Eramet, BASF and SUEZ partner to develop innovative closed-loop process for recycling Li-ion batteries
Mercedes-Benz partners with Farasis for battery cells from carbon-neutral production

California Energy Commission approves $95M plan for clean transportation investments; zero-emission infrastructure

The California Energy Commission (CEC) approved a $95-million plan for critical clean transportation investments to expedite the adoption of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) and help the state reach its climate, air quality and other goals.

The plan also focuses on closing an anticipated gap in charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, and increasing program benefits to disadvantaged communities.

The -2020 Investment Plan Update for the CEC’s Clean Transportation Program (formerly known as the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program) allocates $85.2 million for ZEVs, as well as zero-emission infrastructure and related workforce development.

The plan calls for:

  • $32.7 million for light-duty EV charging infrastructure

  • $30 million for medium- and heavy-duty ZEVs and infrastructure

  • $20 million for hydrogen refueling infrastructure

  • $2.5 million for workforce development

The investment plan also allocates $10 million for production of zero- and near-zero-carbon fuels.

Despite considerable ongoing investments in public charging by the CEC, the state’s lead agency for fueling infrastructure deployment, as well as the state’s electric utilities, Electrify America, and others, the agency estimates that California will fall approximately 81,600 charging ports short of the 250,000 needed to support the state’s goal of 1.5 million ZEVs on the road by 2025.

Among the solutions that the CEC is promoting to close the gap are:

  • Technologies that provide more effective charging.

  • Zero-emission car- and ride-sharing that make better use of charging infrastructure and provides disadvantaged and rural communities with access to clean transportation.

  • Streamlined incentives for charging infrastructure that leverage more private capital.

p>Increases to workforce development investments, particularly in disadvantaged communities, as well as increases to ZEV investment also reflect recommendations by the Disadvantaged Communities Advisory Group. The advisory group advises the CEC and the California Public Utilities Commission about programs that will help achieve clean energy and pollution reduction while being effective and useful in disadvantaged communities.

The Clean Transportation Program was created in 2007 by Assembly Bill 118 (Núñez) to support the state’s climate change policies by developing and deploying alternative and renewable fuels and advanced transportation technologies. The program has invested nearly $830 million to more than 600 projects covering a broad spectrum of alternative fuels and technologies.

AB 118 also created the Air Quality Improvement Program, which the California Air Resources Board administers. The program funds air quality improvement projects relating to fuel and vehicle technologies. The bill also established an enhanced fleet modernization program for the retirement of high polluting vehicles, run by the Bureau of Automotive Repair.



Many states are working to protect people's health while at the same time the Republicans are busy undermining these efforts by wiping out the regulations under which these efforts operate...just one example:

The Lurking Jerk

Many democratic states are fast becoming unlivable because of shortsighted government overreach. Republicans are not 'wiping out' environmental regulations as much as rolling them back to realistic levels. The four bluest states have the highest rates of exodus- and people are moving to republican states where regulations haven't wrecked the economies.


Oh yeah, Republican debt, war and tax breaks for the rich are so good /s

Many states are working to protect people's health while at the same time the Republicans are busy undermining these efforts by wiping out the regulations under which these efforts operate...

And precisely WHAT could Washington do to prevent California from pursuing the goals listed above?

You may want to put down the hyper-partisanship and look at the details.  For instance, what is the expenditure in $/vehicle supported for the various options above?  What are the operating costs, what is the net efficiency, etc?  After all, if California is spending its citizens' tax money unwisely, you WANT the people in Washington to provide a counterweight of some sort.


Thanks to California (and a few other States), USA may slowly switch to cleaner (electric + FCH2) vehicles by 2050 or so?

Other major environmental problems remain to be solved.

Chemicals used in agriculture will have to be further restricted to reduce the number of associated illnesses including the huge increase in autism cases in the last 20+ years. A progressive switch to meatless (burgers + hotdogs + ribs etc ) for human food could help to reduce GHGs emissions?

The comments to this entry are closed.