my argument for me. All those reasons are reasons I did not support NEVI funding.

 

[Brons2]

I retract my prior post. I mistook "ports" for "stations". But, the evidence I found was even better.

After reading the background, a number of the state formula funding announcements were not made until 2 years after the bill was passed and this doesn't count disbursements, which were originally to be made in FY23-27.

The first station broke ground on Oct. 18, 2023! So, saying that 8 stations were online for xyz billion is still a dog whistle. The contracts hadn't even been awarded, in most cases, and you can track the state level contract awards in the links below.

This was all a very convenient vector for a point in time attack for certain media pundits. This was then picked up by many people of a certain political persuasion.

Please, tell me why this is not extremely disingenuous and designed to appeal to a certain political opinion that the "free market" should do everything.

There are quarterly updates on awarded contracts which contain the state level block grant info:

https://driveelectric.gov/news/q4-2024-nevi-quarterly-update

https://driveelectric.gov/news/q3-2024-nevi-quarterly-update

https://driveelectric.gov/news/q2-2024-quarterly-nevi-update

https://driveelectric.gov/news/nevi-update-q1

https://driveelectric.gov/news/nevi-progress-update

These are most of the stations that were awarded and announced, on a map, with the caveat that "We are in the process of adding chargers in Iowa, Oregon, Delaware, and California. We are also updating the status of chargers in Texas."

https://pluginamerica.org/nevi-funding-tracking/

The fact that it took 2 years to spin up the priocess for funding is not great, but, things are happening. At least, they were until the change of administration. Not sure what the status of these things will be now.

Sponsored