Assessing Progress and Equity in the Distribution of EV Rebates

Assessing Progress and Equity

Published in the research journal Transport Policy, this study uses a large amount of relatively recent data and some simple but powerful metrics to inform conversations about the equity of electric vehicle (EV) incentives. It examines demographic and housing metrics to assess where progress is being made and where it needs to be made to increase equity and the widespread adoption of EVs.

Further, it breaks down:

1) Differences between the general population and new-car buyers.

2) Differences between new-car buyers and EV rebate recipients. 

Doing so highlights where, and the degree to which, previous findings that used census data might be more about structural inequities in new-car buying rather than particular to EVs. This helps inform effective strategies for addressing each component of the challenge that remains.

The report:

  • Updates previous demographic characterizations of EV rebate recipients.
  • Compares new-car buyers in general with new EV buyers to inform conversations about EVs, incentives and equity.
  • Shows that home ownership and male gender are associated with new EV purchases more particularly than some metrics of income or race.
  • Develops heat map tables and other metrics to measure progress toward EV adoption by mainstream markets and priority populations.

The State of Electric Vehicle Adoption in the U.S. and the Role of Incentives in Market Transformation

Profile picture for user Center for Sustainable Energy
Submitted by Center for Sus… on Wed, 09/13/2023 - 17:00

CSE FACT SHEET

The transportation system is the largest source of climate-altering U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, making it critically important to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs). 

The Center for Sustainable Energy (CSE), a national nonprofit that designs and administers state, local and utility EV and EV charging incentive programs across the U.S., answers some frequently asked questions about EVs and EV policy.

Key EV Facts

Measures of Impact of New York State Drive Clean Rebate for Electric Vehicles

Drive Clean Rebate

Electric vehicle (EV) rebates in New York have gone predominantly to households with annual incomes less than $200,000 to buy or lease moderately priced EVs to replace older, typically more polluting vehicles. In 2021, 40% of rebate recipients surveyed said they would not have purchased or leased an EV without the rebate.

In this paper for the 36th Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exposition (EVS36), CSE’s Brett Williams, senior principal advisor for electric vehicle programs, and research analyst Nicholas Pallonetti examine 14,000 survey responses from recipients of the New York Drive Clean Rebate to assess the outputs and impacts of the program since 2017, with an emphasis on 2021. Topics analyzed include rebate influence, incidence, beneficiaries and vehicle replacement.

Key takeaways

  • Vehicle price. Despite valid concerns about the high cost of EVs, rebates in New York have predominantly gone to moderately priced EVs.
    • Similar to earlier years, for model year (MY) 2020, 71% of rebates went to EVs with an MSRP under $40,000 (before incentives) – despite the onset of COVID-19.
    • For MY 2021, the percentage under $40,000 fell to 60% as Tesla lost Model 3 share but grew Model Y share at a higher price ($50,000–$60,000).
  • Household income. For 2021 purchases/leases, nearly 71% of rebate funding went to households with annual incomes less than $200,000 and a third had household incomes below $100,000.
  • Consumer characteristics. By 2021, rebate recipients had come to resemble new-car buyers for certain metrics of race/ethnicity and age. Moderate differences remained for home ownership and educational attainment, and larger differences distinguished rebate recipients as having higher incomes and more frequently identifying as male.  
  • Rebate influence.
    • In 2021, 87% of rebate recipients rated the rebate “moderately,” “very” or “extremely important” in making it possible to acquire an EV, up from 2020.
    • Some 40% claimed they would not have purchased/leased without the rebate.
  • Vehicle replacement. Rather than being an additional vehicle for a household, most rebated EVs have replaced older, typically more polluting vehicles (80% in 2021). Over one-quarter of replaced vehicles were 15+ years old and over half were 5+ years old.

Video: Cost-effectiveness of GHG reductions from CVRP incentives

CVRP Rebate Essentials

Over 90 percent of participants in California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Program (CVRP) said the rebate was extremely, very or moderately important in making it possible for them to buy or lease an EV in 2019. For 55%, the rebate was essential.

In other words, reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from these EV purchases would not have happened without the rebates. The cost-effectiveness of the program is better understood when incorporating these metrics of rebate influence.

Dr. Brett Williams, Senior Principal Advisor for Electric Vehicle Programs, presented these findings from research co-authored by Nicholas Pallonetti at a public workshop held by the California Air Resources Board on Feb. 17, 2022. 

  • VIDEO: Cost-effectiveness of GHG reductions from CVRP incentives

The big picture: Counting only the CVRP rebates given to those “Rebate Essential” consumers whose purchase or lease of an EV was highly influenced by the rebate in 2019, that single year of the program is estimated to have saved over 1 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions.

According to the U.S. EPA, that’s similar to swapping out 39 million light bulbs from incandescent to LEDs or letting 17 million trees grow for 10 years.

An EV Consumer Segmentation Roadmap for New York

NYSERDA Report
Strategically Amplifying Participation in the NY Drive Clean Rebate Program

This report summarizes analysis of over 5,400 surveys representing nearly 22,000 consumers who received electric vehicle (EV) rebates in the state of New York. The goal was to understand who is adopting EVs, examine the role rebates have played in EV purchasing decisions, and inform the state’s efforts to move EVs forward.

The report characterizes a series of strategic consumer segments, including:

  • Rebate Essentials,” who would not have acquired an EV without the rebate
  • EV Converts,” who had low or no interest in EVs at the beginning of their car search, and
  • Disadvantaged Communities, defined by the state based on income and economic-opportunity criteria.

Each segment of the report offers its own set of lessons – how to increase rebate cost-effectiveness, how to expand EV markets beyond enthusiastic early adopters, and how to amplify EV purchases by priority populations. Collectively, the segments represent steppingstones on a demographic path from past EV adoption toward mainstream and equitable access to the benefits of transportation electrification.

To view the full report, go to the NYSERDA website and click to download report 21-30: An Electric Vehicle Consumer Segmentation Roadmap. 

Refining Estimates of Fuel-Cycle Greenhouse-Gas Emission Reductions Associated with California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project

Refining Estimates of Fuel-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions Associated with California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project with Program Data

In an article for the journal Energies, CSE researchers Nicholas Pallonetti and Dr. Brett Williams refine and update estimates of the fuel-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts of electric vehicles (EVs) rebated in California. Emissions are estimated using disaggregated data from the start of California's Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) through August 2018 (N = 269,902 participants).

GHG reductions are calculated for the first year of vehicle operation and subsequently scaled to reflect various operational timeframes. GHG reduction estimates over the first year of vehicle ownership total approximately 855 thousand metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions, or 3.2 tons per vehicle. For nonfleet individuals, 54% of reductions are associated with “Rebate-Essential” participants who were most highly influenced by the rebate to purchase/lease. Comparing the estimated warranty-life benefit of 7.9 million tons of GHG reductions to $603 million in corresponding rebates results in $76 of state incentives per metric ton reduced over the first 100,000/150,000 miles of rebated vehicle use.

Though uncertainty in estimates presents opportunities for further refinement, the contributions of this work increased average first-year GHG reductions per vehicle by 35–45% compared to previous work, demonstrating that use of program-derived data can enhance the understanding of EV impacts.

View the full open-source article featured in the Energies journal.

How to Make EVs Affordable to More Consumers

Profile picture for user Fabi Lao
Submitted by Fabi Lao on Thu, 07/08/2021 - 08:23

To expand electric vehicles (EVs) beyond early adopters, we need to make EVs equitably accessible and affordable to more Americans. This requires two core types of incentive programs: 1) incentives for buying new EVs, including increased incentive amounts for low- and moderate-income consumers and 2) incentives for buying used EVs.

To achieve equity goals, these incentives must be provided at the point of sale, rather than as a tax credit, they must be stackable with other incentives provided by utilities or other entities, and there must be meaningful community engagement.

Forecasting Demand for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure: Definitions, Assumptions and Conceptual Models

Forecasting Demand for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

As the U.S. begins a transition away from fossil fuels and toward electric vehicles (EVs), a key question emerges: How are we going to charge all of these new EVs? Forecasting the number of EV charging stations required to meet the needs of EV drivers is complicated due to three sets of issues: 1) A wide range of definitions and equipment, 2) the many assumptions used in forecasts and 3) some fundamental differences in our conceptual models of EV charging. This brief by Nicholas L. Cain, Ph.D., and Amy Lastuka, Ph.D., explores these three areas in more detail and surfaces areas of uncertainty that require more research and analysis.