If VW Group does not plan to release any H2 vehicles in California, they rightfully should be resistant to putting any of the required ZEV investment into H2 infrastructure.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
VW Fallout: $2.0 Billion for ZEV Infrastructure Buildout
- Thread starter RubberToe
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
You have way more trust in Sacramento than I do. If you assume Sacramento does not have a history of saying one thing, then doing something else to benefit themselves, family, and friends, you haven't followed our politics much.
A tourist area would showcase California's Green ambitions, not Sacramento. Sacramento is a place you drive through, not a destination. Well, that is unless you are in the state government.
Remember that the head of CARB does not drive an EV, she drives a Mirai.
In Jerry we Trust! E Pluribus Californium!
I do agree San Diego would have been a better green city choice than Sacramento. Pasadena would obviously been the BEST choice
RT
In Jerry we Trust! E Pluribus Californium!
I do agree San Diego would have been a better green city choice than Sacramento. Pasadena would obviously been the BEST choice
RT
Pasadena would have been another wise choice. It's seen by much of the world once a year. All the floats running on EV power? All the taxis being electric? Turn it into the 'Sturgis Rally' of EV owners? That would be cool. Fremont would be another good choice for obvious reasons.
Sacramento was chosen for only a single reason.
e-FTW
New electron smell
Translation: "money will be made, and we will go with as little effort as possible" - Signed, VW
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
While I could imagine that the choice of Sacramento is "wetting some beaks", I also notice that all the other cities on the list are coastal. So maybe some political pressure to do something "inland".
Also, regardless of the ugliness of how the sausage is made, Sacramento may be a great choice! So a whole bunch of politicians and farmers will get exposed to (what I hope will be) a working set of EVs and chargers.
I do sincerely hope that H2 continues to fade over the horizon, until/unless someone comes up with cheap zero emissions hydrogen production. And if this first cycle doesn't include H2, it's hard to believe that H2 is going to be MORE attractive two years from now. If VW turns out to be serous about EVs, THEY are certainly not going to be interested in investing in H2.
Alan
Also, regardless of the ugliness of how the sausage is made, Sacramento may be a great choice! So a whole bunch of politicians and farmers will get exposed to (what I hope will be) a working set of EVs and chargers.
I do sincerely hope that H2 continues to fade over the horizon, until/unless someone comes up with cheap zero emissions hydrogen production. And if this first cycle doesn't include H2, it's hard to believe that H2 is going to be MORE attractive two years from now. If VW turns out to be serous about EVs, THEY are certainly not going to be interested in investing in H2.
Alan
Having lived in California my whole life, from San Diego to Smith River, I can tell you Sacramento is a waste of a great opportunity.
First you need to be aware of what California is. Almost 1/2 the land is owned by the Feds. The coastal areas are where most of the people live. California is mountainous, with huge forests, low deserts (hottest on earth), high deserts, and of course the coast areas. Most the people with EVs are in the Southern California area simply because that's where most the people live, the southern coastal region.
Tourism is a major California industry, with tourists arriving from all over the world year round. Sacramento is not where they go.
Best guess is the politicians have significant land holdings in the Sacramento area, and are hoping to see a bump in their real estate investments. That's how we roll here.
PS - I live in the Inland Empire today, which is in Southern California but away from the crowded coastal region.
cpa
Active Member
McRat, your cynicism makes me look like Pollyanna!
I grew up in LA County, spent four years in Shasta County and have been in the heart of the San Joaquin Valley the past 30. Anyway, much of what you say is true.
However, I will just throw this out there as a possibility. Sacramento makes perfect sense for these installations because it is at the only major junction for east-west travel (80 and 50) and north-south travel (5 and 99) in the interior of the state. It is the gateway for outdoor activity year around. I would submit to you that Sacramento makes much more sense than Bakersfield or Barstow for this very reason. I really cannot think of any other hub in the interior that would attract as much traffic as Sacramento day after day. There have been many people on this website who have raved about the snow we have received this winter and have driven their Teslas to ski resorts and ski slopes for the day or for the weekend. I would suppose that there might be a lot of other people who would by other BEVs that enjoy weekend trips to ski or to gambol among the gamblers in Reno.
Of course political malfeasance cannot be dismissed. Let's see how this plays out. . .
I grew up in LA County, spent four years in Shasta County and have been in the heart of the San Joaquin Valley the past 30. Anyway, much of what you say is true.
However, I will just throw this out there as a possibility. Sacramento makes perfect sense for these installations because it is at the only major junction for east-west travel (80 and 50) and north-south travel (5 and 99) in the interior of the state. It is the gateway for outdoor activity year around. I would submit to you that Sacramento makes much more sense than Bakersfield or Barstow for this very reason. I really cannot think of any other hub in the interior that would attract as much traffic as Sacramento day after day. There have been many people on this website who have raved about the snow we have received this winter and have driven their Teslas to ski resorts and ski slopes for the day or for the weekend. I would suppose that there might be a lot of other people who would by other BEVs that enjoy weekend trips to ski or to gambol among the gamblers in Reno.
Of course political malfeasance cannot be dismissed. Let's see how this plays out. . .
It really depends on why you would want to focus a significant chunk of the funds for creating an EV friendly city.
I would pick a city that would be a 'force multiplier' for showcasing modern EV technology. The more people who visit it, and the more locations they come from, the more effect each dollar spent will have.
The more I think about it, the more San Diego makes sense as an EV Showcase.
1) It has the most moderate climate in the USA, or perhaps the world. It is never cold, never hot. People wear jackets when it dips into the high 60's, and many homes do not even have air conditioning. My friend just sold her $1.5 million home and it had no AC, nor did it ever need it. EV's LOVE moderate climates.
2) The city has the world's best zoo for a reason. The entire Balboa Park region is not only beautiful, it's green year round. San Diego was 'Green' before being green was cool.
3) Selecting a target that is in a corner amplifies your grid dollars. In other words, it takes ~33% resources to cover a 50 mile radius when you start in a coastal corner. You don't have cover Mexico or the ocean.
4) It also has 3 times the population of Sac.
So EVs will function better in SD with more range and more battery lifespan, they will look better in SD, and it you will be able to spend 3 times as much money per sq mile in SD than in a inland target.
I would pick a city that would be a 'force multiplier' for showcasing modern EV technology. The more people who visit it, and the more locations they come from, the more effect each dollar spent will have.
The more I think about it, the more San Diego makes sense as an EV Showcase.
1) It has the most moderate climate in the USA, or perhaps the world. It is never cold, never hot. People wear jackets when it dips into the high 60's, and many homes do not even have air conditioning. My friend just sold her $1.5 million home and it had no AC, nor did it ever need it. EV's LOVE moderate climates.
2) The city has the world's best zoo for a reason. The entire Balboa Park region is not only beautiful, it's green year round. San Diego was 'Green' before being green was cool.
3) Selecting a target that is in a corner amplifies your grid dollars. In other words, it takes ~33% resources to cover a 50 mile radius when you start in a coastal corner. You don't have cover Mexico or the ocean.
4) It also has 3 times the population of Sac.
So EVs will function better in SD with more range and more battery lifespan, they will look better in SD, and it you will be able to spend 3 times as much money per sq mile in SD than in a inland target.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
The city has not been selected yet but this article in the Sacramento Bee gives some background.
Sacramento was one of several cities that applied for the funding and competed against Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles and others. Sacramento ranked in the top position in almost all categories, said Rivas. Fresno is also receiving consideration, said Sacramento city sustainability manager Jennifer Venema.
Some of the criteria that helped push Sacramento to the top choice highlight the city’s problems.
Volkswagen wanted a test city that needed air quality improvement. Sacramento has the sixth highest rate of ozone pollution of any city in the U.S. and is in the top 20 percent for exposure to diesel particulate matter, according to the city’s proposal to Volkswagen.
The automaker also looked for a city where an increase in electric vehicles could help disadvantaged neighborhoods. In Sacramento, almost 50 percent of households earn less than 80 percent of the area median income, and some of the lowest earners such as the elderly and large families have the greatest transportation challenges. Improving access to light rail for disadvantaged communities has been an ongoing struggle for Sacramento and the region, said Steinberg.
Read more here: Court-ordered Volkswagen settlement could bring millions to Sacramento
Sacramento was one of several cities that applied for the funding and competed against Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles and others. Sacramento ranked in the top position in almost all categories, said Rivas. Fresno is also receiving consideration, said Sacramento city sustainability manager Jennifer Venema.
Some of the criteria that helped push Sacramento to the top choice highlight the city’s problems.
Volkswagen wanted a test city that needed air quality improvement. Sacramento has the sixth highest rate of ozone pollution of any city in the U.S. and is in the top 20 percent for exposure to diesel particulate matter, according to the city’s proposal to Volkswagen.
The automaker also looked for a city where an increase in electric vehicles could help disadvantaged neighborhoods. In Sacramento, almost 50 percent of households earn less than 80 percent of the area median income, and some of the lowest earners such as the elderly and large families have the greatest transportation challenges. Improving access to light rail for disadvantaged communities has been an ongoing struggle for Sacramento and the region, said Steinberg.
Read more here: Court-ordered Volkswagen settlement could bring millions to Sacramento
So they are saying Sacramento should be the showcase city BECAUSE it's a cesspool?
OK, now I see the logic that got Jerry's Kids running the show.
This is what will happen:
Sacramento will still be a cesspool 5 years from now just because of what it is. A farming center and truck stop. We will prove to Californians and the World that EVs do not work. People can't afford them and they can't clean Class 8 and off-highway diesel exhaust.
Last edited:
I would also argue that 700 EVs themselves will not make an impact on a city with roughly 250,000 cars, You can showcase, but you should not expect change from that small of an effort.
Show the state, the country, and the world, how nice it can be in an EV World. Not how nasty a truck stop can be.
Show the state, the country, and the world, how nice it can be in an EV World. Not how nasty a truck stop can be.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
I agree completely that Sacramento is a backwater town and lacks natural beauty of the coastal and mountain regions.
I would challenge your assumption that more EVs are located in Southern California ... my sense is that Northern California wins the EV race.
I agree completely that Sacramento is a backwater town and lacks natural beauty of the coastal and mountain regions.
I would challenge your assumption that more EVs are located in Southern California ... my sense is that Northern California wins the EV race.
It's simply a numbers game.
There are about 24 million living south of the San Berdo County line, and 15 million living north of it.
Using the CVRP rebate data, you can confirm this theory. As of February 1, 2017 the following air districts have these total numbers of rebates from the program:
Other air districts have less than 500 rebates each, so I didn't bother to total them up. There is a clear winner in the North-South distribution.
Source: Clean Vehicle Rebate Project Rebate Map
VW's draft plan says:
Car & Driver ran an article 3 days ago noting that:
It may not be a done deal but it sure looks like the default outcome at this point.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
Here are more detailed stats on the installation plan and schedule from VW.
VW is installing ultra-fast 320 kW chargers in California as part of its $2 billion EV infrastructure plan
Here’s the schedule for deployment and some of the corridors they plan to cover:
That’s mainly for level 2 chargers and 50 kW DC chargers, but the fun starts with the high power stations, which enable long-distance travel in electric vehicles and make charging time competitive with fueling gas-powered cars. VW seems to understand the different use cases for each different charging speed, which is encouraging:
VW confirmed that Electrify America fast-charging stations will include both 150 kW and 320 kW DC fast chargers.
VW is installing ultra-fast 320 kW chargers in California as part of its $2 billion EV infrastructure plan
Here’s the schedule for deployment and some of the corridors they plan to cover:
That’s mainly for level 2 chargers and 50 kW DC chargers, but the fun starts with the high power stations, which enable long-distance travel in electric vehicles and make charging time competitive with fueling gas-powered cars. VW seems to understand the different use cases for each different charging speed, which is encouraging:
VW confirmed that Electrify America fast-charging stations will include both 150 kW and 320 kW DC fast chargers.
Right. Average highway station will be 5 chargers. 2 to 3 150kW units and 2 to 3 320kW units. Small or lower traffic site probably 2 of each and higher traffic site would be 3 of each.
Similar threads
