Federal NEVI EV charger program cancelled

[Dave Cundiff]

What you’ve wrote is the good thing about government funding, they can use the common good as a motivation instead of profit as that’s what we pay taxes for.

The bad is the government has no motivation to use those funds as wisely as a private company would because they aren’t accountable to the penny like a corporation is. All the money a corporation spends is accounted for and projects are evaluated on whether or not they made money.

So it’s a good idea to force the government to spend with that same level of accountability.

TLR: Lots of economic theory here. For NEVI as an example, see point #5 in the second paragraph below.

***

If market forces are enough to meet the public's need in a timely way and at a reasonable cost, then you don't need government intervention at all. Get out of the way and let the private sector do it as efficiently as their customers want! Example: Gas stations and grocery stores in wealthy suburbs.

Where government workers earn their pay (among other places) are addressing what economists call "market failures." Examples: (1) No smooth highways around the country in the 1920s? Enter the federal and state highways, building roads that benefit everything but that local people can't fund. (2) Only cities have electricity in the 1930s? Enter the public power network, which is still cheaper and more reliable than its investor-owned counterpart companies. (3) Farmers can't sell their extra food, low-income people can't pay for healthy food, and there are no grocery stores in low-income neighborhoods? Enter the SNAP program that pays for healthy food virtually anywhere it's sold, with tax incentives for local stores to sell healthy food. (4) Low income people can't afford housing in the private market in 2025? Enter "Section 8" (which guarantees private-sector rent payments on behalf of needy people, subject to budget limits), and public housing projects (which directly house people, administered directly by government or its contractors, again subject to budget limits that never seem to house all in need). (5) People want EVs, but don't feel comfortable with charging options on real-world road trips? Enter NEVI, which analyzes where the unmet needs are (with some concerns for equity in disadvantaged communities) and subsidizes the capital expense of building high-speed chargers where they are needed.

If there were no market failures, we wouldn't need government to build stuff, or fund the building of stuff, or provide public services, at all. Because there will always be market failures, though, for reasons that can be as complicated as they are inevitable, we'll still need government to run the public libraries and the fire departments and the public schools and the water and sewer departments and the prisons and the community colleges and the safety-net health insurance and the stock market regulators, and a lot of the other things where we've gotten used to the benefits of government without really thinking about them.

This is a long way of saying: You can AND SHOULD expect government to accomplish each task as fairly and efficiently as possible. But, except in rare circumstances, you cannot AND SHOULD NOT expect government to make money.

Sometimes government agencies can make money. For example, public power is hugely advantageous (mostly by means of affordable rates and high reliability) for the communities lucky enough to own a power system.

More often there is no opportunity for profit. For examples, public schools have no ability to sell their services at a profit to special-needs children, and a fire department that served only dues-paying customers would quickly create intolerable unfairness within its community.

Thanks and best wishes!

Sponsored

 

[Thedude]

Ludicrous. This is not the place to debate climate change and the need to electrify transportation. Take your argument to the crazies if you want an echo chamber.

Is this the place to debate mandatory sterilization after your first child? That would do a lot more for the world climate problems than some rich countries buying brand new resource intensive EVs every few years.

 

[Riviot]

Is this the place to debate mandatory sterilization after your first child? That would do a lot more for the world climate problems than some rich countries buying brand new resource intensive EVs every few years.

 

[Budman]

I’ve seen a couple of posts here mentioning how slow the buildouts are happening.

I think people are underestimating how long stations take to get setup. I’ve seen several go up around my places in the last 5 years, everyone took over a year from the time they broke ground until they were open to the public. That does not even count the pre-construction work of securing a location and negotiating with the power companies to ensure the grid in that location is capable of supporting the demand.

It does seem to take a long time most of the time. However, Ionna is constructing and opening large, impressive stations in a couple months. They are showing it can be done quickly.

 

[Captblue]

Is NOT cancelled. Just like they campaigned, DOGE is doing an audit on the entire federal government, they have paused payments on pretty much everything. Other administration have done similar things in the past, just to get a budget in mind. ( not to this extent ) “like out of specs reviews“ said this might not be a bad thing. You want companies to build the infrastructure, and be reliable. Last time this happened was with EA, and look what they did.

 

[Zoidz]

Just like they campaigned, DOGE is doing an audit on the entire federal government, they have paused payments on pretty much everything.

"Paused payment"? Tell that to 9700 employees who were told they were losing their jobs permanently, see if they think it is "paused payment".

I don't have an issue with the audit concept, but I have an issue with the legality of the execution.

WASHINGTON, Feb 6 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration plans to keep fewer than 300 staff at the U.S. Agency for International Development out of the agency's worldwide total of more than 10,000, four sources told Reuters on Thursday.
Washington's primary humanitarian aid agency has been a target of a government reorganization program spearheaded by businessman Elon Musk, a close Trump ally, since the Republican president took office on January 20.

The four sources familiar with the plan said only 294 staff at the agency would be allowed to keep their jobs, including only 12 in the Africa bureau and eight in the Asia bureau.

 

[BigSkies]

NEVI and the $7,500 rebate get all of the headlines when it comes to EV's. They are important.

But pay more attention to the EPA fuel economy standards, and whether California's emissions waiver gets revoked (which would set off a big court fight). These are way more important to electrification than either NEVI or the tax credit.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

TLR: Lots of economic theory here. For NEVI as an example, see point #5 in the second paragraph below.

***

If market forces are enough to meet the public's need in a timely way and at a reasonable cost, then you don't need government intervention at all. Get out of the way and let the private sector do it as efficiently as their customers want! Example: Gas stations and grocery stores in wealthy suburbs.

Where government workers earn their pay (among other places) are addressing what economists call "market failures." Examples: (1) No smooth highways around the country in the 1920s? Enter the federal and state highways, building roads that benefit everything but that local people can't fund. (2) Only cities have electricity in the 1930s? Enter the public power network, which is still cheaper and more reliable than its investor-owned counterpart companies. (3) Farmers can't sell their extra food, low-income people can't pay for healthy food, and there are no grocery stores in low-income neighborhoods? Enter the SNAP program that pays for healthy food virtually anywhere it's sold, with tax incentives for local stores to sell healthy food. (4) Low income people can't afford housing in the private market in 2025? Enter "Section 8" (which guarantees private-sector rent payments on behalf of needy people, subject to budget limits), and public housing projects (which directly house people, administered directly by government or its contractors, again subject to budget limits that never seem to house all in need). (5) People want EVs, but don't feel comfortable with charging options on real-world road trips? Enter NEVI, which analyzes where the unmet needs are (with some concerns for equity in disadvantaged communities) and subsidizes the capital expense of building high-speed chargers where they are needed.

If there were no market failures, we wouldn't need government to build stuff, or fund the building of stuff, or provide public services, at all. Because there will always be market failures, though, for reasons that can be as complicated as they are inevitable, we'll still need government to run the public libraries and the fire departments and the public schools and the water and sewer departments and the prisons and the community colleges and the safety-net health insurance and the stock market regulators, and a lot of the other things where we've gotten used to the benefits of government without really thinking about them.

This is a long way of saying: You can AND SHOULD expect government to accomplish each task as fairly and efficiently as possible. But, except in rare circumstances, you cannot AND SHOULD NOT expect government to make money.

Sometimes government agencies can make money. For example, public power is hugely advantageous (mostly by means of affordable rates and high reliability) for the communities lucky enough to own a power system.

More often there is no opportunity for profit. For examples, public schools have no ability to sell their services at a profit to special-needs children, and a fire department that served only dues-paying customers would quickly create intolerable unfairness within its community.

Thanks and best wishes!

To clarify my point I only mentioned companies making money as a way to demonstrate accountability. When a corporation funds a project they calculate the ROI on said project as a back check and a way to hold themselves accountable for the incurred expenses.

Perhaps a better way of saying it would have been that the value received was in excess of the input costs. A business operates with limited funding so they are incentivized to maximize returns on minimal investments. The best decisions are those that create the highest ROIs. The government works on budgets and allocation and are not accountable to the ROI principle.

Once legislation is passed and departments are established they are rarely evaluated for cost and effectiveness. Private projects routinely beat public projects on a dollar for dollar basis as government agencies tend to collect bloat with no system of checks and balances to ensure that every dollar is well spent.

How the government can “make money” is by providing the backbone for the private sector to generate capital. Healthy workers are productive workers, freeways allow businesses to transport goods and utilities provide critical power and water to private businesses and individuals in order to generate profits which can be siphoned in the form of taxes to continue those projects or provide new ones.

As such their expenditures should be evaluated on the same basis. Can those construction projects be done quicker, or better? As someone formerly in that industry I can tell you public projects have a ton of wasted downtime and arbitrary requirements that do not improve the project’s outcomes but do substantially increase the cost.

There is no reason a government project cannot be evaluated based on a cost/benefits assessment. I’m sure you’d agree that there are limited funds but unlimited ways to help as such doing the most you can with the funds you have should be a central part of that decision making process. Unfortunately it is not because government projects have many layers of bureaucratic red tape and functional inefficiencies built right in.

I’m all for government spending and projects that benefit the common good but they need to be held to a functional standard.

 

[DuoRivian]

"Paused payment"? Tell that to 9700 employees who were told they were losing their jobs permanently, see if they think it is "paused payment".

I don't have an issue with the audit concept, but I have an issue with the legality of the execution.

WASHINGTON, Feb 6 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration plans to keep fewer than 300 staff at the U.S. Agency for International Development out of the agency's worldwide total of more than 10,000, four sources told Reuters on Thursday.
Washington's primary humanitarian aid agency has been a target of a government reorganization program spearheaded by businessman Elon Musk, a close Trump ally, since the Republican president took office on January 20.

The four sources familiar with the plan said only 294 staff at the agency would be allowed to keep their jobs, including only 12 in the Africa bureau and eight in the Asia bureau.

Not sure why USAID was brought into this as it is irrelevant to a discussion on EVs. Also seems from reports that a lot of money was wasted and not spent on aid to needy people but on media like Politico and the BBC.

 

[Zoidz]

Not sure why USAID was brought into this as it is irrelevant to a discussion on EVs. Also seems from reports that a lot of money was wasted and not spent on aid to needy people but on media like Politico and the BBC.

It's an example that shows more than "paused payments" is taking place, and therefore EV programs are likely at risk beyond "paused payments".

 

[JRock]

In a normal world, court orders stopping unconstitutional executive orders would be the end of the story. That’s a normal world. Mr. Orange seems to have enough willing accomplices in Congress to allow him to simply ignore court orders and implement his wishes. It remains to be seen if Congresscritters can find their collective spine to stop the theft of their separate, equal powers. Congress has the power of the purse, not the Executive Branch, as we all learned in civics class or Schoolhouse Rock. If Mr. Orange starts ignoring court orders, and no one stops him, we’ll have our answer.

 

[Jonger1150]

I totally disagree with, "this isn't the place to discuss climate change".

EVs don't have to be purchased ONLY to "save the planet" -- but the first wave of buyers (Us) are undeniably more concerned with the climate than the general public. I don't think any vitriol needs to be included in the discussion, but this is a natural place to discuss the topic as long as it's reasonable.

 

[Jonger1150]

In a normal world, court orders stopping unconstitutional executive orders would be the end of the story. That’s a normal world. Mr. Orange seems to have enough willing accomplices in Congress to allow him to simply ignore court orders and implement his wishes. It remains to be seen if Congresscritters can find their collective spine to stop the theft of their separate, equal powers. Congress has the power of the purse, not the Executive Branch, as we all learned in civics class or Schoolhouse Rock. If Mr. Orange starts ignoring court orders, and no one stops him, we’ll have our answer.

JD Vance tried passing a law that removes the EV incentive and places it on gas vehicles only..... AND.....

Yes, it gets worse

Increase the incentive for the vehicle being LARGER.

More money for more emissions.

The Drive American Act seeks to gut the Biden administration’s electric vehicle tax rebate program, with the first half of the bill undoing the program altogether. In the latter half of the bill, Vance proposes that American taxpayers follow him into a ridiculously circular logic that would instead place up to a $7,500 rebate on all new gasoline- and diesel-powered cars, trucks, and SUVs. Vehicles with larger payloads and more seats would be eligible for more of the incentive. In order to take advantage of this, you’d need to live in a household making less than $300,000, and the vehicle could not exceed $80,00o. Both “limits” are well north of average.

As the bill is written, each American-assembled vehicle sold powered by gas or diesel would automatically qualify for a $2,500 price reduction. There is an additional incentive of $500 “for every 250 pounds of payload capacity in excess of 1,000 pounds,” meaning a vehicle with a payload of 2,500 pounds would qualify for an extra $3,000 rebate. The final incentive structure would give an extra $1,000 for each additional seat in vehicles with seating capacity more than 4. A seven-seat vehicle would qualify for a $3,000 bonus. Both bonus incentives are capped at a collective $5,000, meaning you could have a truck with 3,500 pounds of payload capacity hit the full $7,500, or a seven-seat SUV with at least 2,000 pounds of payload capacity.

https://qz.com/jd-vance-trump-gas-car-rebates-evs-1851594703

 

[RivAW]

My state didn't build a single station with the funds and we are a full on Democrat state all about pushing EVs. So what was taking so long?

I think it's worth pausing and looking into all the bureaucracy behind the dispensing of funds.

Exactly....they didn't "cancel anything". The paused, pending review....which is responsible accounting, particularly under the circumstances.....

 

[shap]

"Paused payment"? Tell that to 9700 employees who were told they were losing their jobs permanently, see if they think it is "paused payment".

I don't have an issue with the audit concept, but I have an issue with the legality of the execution.

WASHINGTON, Feb 6 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration plans to keep fewer than 300 staff at the U.S. Agency for International Development out of the agency's worldwide total of more than 10,000, four sources told Reuters on Thursday.
Washington's primary humanitarian aid agency has been a target of a government reorganization program spearheaded by businessman Elon Musk, a close Trump ally, since the Republican president took office on January 20.

The four sources familiar with the plan said only 294 staff at the agency would be allowed to keep their jobs, including only 12 in the Africa bureau and eight in the Asia bureau.

And it will be great, as we will see that 294 staff will do the perfect job that 10k did before. Nothing wrong with this. But it is a matter of opinion of course.

Sponsored