On Tuesday (July 16) the Connecticut Roundtable on Climate and Jobs (CRCJ) hosted a virtual webinar addressing Transportation Infrastructure and Electric Vehicles in Connecticut. The discussion revealed a stark admission: the state is neither prepared nor capable of replacing every gas-powered car with an electric vehicle (EV).
During the webinar, Jay Strange, program manager for Transport Hartford at the Center for Latino Progress, highlighted a critical issue during the discussion, emphasizing the unrealistic nature of expecting every Connecticut resident to own an EV. He noted, “I don’t think it’s important for us to have as our goal to replace every gas-powered vehicle in Connecticut with an EV. I don’t think that’s necessarily a policy goal that’s realistic.”
Strange argued that the goal should not be to replace every gas-powered vehicle with an EV, as it is neither economically feasible nor practical due to supply chain limitations and “the geography of our spaces doesn’t allow it.”
Ultimately, Strange painted a bleak picture of Connecticut’s ability to solve its emissions problem. He stressed that a multifaceted approach, including investments in public transportation, land use and zoning reforms and supporting tools like EVs and electric bikes, is necessary, but implied that the state is far from ready to meet these challenges effectively.
He also highlighted the need for a change in Connecticut’s approach to transportation and urban planning. “I think it’s really important for us to talk about ways that we can live closer to where we work, where we go to church, where we shop, where we go to school,” Strange said, adding that his vision is “prioritizing building better cities, building cities where people can move about using a variety of modes [of transportation].”
Strange, who uses various transportation methods himself, including driving, walking, biking, skateboarding and taking public transport, emphasized the need for these options to be available to more residents.
Meanwhile, Barry Kresch, President of the EV Club of Connecticut, when asked on a strategy to ensure more EVs’ availability, emphasized that a comprehensive approach is required, stating, “There are a range of policies, not just one big bill, that need to happen.” This suggests that the proposed regulation to ban the sale of gas-powered cars will not effectively accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles as promised.
Kresch echoed sentiments repeatedly voiced during the debates over the failed gas car ban. He pointed out that, “Especially, in urban communities, there’s in particular a lack of access to charging due to a higher incidence of multifamily dwellings. Lack of dedicated parking, lack of off-street parking, plus, you have to deal with vehicle costs, greater challenges with credit, and I think there has been a lack of outreach and education.”
Suggesting the need to “subsidize and prioritize charging infrastructure, including on street,” Kresch also supports the Connecticut Department of Transportation’s (DOT) policy goal to implement a vehicle mile traveled (VMT) tax. The DOT aims for a 5 percent per person reduction in VMT by 2030, while investing more in public transportation to encourage residents to opt for public transit over driving their cars.
In a revealing moment, CRCJ Executive Director Aziz Dehkan, speaking for International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) members in attendance, sees EV infrastructure as a way to grow union membership. Dehkan highlighted EV charging station installations as a “real good work opportunity” for the union. He urged Gov. Ned Lamont to ban out-of-state workers who can perform these installations more cheaply than union labor. This raises an interesting question: Are EVs really about the environment, or are they more about filling union coffers?
It is important to point out that Dan McInerney, Board Chair of CRCJ, is the Business Manager and Financial Secretary of the IBEW Local Union 488.
The panelists’ conclusions about the lack of access to charging and the affordability of electric vehicles, along with the state’s unpreparedness to halt the sale of gas cars, align closely with the responses from a recent DOT survey. The survey highlighted community concerns regarding the benefits and feasibility of widespread EV charger implementation, reinforcing the sentiment that Connecticut is far from ready to make a full transition to EVs.
Survey Results: The Reality of EV Ownership
Out of 2,870 respondents, a mere 866 reported owning or leasing an electric vehicle (EV), leaving 2,004 without an EV. This dismal figure indicates that despite the hype, widespread adoption of EVs is far from reality. The reluctance to adopt EVs is particularly pronounced among those with household incomes below $69,999, where only 68 own an EV compared to 446 who do not.
The most glaring obstacle for these individuals is the cost of purchasing an EV with 228 respondents citing this as their primary concern, followed by lack of charging options (125) and utility bill costs (106). Other reasons given were range anxiety (86) and time required to charge (85). Notably, 205 respondents in this cohort simply do not want one.
Conversely, households making over $118,000 owned or leased 508 EVs, while those earning between $94,000 and $117,999 had 116 EVs. This data underscores that financial barriers remain a significant obstacle to EV ownership.
Housing type also plays a crucial role in EV adoption. Those in single-family homes are far more likely to own an EV (499) compared to those in apartments or condos (52). When asked what would increase their interest in purchasing or leasing a plug-in EV, 515 respondents pointed to funding assistance for buying an EV, followed by funding assistance for installing at-home charging infrastructure (450) and more convenient locations for charging stations (437). However, a striking 1,149 respondents answered that none of the listed options would increase their interest in EVs.
This data paints a clear picture: financial and practical barriers continue to hinder the widespread adoption of EVs, further proving the point that Connecticut is nowhere near ready to ban the sale of gas cars.
The enthusiasm for a green future is commendable, but the current economic and logistical landscape paints a much bleaker picture. It appears that the push for EVs, as it stands, is more about rhetoric than practical, achievable policy. Interestingly, it seems the advocates of green energy alternatives are shifting away from an outright ban on gas cars and are instead focusing on policies that encourage people to abandon their cars altogether in favor of public transportation. Unless substantial and realistic changes are made to address these barriers, the dream of a fully electric vehicle fleet in Connecticut will remain just that — a dream.
