Feds To Spend Hundreds of Millions of Dollars on E.V. Chargers in 'Disadvantaged Communities'
The projects include $1.4 million for a charging station in a remote Alaskan community with barely 2,000 people.

Last week, the White House announced that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) would issue $623 million in grants for states to build chargers for electric vehicles (E.V.s). The money comes from the Charging and Fuel Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program, a $2.5 billion fund established as part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. According to the announcement, the project "will fund 47 EV charging and alternative-fueling infrastructure projects in 22 states and Puerto Rico, including construction of approximately 7,500 EV charging ports."
Unfortunately, that money is unlikely to go as far as it would have in private hands. "The CFI Program advances President Biden's Justice40 Initiative, which set a goal that 40% of the overall benefits of federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution," bragged the FHWA press release. "More than 70% of the CFI funding announced today will support project sites in disadvantaged communities."
As an example, it notes "$1.4 million to the Chilkoot Indian Association, an Alaska Native Tribe, to build an EV charging station in Haines, a rural and disadvantaged community where there are no publicly available EV charging stations."
Haines is in Haines Borough, Alaska, which has a population of just over 2,000 people.
It's hard to imagine that "disadvantaged" communities would buy E.V.s if only there were public charging stations available. A November survey from S&P Global Mobility showed that potential buyers cite high E.V. prices as their primary concern, higher than concerns about range or charging infrastructure. And while E.V. prices have declined in recent years, the average new electric vehicle still costs around $50,000.
Not that this is the first instance of poorly planned government spending on E.V. infrastructure. Last month, Reason reported that even though the federal government had dispensed $2 billion out of the $7.5 billion apportioned by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to build public charging stations, no chargers funded by the cash had come online. Speaking to Politico's James Bikales, state and E.V. industry officials blamed "the difficulties state agencies and charging companies face in meeting a complex set of contracting requirements and minimum operating standards for the federally-funded chargers."
"The barrier isn't technological," The Wall Street Journal's editorial board noted this week. "It took Tesla less time to install 80 chargers at its Harris Ranch station in northern California." Rather, "the bureaucrats are getting in their own way."
"The FHWA issued a rule requiring that workers for most projects be certified by the electricians union, or another government-approved training program," the Journal continued. "The Electric Vehicle Charging Association warned that the restrictions 'risk creating a bottleneck by limiting the available workforce.' The agency charged ahead anyway, decreasing the odds of a workable contract."
"In a better Washington, there would be no subsidies for EV chargers," noted the Journal. "The market would meet demand, as it did with gasoline stations. But we live in the age of subsidy," meaning bureaucrats are all too happy to give out your money and mine, with little hope of achieving their intended goals.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Bwahahaaaa!! In other news the major news entertainment networks were full of videos of electric vehicles stalled in winter weather having become un-re-chargeable and others waiting in long lines at the public recharging stations where it took up to two hours in the cold weather to accumulate enough of a charge to get home again - or maybe enough of a charge to get to the next charging station. In a rare spasm of honesty, America's socialist and catastrophic climate change cheerleaders admitted that maybe government forcing a premature mass switch to electric vehicles might not have been such a good idea after all!
How is this not even mentioned, especially after bringing up an Alaskan location as an example?
It is all bullshit to line the pockets of favored individuals and groups at the taxpayer's expense.
Until the price comes down on EVs and they are able to charge from any 115v outlet with only a sufficiently long extension cord required, they will not be practical for most people. Even then, they simply aren't suitable for different environments and uses where ICE vehicles are already in use.
At some point you would think a "free minds and free markets" writer would talk about what is really driving the push for this stuff
Because Haines is a coastal town whose record low is 18 F warmer than Chicago's
Stop setting the stage for libertarian Newfie jokes.
So, um, how are they supposed to keep these things running when it gets cold?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/other/tesla-owners-in-deep-freeze-discover-the-cold-hard-truth-about-evs/ar-AA1n42lu
They're NOT supposed to. That's the point! Chicagoans deserve what they get. They swallowed the official narrative hook, line and sinker like the good little social democrats that they are. As they were freezing their patooties off in the most recent round of "global warming" waiting for their turn to spend two hours plus at the officially sanctioned public recharging station, they had ample time to reflect upon the imminent climate change disaster. Only some of them were capable of drawing any conclusions from that exercise.
It won't be a problem - people in disadvantaged communities aren't going to be buying EV's. For a number of reasons.
And in this Alaskan town in particular - how close is the nearest other town with a charging station? The closest city is Juneau, and it's 5 hours by ferry - there aren't even roads to take you there.
Multi modal EVs. A battery powered, amphicar! 😉
Just more "if you build it, they will come" utopian thought. Unrestricted by any consideration of the laws of the universe.
Well then the good news is you aren't using any battery charge while you're riding on the ferry to Juneau, although it also means that the ferry is burning fossil fuels for that part of the trip.
Wait. It's not an EV ferry?
We had -20°F last week. ICE vehicles struggled starting and diesels ran like shit for the first 10-15 minutes.
Not surprised about EV performance in the cold.
Darn physics and chemistry getting in the way of feel good Climate change religion. Next you'll tell me they are racist.
Nah. The racism is being mitigated with this program. Can't you see that?
Great, "disadvatanged" people can get direct reparations from rich EV owners while they are charging.
Yes! And they can also bask in the global warming disadvantages of living in Alaska while they are waiting for reparations at the local electric vehicle garage!
Rather, "the bureaucrats are getting in their own way."
In other news...
Seriously, as with "Green" energy initiatives, this is all political and providing the right sound bytes for a given tribe.
Global warming would actually increase the suitability of an EV in Alaska...so it's a feature not a bug - in Alaska. That whole months of permanent darkness isn't boding well for the Alaskan solar industry tho. The Feds could contract with Elon to build a big rocket sideways at the North pole, then roll the earth over some to help get more sun on Alaska...or something equally as wise as mandating EV's...
Next up; a huge grant program to provide EVs to communities with underutilized charging stations.
For the children, of course.
It will probably be powered by a generator.
Do just "chargers" make EV's go?
Next up: Universal Electricity for All which will require your house to pay the bill but it'll be okay. CA has Commie-Tent camps now.
Will the new tent cities have EV stations?
Worse than that. The CA PUC has the utility providers working up new rate schedules that are to be set according to household income!
The Bernie Bros are just ending around any blockage of their two, related pledges: "It's a human right" and "free shit for everybody".
We don't need to let the laws of physics, chemistry or economics get in the way of utopian dreams.
Feds To Spend Hundreds of Millions of Dollars on E.V. Chargers in 'Disadvantaged Communities'...Not that this is the first instance of poorly planned government spending on E.V. infrastructure.
This is not 'poorly planned'. It is planned exactly as intended. The US is corrupt to its bones. The only purpose here is so that wealthy people can loudly proclaim how wonderful they are for volunteering in a soup kitchen one day per year - and still get home to their non-disadvantaged communities at the end of that hour.
Uncle Ted Stevens is roling in his grave; only 1.4 million in todays money wouldn't make it out of committee.
Maybe NOBODY wants them ... I mean if people really wanted them wouldn't they be *willing* to EARN them themselves?
It's amazing how indoctrinated US society already is. The frog pot is already boiling. The element was turned on when taking (borrowing) without *earning* (paying the bill) punishment was considered cruel and unusual punishment (i.e. Can't jail a person for being 'poor'; No, but you can jail them for taking what they didn't want to *earn*).
Now the Gov-'Guns' are the criminals. They don't ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for anyone. They STEAL for those who don't want to *earn* what they want.
So, you've been to San Francisco?
Probably lots of copper wire in there to be redistributed.
I just made a comment about "expertitis" in the Populism thread. Applicable.
Watch 'em get stripped for wiring, metal, and conduit. In the case of Alaska, the first two would be for cash and the conduit would be for illegal hooch stills in the "dry" areas of the State.
The first two paragraphs show the lack of understanding of federal funding, This will get to private hands. The feds create the program and set up the funding. The states will receive their "share" and reallocate to local sources for the program. The local transportation czars will apply for and allocate the funds to some fudged program that meets all the stupid, federal and state requirements that are imposed (disadvantaged communities). Then the local transporation agencies will put their funded projects out to bid, with no consideration of actual effectiveness by the way, and the oligopoly of charging station contractors that understand how to play the game of government contracting, will get the nod to put them in.
All along the way, each governmental agency gets their cut and the private providers get an inflated profit margin.
The bureaucracies are ensured of continued justification for their existence and, they earn more social welfare points along the way.
What could possibly go wrong.
"a rural and disadvantaged community"
That's a federal definition. Just more slicing and dicing of the population. It's how they operate and get tribal support.
"meaning bureaucrats are all too happy to give out your money and mine"
I'm sure it's assumed, but it needs to be stated plainly that this money is first forcibly taken from us.
No one in their right mind would voluntarily give these politicians and bureaucrats their money to spend as as they want.
Dude, they barely even use cars out in bush Alaska. It's all ATVs.
And I promise you that no tribal (or anyone else outside of oil magnates) is out there spending $20K on an electric ATV when they could get four higher performing ones for the same price.
Know your audience, aristos. Most of the country, let alone the Alaskan bush, isn't the same as Martha's Vineyard or Mar-a-Lago.
The push for electric vehicles is taking an ugly turn... This is a good toy for those who do not travel outside the city center. But there are millions of people who need a reliable car for difficult climatic conditions. I can give you a link to honda odyssey sydney - https://www.bestpeoplemovers.com.au/our-vehicles/honda-make/odyssey-model/ Japanese cars are now the most in demand as a family car in Australia. Quality, availability for purchase and standard refilling are the classics that will always come first.