The most important role that state and metropolitan transportation agencies can play to help usher in an electric transportation future is to anticipate the needs of a growing electric vehicle fleet and plan for how this new breed of vehicles can be smoothly integrated into the existing transportation network. Coordination and planning, as John Horsley notes, not just providing infrastructure, will be critical.

Charging infrastructure will of course be important, and while public infrastructure is certainly a legitimate candidate for public funding, a majority of charging activity is likely to occur on private property—at home and at work—with charging equipment that is privately-owned (according to a recent Carnegie Mellon study, more than 94 percent of U.S. residences have access to a garage or other off-street parking location that would accommodate home-charging).

There are several initiatives large and small to install charging stations in advance of the 25 or more new plug-in electric vehicle models that are expected to hit the market in the next few years. But charging station manufacturers and other industry observers have noted that these devices do not need to be installed en masse. It will be more cost-effective to install stations gradually as local electric vehicle use expands. A parking garage, for example, may start with just a few charging stations, but could anticipate providing every space with charging capacity. In the meantime, long-range planning where stations will be located and making installation of appropriate electric conduit (very cheap when done in advance) a standard practice for public and private building projects will greatly facilitate and reduce the costs of future expansion.

The speed and scale of the penetration of electric vehicles will still hinge on the same thing that determines the success of any new car—consumer satisfaction. That means managing the expectations and customer experiences of new electric car owners. Initially, convenient charging infrastructure need not be everywhere, but where actual owners need it most.

Some Additional Background Information

A plug-in electric car typically can be charged from a regular 120-volt electric outlet, often called Level 1 charging, however, higher voltage charging devices can substantially improve charging time. Some automakers are planning to offer the option of a Level 2 charger (240 volts) when the car is sold. Before a buyer takes delivery, an electrical contractor will have been scheduled to install the device (and an additional electric circuit if needed) in a garage or other home parking location. Level 2 stations can provide a full charge in approximately 4-8 hours, depending on the specific battery.

Level 3 stations operate at 480 volts and reduce charging time to under an hour—as quickly as 15 minutes in some cases. The cost and high-voltage of Level 3 devices makes them more appropriate for frequently-used public and commercial applications.

Production costs for electric vehicles are, at present, significantly higher than those of a comparable internal combustion vehicles, with batteries accounting for most of the cost. Battery production costs have fallen under $1000 per kilowatt-hour and are projected to approach the $500/kWh mark within a few years. (the Chevy Volt will be equipped with a 16 kWh battery, while the Nissan Leaf will have 24 kWh).

Electric vehicles generally have lower operating costs, however, in terms of fuel costs and maintenance—due to the mechanical efficiency and simplicity of electric motors. Whereas internal combustion engines only convert roughly 20 percent of the energy stored in gasoline into automotive power, electric motors convert electricity into mechanical energy with 75-90 percent efficiency. At a gasoline price of $3.00 per gallon, a conventional vehicle that gets 30 miles per gallon will cost 10 cents per mile, compared to an electric vehicle which, at an electricity price of of 10 cents per kilowatt hour, will cost 3-4 cents per mile or the equivalent of less than $1.00 per gallon.

Electric vehicles can also have significant value for managing the electricity grid. Electric cars will typically be parked for most hours of the day. When they are plugged in and connected to the grid, they can provide important storage, frequency regulation, and load management services. Revenues for these services can be substantial—up to $3000 per vehicle per year in initial pilot projects. Industry observers have also suggested that the performance advantages of electric cars may command a higher consumer price—e.g. the high torque of electric motors provides for exceptionally rapid, smooth, and quiet acceleration relative to conventional engines.

In May 2010, bipartisan legislation to support and accelerate market penetration of electric vehicles was introduced in both chambers of Congress. Both the House of Representative bill, the Electric Drive Vehicle Deployment Act of 2010 (H.R. 5442), and the related Senate bill, theElectric Vehicle Deployment Act of 2010 (S. 3442), would provide incentives for the purchase of electric vehicles and the deployment of charging infrastructure.

This is a guest post from Kevin Matthews, director of NSI’s Sustainability Practice, where he runs the day-to-day sector operations and works with clients on sustainable solutions for interfacing with state and local governments. He’s also held various positions in the Environmental Protection Agency.

Transportation departments at the federal, state and local levels could be creating incentives for electric vehicle drivers such as allowing access to HOV/HOT lanes and free or reduced rate parking as well as reduced licensing fees. Metropolitan areas across the country might consider following London’s lead in placing limitations on congested city roads, but waiving them for electric vehicles. In turn, penalties attached to polluting vehicles would make driving something other than electric vehicles less attractive. These incentives assist transportation departments in reaching mandatory or voluntary green house gas reduction goals that state and local governments have adopted.

Further, by making EVs less costly to purchase and operate, and allowing for various incentives, Transportation Departments can help EVs to reach their full potential –Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) operations in particular. V2G allows excess battery capacity in an EV to be sold back to the grid as usable energy, whereby each EV becomes a “mobile generator” or Peak Demand-capable power source.

Transportation departments themselves could become the innovators, converting portions of their fleets to EV, reducing their own emissions, but also providing power back to the grid or in disaster response operations to needed facilities.

In essence – it is time for transportation departments to lead future transportation options by creating incentives and converting their own fleets by partnering with innovative V2G businesses.

This post was written with Nick Nigro, a solutions fellow at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

On behalf of Nick Nigro and myself, I wanted to note that the call for the government to act to promote plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), and all clean alternative fuels for that matter, is to correct the clear market failures that exist in today’s petroleum-based transportation sector.

Historically, petroleum has been a key driver in the growth of the economy and development of nations worldwide. Gasoline and diesel fuel’s impressive energy density, portability, and low production cost made it the fuel of choice for nearly a century. All the while there have been costs, although they haven’t always been obvious. Petroleum’s impact on climate change and U.S. energy security, and the risks of drilling, result in real and significant costs to society, and currently the price of petroleum does not include those externalities.

For climate change, the true costs to society are not fully known, but what is clear is that those costs will be significant and borne by all of society and not just those that are consuming petroleum -- unless action is taken. Furthermore, the U.S. has experienced the tribulations associated with energy security for decades beginning with the oil embargo of 1973 by OPEC. When the true costs of a product are not revealed by the market price, basic economics tells us to price that externality through public policy. This price is the primary role of government here.

However, transportation is such a complex system that correcting the price alone will not resolve these market failures. Government must do more to counterbalance the pervasive fueling infrastructure that we have built over the last century to support gasoline and diesel as well as the inertia of consumers’ uneasiness with change. This is where U.S. DOT and state transportation departments can help.

Transportation departments and state governments more broadly can incentivize the purchase and use of PEVs through a number of policies under their influence or control, such as HOV access, reduced tolling fees, parking privileges, public charging infrastructure support, public education, tax incentives, and transportation planning analyses that highlight the effects of increasing PEVs – as opposed to not taking action.

It will likely take decades to transition away from petroleum, but the sooner this transition begins, the sooner technological advancements in batteries, electrical grid management, and other technologies and practices related to PEVs can reach the marketplace. States can play a pivotal role in correcting the historical petroleum market failures and accelerating this transition.

Our federal and state transportation departments must do several things to support and compliment the private sector's efforts for electric vehicles. The Obama Administration provides a number of examples of successful cooperation and collaboration between departments, such as the Livable Communities Initiative between HUD, USDOT and USEPA.

In order for the electric vehicle industry to succeed, we need this kind of cooperation and collaboration between the Department of Energy, which can focus on the mechanics of electric vehicle technology and the Department of Transportation, which can focus on needed infrastructure. The private sector is producing more options and better electric vehicle technology. But that technology requires an infrastructure that has not kept up. An important role for federal, state and local transportation departments to play in developing and promoting electric vehicle technology is to fill this void. One of the main obstacles prevent the electric vehicle market from achieving real success is the lack of available charging stations to utilize between destinations. Transportation officials must consider potential opportunities to provide this crucial piece to ensure future success of a technology that will help us build more sustainable transportations options. Other issues of tax credits, use of HOV or dedicated lanes, special parking, etc must be addressed through this collaborative approach.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and our dependence on foreign fuel sources are important goals that we must achieve, and electric vehicles can help us get there while still allowing Americans to travel freely. Unfortunately, as this trend helps us to further reduce our motor fuels use, the revenues in the Highway Trust Fund continue to decline and we continue to fall further behind in improving the nation’s surface transportation infrastructure.

Better fuel economy on modern vehicles has already led to chronic shortages in the trust fund. And, under the current model, electric cars will allow people to drive as much as they want and not pay a cent. That will leave us with just as much traffic, more dangerous road conditions and no way to pay for repairs.

If departments of transportation are serious about getting drivers to switch to electric, they also need to be serious about how to pay for it. At the federal and state levels, DOTs need to advocate for transitioning to a vehicle miles traveled fee system and stress the importance of increased gasoline taxes in the meantime. They also have to be leaders in educating the driving public and working to implement the new system.

Our infrastructure is already falling apart. Encouraging and accommodating electric vehicles without reforming the funding mechanism is solving one problem while exacerbating another.

The best thing we can do for electric cars is to protect and invest in the Highway Trust Fund.

Developing a smarter and cleaner transportation system that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and our dependence on oil must be the overriding vision that guides the next federal transportation bill. Part of that vision must be realized through smarter approaches to managing traffic congestion, providing more options like public transportation, vanpools, intercity buses and high speed rail and offering incentives for states and local governments to develop more walkable and livable communities that encourage shorter commutes. But if we’re serious about reducing emissions and oil dependency, that vision can only be fully realized if we make a significant investment in infrastructure that will accelerate a transition to electric vehicles.

Just as the state Departments of Transportation play a crucial role developing smarter approaches to managing traffic and creating more travel options, they have a role to play overseeing the complex infrastructure needed to operate these vehicles. Giving DOTs a role in electric vehicles does not mean playing favorites or micromanaging research. The most promising technologies of tomorrow will continue to come from the private sector, as well they should. IBM has shown how intelligent transportation systems (ITS) make the movement of goods and people more efficient and economical, and this includes technologies that benefit private vehicles as well as public transit. But as John Horsley rightly points out, DOTs have an important role to play in harnessing this innovation, specifically by creating a smart grid and recharging infrastructure.

The oil spill in the Gulf and prospects for a clean energy bill in Washington illustrate the need to act. The American Power Act sponsored by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman would provide a significant boost to clean transportation, while allowing a great deal of flexibility on how to achieve lower emission and oil usage targets. Let’s get our roads and highways ready to serve electric vehicles while continuing to push for both a strong climate bill and a comprehensive transportation authorization that increases everyone’s choices.

Stimulus investments in hybrid and electric cars are beginning to pay off. The $2.4 billion included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for advanced vehicle and battery development and manufacturing is flowing, and these efforts are expected to bring more than 500,000 hybrid and electric car batteries to market per year by 2014, creating tens of thousands of American jobs.

As sales of hybrid/electric models like the Ford Fusion and Chevy Volt chip away at the U.S. auto market, creating a ready supply of advanced batteries will only increase market share and the proportion of these cleaner vehicles on the road.

Chalk this up as success number one, in terms of resources: smart investments to develop and manufacture advanced vehicles.

This week, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced a joint process to deliver $75 million in grants for projects where transportation, housing and commercial development interests overlap.

This collaboration builds on the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, an interagency effort among DOT, HUD and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to remove the traditional ‘silos’ that exist between agencies and leverage transportation, land use, housing and environmental resources to build more sustainable communities.

Chalk this up as success number two, in terms of process: agencies ‘playing nice’ and working together to advance more efficient, sustainable approaches to infrastructure.

Now is the time for the rubber to meet the road when it comes to creating infrastructure that makes vehicle electrification more practical for consumers and communities.

Let’s build on the success of these interagency endeavors, and get DOE in the fold to integrate vehicle electrification within these efforts. A strategic alliance between DOT and DOE is key since these agencies will see significant overlap in linking our transportation systems to the electrical grid and information networks.

Pieces of this puzzle now exist in other parts of the ARRA, and resources could be increased through several bills aimed at advanced vehicle deployment and infrastructure now in the House and Senate. Recent iterations of comprehensive climate and energy legislation, including the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACESA) that passed the House last summer, would invest billions more in clean vehicle production (Section 136) and supporting infrastructure, and final Senate climate/energy legislation should at least match advanced vehicle investments passed in ACESA.

The resources, community support and political will are there, and growing. Now it's time to put the puzzle pieces together, and also pass advanced vehicle and climate/energy legislation. Then we will see hybrid and electric vehicles grow beyond a niche and into a significant slice of the U.S. auto market, creating significant employment within U.S. manufacturing and infrastructure sectors and accelerating our shift to a clean energy future.

The Bipartisan Policy Center's National Transportation Policy Project (NTPP), in its June 2009 report, defined five goals for national surface transportation policy -- economic growth, national connectivity, metropolitan accessibility, safety, and, importantly for the question posed by this week's National Journal blog, energy security and environmental sustainability.

While the approach of NTPP is very much "bottom up" and non-prescriptive, it is clear that reducing the transportation sector's almost total dependence on oil must be a clear and central purpose of national transportation policy. To that end, while NTPP does not propose particular modes or policies, nor does it promote specific alternative fuels or technologies, it has concluded that the reduction of petroleum consumption is the simplest and most appropriate metric for evaluating how effectively state and metropolitan strategic programs achieve the national energy security goal, at least for the near term.

Most state and local governments are not able to undertake the development and implementation of new vehicle technologies and alternative fuels. Yet, their strategic programs can include the supportive policies and incentives, and the enabliing investments in the distributive infrastructure, that can accelerate the deployment of these technologies and fuels, including greater use of electricity and other non-fossil fuels in the vehicle fleet.

There are, of course, other policies that can promote reduced dependence on oil and increased use of alternative fuels, including electricity, in the transportation sector. These include appropriate pricing of carbon in fuels or increased motor fuel taxes; the adoption of more rigorous vehicle fuel efficiency standards; and the implementation of greenhouse gas emission regulations for vehicles. The adoption and implementation of these policies and regulations must necessarily involve federal, state, and local transportation departments, working in concert with other executive and regulatory agencies and with appropriate legislative bodies.

The "what" is clear: reduce transportation's dependence on oil, as its sole source of energy. The "how" is best left to state and local governments, with the clear understanding that national policies and programs should create the incentives and should establish the rules to enable this transition to occur.

Government's role has and always will be to promote policy objectives including the advancement of new technology. Electric vehicle technology is no exception given that transportation in the 21st century will need to focus on reducing the energy intensity per passenger mile driven. The most strategic view of electric vehicles would be using a systems approach where all modes are optimized and integrated to achieve the best results for our environment, economy and all users.

A viable sustainable mobility policy is centered around two core interconnected concepts: Energy Efficiency and Demand Management. Energy efficiency needs the federal government to oversee vehicle standards, efficiency, noise and safety and financing while demand management in
terms of transit-oriented land use, pedestrian, bicycle and transit friendly road design along with parking ratios and pricing needs local government leadership. The financing role is key to ensure that the influence of policy is being implemented at both levels of government and with industry. Transit is a good example in which federal financing and standards with local implementation and management creates a symbiotic partnership that helps reduce the energy intensity per
passenger mile driven. While the SFMTA is taking the lead on the demand management side, we are working to ensure that we can support and integrate with the federal energy efficiency categories through local electrical vehicle support.

Electric vehicles require a total partnership at all levels of government and industry in ways we have never seen before. Just like the computer and cell phone changed the way we communicate, the integration of these stand alone devices with the internet has allowed us to explore
and experience things that we only dreamed of.

Unlike the personal computer and the cell phone, the electric vehicle will not be successful without it being networked from the get go. This means that smart electrical metering needs to be in place at the same time as the vehicle fleet begins the transition toward electrification. The networking of EVs could optimize recharging and road use to minimize impacts on the energy loads, communicate with parking and demand management programs to minimize congestion and provide the instant connectivity to signals and each other that would eventually eliminate the need to physically hands-on-wheel drive the vehicle. This change would be fundamental--imagine being able to use that time for more productive things like working, sleeping, sightseeing, eating, socializing or anything else.

The near future of smart EVs linked to the other sustainable mobility modes via your smart phone would ensure that smart mobility decisions are being made each day and every day. The SFMTA is embracing this concept as part of our sustainable mobility strategy linking all modes under one system. We believe that this must be a local and national priority if we are to meet the needs of an increasingly urban society, one that places more emphasis on networked communications, mobility and access than on owning and operating a stand alone car. This is not future dreaming, this is inevitable and the sooner we get on board the better.

This is a guest post by Oliver Hazimeh, director and head of the Global E-Mobility Practice at PRTM, a global management consulting firm.

For the first time, industry and government – as well as public opinion – appear to be marching in lock-step toward an electrified vehicle (EV) future. The use of electricity as a fuel, however, requires unique and unprecedented coordination among automakers, utilities, internet service providers, commercial property owners and home builders. Essential to making this nascent industry work and thrive will be a solid infrastructure supporting greater deployment of EVs.

This needed infrastructure is not limited merely to convenient and accessible charging stations; rather, it must consist of an integrated end-to-end network that links together all disparate players, from physical home charge points enabled by smart metering to demand-response planning systems at utilities. A comprehensive network—as convenient and ubiquitous as the gasoline pump—will be required.

Several federal agencies, including the Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Treasury, are all playing vital roles in the development of this infrastructure. At a national level, each of them needs to provide the necessary resources and guidance for the United States to arrive at an integrated nationally compatible and economically viable electric transportation solution. The Department of Transportation, for example, has been tasked with providing an efficient transportation structure that protects our national interests. With daily reminders of the impact of oil dependency on our environment and our economy, the DOT’s mandate should include supporting an EV future.

Federal, state and local governments must employ a long-term view toward an inter-connected and seamless national network. Ideally, the efforts of the various federal agencies to help develop this infrastructure and “eco-systems” would include coordinated funding for state-level initiatives and ensuring that these locally run programs do not result in ad-hoc and incompatible local networks and are deployed with sufficient scale. Recently, the Electrification Coalition, an electric vehicle advocacy group, published the “Electrification Roadmap” which outlines an approach to developing local electrified ecosystems, which are coordinated at a national level. This proposition demonstrates how a coordinated EV infrastructure requires government participation at local and federal levels and it also suggests that a coordinated approach between the different federal departments requires a “central EV coordinator.”

Vital to the success of these recommendations is the cooperation between government agencies and private industry. Although government investment can break the logjam of missing EV infrastructure, the private sector will be instrumental in the success of any such initiatives. Participation of automakers to drive EV supply is obvious, but just as important are the roles of utilities in commissioning rate structures that support EV development; progressive employers that are willing to invest in infrastructure for employees; commercial developers that will dedicate parking in advance of arriving vehicles; local authorities adopting standardized and efficient permitting; and marketers that spot a growing and attractive market segment.

One of the best examples of how this interplay between government support and private investment can work is the developing story of The EV Project. Beginning this year, through grants issued by the U.S. Department of Energy as well as local incentives, almost 15,000 chargers will be installed in 13 cities to support the introduction of 5,700 Nissan Leafs and 2,600 Chevy Volts. While clearly the current number of EVs pale in comparison to the number of internal combustion vehicles in the United States, ensuring that public and private roles in early infrastructure models are robust will lay the critical foundation for a rapidly approaching electrification tipping point.

State Departments of Transportation can do a great deal to assist in the deployment of electric cars. AASHTO and its members across the country are committed to doing our part to help achieve the Climate Change policy goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050. There are a number of approaches which will be needed to help achieve that goal: More fuel efficient vehicles, cleaner fuels, reducing travel demand, and improving system operations. One of the most promising technologies is the electric car.

We believe that widespread deployment of electric cars is essential if the U.S. is going to reduce its dependence on foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It especially has the potential to offset the emissions expected from the projected growth in motor vehicles worldwide. As Daniel Sperling and Deborah Gordon explain in their recent book, 2 Billion Cars, the number of vehicles in the world is likely to double, from approximately 1 billion today to 2 billion by 2030, largely as a result of economic growth in China, India and other developing countries.

If that proves true, even if the U.S. is successful in implementing other transportation-related greenhouse gas reduction strategies, the reductions in emissions achieved will be overpowered by the explosive growth in car ownership and vehicle miles traveled worldwide.

So what is the role that can be played by state departments of transportation in bolstering the fledgling - but growing - electric car and alternative-vehicle market?

1) Several state departments of transportation are already taking steps towards increased electric vehicle deployment by providing needed infrastructure for refueling and other support services. Washington, Oregon, California, and British Columbia are working together on an initiative for the Interstate 5 West Coast Green Highway. The partnership, which involves both public agencies and the private sector, is working to build a framework for electric vehicles and other alternative fuel vehicles along the entire 1,350 miles of the I-5 corridor. Currently in the early stages of the initiative, the Washington, Oregon, and California Departments of Transportation are working to develop electric vehicle infrastructure standards, guidelines, and consistency in signage.

2) By turning over their own vehicle fleets to include electric cars, buses and other alternative energy products, state DOTs can also affect change. In 2000 the former Governor of New York State, George Pataki, announced a plan to transform the NYC Transit bus fleet into the cleanest in the world. The first few years of the program focused on cleaning up the diesel fleet, but recent improvements have included adding both compressed natural gas and hybrid-electric buses. Just last week, on June 16, 2010, Virginia’s Governor Bob McDonnell announced a initiative to increase the use of electric vehicles in the state. Called Virginia “Get Ready” the plan will involve a number of state and local government agencies and businesses, vehicle manufacturers and agency fleets, universities, utilities, and the Virginia Department of Transportation.

States are moving forward. However, a greater degree of cooperation between federal, state, and local agencies, automakers, and electric utilities will be needed if America is to transition its existing transportation system into one that is compatible with a larger market share of electric vehicles. The solutions to GHG emissions are real. Success will depend on sound leadership, dedicated resources and a strong national will.

Find more information about AASHTO's proposals at: http://climatechange.transportation.org/pdf/RealSolutionsReport.pdf.

Automakers support sustainable mobility and are producing diverse technologies that run on a range of alternative fuels. Electric vehicles will play an important role in advancing this goal. Strong cooperation among automakers, electricity providers, consumers, and all levels of government is essential to the successful deployment of electric vehicles.

Our nation needs mass market commercialization of advanced electric propulsion technologies to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to address transportation sector greenhouse gas emissions. Meeting the diverse and challenging requirements of the transportation sector will only be possible through careful placement of advanced powertrain technologies incorporating electric drive, including hybrid electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles.

Achieving widespread acceptance of these technologies requires focused efforts to:

· develop a supporting infrastructure;

· provide incentives for consumer adoption;

· align regulatory efforts; and

· remove other market barriers.

The recent joint final EPA/NHTSA rulemaking on greenhouse gas emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy establishes a policy of requiring manufacturers of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles to account for upstream emissions from electricity generation (i.e., the emissions of utilities in effect become the responsibility of the automotive sector).

This policy discourages future production of plug-in electric vehicles by making automobile manufacturers responsible for the electric energy mix of the country or a given state. Automakers cannot control fuel production (including electricity or any other fuel) nor can they control how much the vehicle is driven. Clearly public policies and programs to address upstream emissions and vehicle travel are needed. However, requiring automakers to account for – despite having no control over – upstream emissions will increase compliance burdens, create planning uncertainty, and put large-scale investments at risk, hampering the launch of electric mobility.

Vehicle electrification requires supportive investments by the utility industry. Local distribution networks for the grid may be stressed if multiple vehicles begin charging at the same time, or if transformers are not allowed to properly cool during the evening. The potential for unintended consequences exists and efforts by both industries need to be well-coordinated. The federal government should support a framework for the automotive industry to work with the utility industry to develop a roadmap and investment plan that reflects future plug-in hybrid electric vehicle and battery electric vehicle energy requirements as part of larger grid modernization efforts.

Access to reliable home charging infrastructure is a requirement for the deployment of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and battery electric vehicles. Although 110/120 volt outlets are available in the home, the circuit/panel inside the home may not currently be able to provide reliable support for the vehicle charger.

While the majority of charging is likely to occur at the home or workplace, publicly available charging access will be important to ensure the successful adoption of battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. To gain widespread usage of battery electric vehicles, the issue of consumer “range anxiety” must be addressed. In the near term, access to public stations will provide the necessary reassurances to drivers of battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that they will have the ability to recharge at locations other than home and work. Publicly available sites also serve to increase consumer awareness of electrification as a viable alternative to traditional energy technologies.

Lastly, the high cost of advanced batteries such as lithium ion presents a hurdle to widespread electric vehicle adoption. Early in the life cycle of any new product or technology, scale is one of the critical factors enabling manufacturing success, as well as cost reductions. Federal policy can address the cost hurdle through tax incentives and polices that increase near-term demand for advanced batteries.

Incentivizing the use of advanced batteries in hybrid electric vehicles and promoting increased sales of hybrid electric vehicles through tax credits would significantly expand the use of advanced batteries. This policy, in turn, would support the entire electric drive industry, as production and sales volumes of power electronics, motors, and related components also increase and achieve efficiencies of scale sooner.

We applaud the administration for recognizing the need for a broader discussion on the challenges manufacturers face to bringing new technologies to market and gaining widespread consumer acceptance. President Obama has set a goal of one million electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015. An integrated approach is necessary to make that vision a reality and government will play a critical role. We’re committed to working with all stakeholders to ensure the successful deployment of electric vehicles.

The short answer to this question is that governments in the US should spend nothing to develop and promote electric vehicle technology. Why?

First, because most have no money to spend. The federal government is sinking in debt. California, which has probably spent more than any other government on building a network of "charging stations" for electric vehicles, is already paying some of its debts in IOUs.

Second, because the focus on "fuel efficiency" results in lighter vehicles and therefore additional deaths on the nation's roads, contrary to the assertion that "Improving safety is DOT's top priority". Existing CAFÉ regulations already cost thousands of additional fatalities each year. Who wants to spill more "blood for oil"?

Third, because governments do not have the expertise to identify winners and losers in technical matters. If there were a commercial demand for electrically powered vehicles, private capital would be more likely than governments to finance the necessary research and development.

The practical question that is still not being asked is:

"Why do noble statesmen itch
To interfere in matters which
They do not understand?"

Plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), which include both pure battery electric vehicles like the Nissan LEAF and plug-in hybrids like the GM Volt are clearly going to be a large part of achieving a sustainable US transportation sector. While we must continue to make gasoline powered and hybrid electric vehicles more efficient, PEVs hold tremendous potential to cut oil consumption and reduction carbon pollution, especially when coupled with renewable electricity generation. Federal, state and local departments of transportation (DOTs) can play in important role for realizing the vision of a wide-scale PEV use.

To date, the main focus for vehicle electrification has been appropriately focused on vehicle manufacture (i.e. improving batteries and reducing their costs) and vehicle-to-grid interconnection. With the Chevy Volt and Nissan LEAF rolling out this year, such vehicles are coming to showrooms. Utilities are meanwhile calculating likely vehicle penetration rates and needed local electricity distribution system upgrades.

The challenges involved with shifting to PEVs have been confronted by a range of public and private entities. Strangely, transportation infrastructure agencies have largely been absent from this discussion. Especially as transportation agencies are asked to help reduce oil consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation, policymakers should consider the roles these agencies can play in helping to facilitate a shift to PEVs.

Most importantly, transportation agencies should consider how infrastructure decisions can actively promote PEV use. Developing a transportation network that permits travelers to take fewer and shorter car trips is a key step that DOTs can take to promote the use of range-limited PEVs. While the range of PEVs has steadily increased, they are not likely to show the range of gasoline vehicles for many years. Regions that are rich in transportation options – public transit and passenger rail, shared biking networks, and good bicycle and pedestrian infrastructures – will make range-limited PEVs more viable for consumers. State and local transportation agencies hold the primary authority to develop such a transportation network.

It’s worth noting that legislation to support the development and adoption of PEVs with bipartisan support in Congress would focus effort (and funding) on regional or corridor “ecosystems” with which all of the components needed for PEV use are encouraged. Such an approach dovetails nicely with the regional- or corridor-based transportation-sector GHG planning adopted in California, as well as provisions contained in each major climate and energy bill considered by Congress over the past two years, including the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act.

In addition to promoting PEV adoption through infrastructure decisions, transportation agencies are well positioned to facilitate PEV deployment in other ways. Large-scale PEV deployment will require some degree of public or commercial charging infrastructure, in addition to substantial residential infrastructure. Some studies have shown that drivers require a certain density of available nearby charging options before they feel confident that they will be able to fuel a PEV when needed.

The location of non-residential infrastructure will need to be carefully planned to accommodate such consumer prerequisites. DOT traffic engineers and planners are well suited to analyzing both existing travel patterns and planned development to help determine, in conjunction with utilities, automakers, charging service providers, and other agencies, the most suitable locations and amount of public infrastructure needed, ensuring that funds are well spent. Moreover, new infrastructure can be designed to best take advantage of existing public and private charging options.

Deploying charging infrastructure will also require a significant engineering and construction effort. While utilities experienced in large public works projects will undertake a portion of this task, transportation agencies also have significant experience planning and managing large infrastructure projects. This includes an extensive network of transportation construction contractors that needed to deploy sufficient charging infrastructure along our transportation system.

Synergies may exist with respect to grid interconnection as well. Electricity used to power transit offers a ready energy source for PEVs that can be connected to charging stations, potentially limiting new grid investment. Overhead or under-ground wires that power streetcars could feed curbside public charging. Electrified heavy or commuter rail could be served by park and ride lots with charging facilities, where cars charged overnight at off-peak hours could feed energy back into the grid, reducing the need for peak daytime generating capacity.

Transportation agencies should be at the table when it comes to financing the infrastructure to support an electrified fleet as well. DOTs are experienced with the multi-jurisdictional grant-making that will surely be necessary to fund major infrastructure investments across states, counties, and cities. And as we move past the gasoline tax as a source of revenue for transportation, recipients of revenue from mileage, other new user fees, or general funds, will likely seek the flexibility to use these funds to include charging infrastructure as part of more traditional road, bridge, and transit projects.

Though PEVs are only one piece of the puzzle of a sustainable transportation network, they could very well be a large piece. Our nation’s energy, climate, and economic security would all be better served if transportation agencies took an active role in helping to design, develop, and deploy a 21st century transportation network that can support PEVs as much as other types of clean and efficient transportation.