The Biden administration is spending billions of dollars to build electric vehicle charging networks and offer incentives to buy new and used electric vehicles. This change offers great economic and environmental benefits, but they are not distributed equitably. People who bear the most burdens in our current transportation systems often receive fewer benefits and are less able to change their situation.
I study the future of clean transportation and energy, and my research looks at equity considerations in the design of these systems. As my colleagues and I see it, an equitable transition will require thinking broadly about all transport users and their needs, especially those currently left behind. Here are four issues we think should be front and center:
Banning gas cars can have unintended consequences
California has banned sales of new gas-powered passenger cars and light trucks starting in 2035, and other states are following suit. Without proper support, these bans could harm communities that are not served by current transportation systems.
By the end of 2022, the average price of a new battery electric vehicle was about $61,500, compared to an average of $49,500 for all new cars. Less expensive models are starting to hit the market, but electric vehicles remain out of financial reach for many people.
Federal tax credits of up to $7,500 for new electric vehicles or $4,000 for used electric vehicles include manufacturer restrictions, income thresholds and vehicle price caps. At the moment, the policy does not offer discounts at the time of purchase, so the upfront costs remain high and often prohibitive for many buyers.
Those bans could affect used gas car markets, and it’s unclear whether states will offer support to people who can’t immediately switch to electric vehicles. Used car prices are already at record highs due to inflation and global supply chain issues affecting the new car market. Bans on new gasoline-powered cars could push up prices on the second-hand market even more, as long as those models are cheaper than electric vehicles.
Support industries such as repair shops, gas stations and car dealerships could also be affected. These companies, which provide services and jobs to their communities, could be displaced in the shift to electric vehicles, which require less maintenance than gas cars and have different supply chains and support systems.
The Biden administration has pledged that the shift to electric vehicles will create high-quality jobs. However, many parts of the auto industry and workforce development systems must evolve to ensure that workers benefit from this process.
Gas cars will continue to pollute for years
The bans on the sale of new gas-powered vehicles will not affect those already on the road. One third of US greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation sector. Cars and light trucks produce nearly two-thirds of this share, making them one of the main drivers of climate change.
They also emit air pollutants, especially fine particles, which can cause premature death and disease, including cardiovascular disease, asthma and other respiratory diseases. Studies show that fine particulate pollution disproportionately burdens communities of color.
Cars that run on gas can stay on the road for up to 30 years. Given its harmful health effects, I believe it is not acceptable to expect the US automobile fleet to naturally transition to zero-emission vehicles.
Today, there aren’t many mechanisms to encourage drivers to move away from old, dirty cars. The federal CARS program, also known as “Cash for Clunkers,” ran for a few months in 2009 and offered rebates of up to $4,500 to drivers who traded in older vehicles for more fuel-efficient new or used cars. However, this program provided modest emissions reductions relative to its cost
Also, older vehicles are often sent overseas for resale. According to a United Nations report, the US is one of the world’s top three exporters of used cars. In addition to increasing the scrapping and recycling of older, high-emission cars, I see the need for coordinated international regulations to ensure a safe and sustainable trade in used vehicles, as recommended by the UN report.
Electric vehicle incentives don’t go to careless drivers
Benefits to promote the adoption of electric vehicles are often not accessible to those who need them most. A 2020 study funded by the US Department of Transportation found that low-income households in Atlanta were less likely to benefit from state and federal EV incentives than higher-income households, because the incentives they granted as credits for income taxes owed. This is also how the current federal tax credits are structured.
In a paper currently under review, his colleagues and I show that so far in California, EV adoption and discount rates are lowest in ZIP codes whose residents are mostly high-income slums and colored populations, as well as in neighborhoods previously marked in red.
In another study, we examined an equity mobility program in California designed to help low-income households purchase zero-emission vehicles. We found that the program was not working entirely as intended, because the application process was complex, imposed difficult deadlines and offered applicants limited support. California has enacted new legislation that will expand this program statewide, and we look forward to seeing updates and improvements.
Rural areas face unique transportation challenges
Nearly one-fifth of Americans live in rural areas, where they typically drive more than city dwellers, have little access to public transportation, and often rely on private vehicles. Members of our research group have interviewed rural residents who do not own cars and rely on a bus a day to get to the nearest doctor’s office or grocery store.
Until now, policies aimed at promoting the transition to electric vehicles have not focused on rural areas, although the Department for Transport has launched an initiative focused on the needs of these communities. Rural residents are concerned about the availability of charging infrastructure, economic development and electric vehicles that meet the needs of rural residents and, in my view, deserve specific support.
In a car-centric society, who does the transition to electric vehicles serve?
The United States is an automobile-centric society where most people need access to an automobile to live their lives effectively. Many years of policy and investment have produced a system that focuses on helping drivers get to their destinations as quickly as possible, rather than other goals like clean air or reliable public transportation.
In doing so, the system values drivers’ time more than people who rely on other modes of transit. Americans with access to cars have more freedom and more choices about where and how to get an education, work, and spend time with loved ones.
Surveys show that lower-income, black, Hispanic or immigrant Americans are particularly likely to use public transit regularly. Today, public transit systems are in decline in the US, thanks to pandemic ridership declines that have worsened the effects of long-term underfunding.
In my view, the transition to electric vehicles should be part of a wider shift towards clean mobility that invests in public transport, walking and cycling, as well as systems such as EV charging that support the use of of the private car. New clean mobility systems must be designed so that all Americans have safe and reliable options for getting to their destinations.
