DOE and DOT Announce $7 Million for New Projects to Accelerate Decarbonization of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Freight Transportation

 

DOE and DOT Announce $7 Million for New Projects to Accelerate Decarbonization of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Freight Transportation, Release Funding Notice of Intent to Increase Accessibility and Functionality of EV Chargers  

The Biden-Harris Administration, through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), today announced funding to accelerate the creation of zero-emission vehicle corridors that expand the nation’s electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. The Department has awarded $7.4 million to seven projects to develop medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicle (EV) charging and hydrogen corridor infrastructure plans that will benefit millions of drivers across 23 states. Additionally, in coordination with the U.S. Department of Transportation through the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, DOE announced its intent to release funding to address barriers to a cleaner, safer, more affordable, and more reliable Made in America EV charging network. These funding measures, in coordination with additional clean transportation announcements from the Federal Highway Administration and the White House, will be critical to achieving President Biden’s goals of building out a national network of 500,000 EV chargers and ensuring that 50% of new light-duty vehicle sales are electric by 2030. 

“A clean transportation sector requires vast investments across the entire industry, including to decarbonize the trucks that move our goods and building more charging ports to get those trucks from coast to coast,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm. “President Biden’s historic clean energy laws are making it possible for us to get more EVs on the road by expanding charging infrastructure into underserved communities, while reducing range and cost anxiety among drivers who want to go electric.” 

Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Planning Selections 

The DOE-funded projects will focus on electrification plans for essential and heavily trafficked domestic freight corridors, including those serving Northern and Southern California, the Eastern Seaboard, the Northeast, Southwest, and much of the Midwest. The projects, administered by DOE’s Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO), will advance the President’s decarbonization goals by accelerating the deployment of medium- and heavy-duty EV charging and refueling infrastructure to reduce emissions from freight corridors and the depots, ports, and other facilities those corridors service. Selected projects support DOE’s Justice40 priorities by demonstrating the impacts and benefits of these freight corridors plans on underserved communities. The projects would also help improve air quality in underserved areas of major American cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, San Francisco, Oakland, and Salt Lake City. 

The selected projects are:

• CALSTART: East Coast Commercial ZEV Corridor. This project will launch an intensive strategic planning effort to spur the deployment of commercial medium- and heavy-duty (MHD) zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) infrastructure through the development of an East Coast Commercial ZEV Corridor along the I-95 freight corridor from Georgia to New Jersey. 
• Cummins Inc.: MD-HD ZEV Infrastructure Planning with Focus on I-80 Midwest Corridor. This project will develop an extensive two-phase MD-HD EV Charging and H2 Fueling Plan for the Midwest I-80 corridor serving Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio, to support 30% of the MD-HD fleet using ZEV technologies by 2035.
• Gas Technology Institute: Houston to Los Angeles (H2LA)–I-10 Hydrogen Corridor Project. This project will develop a flexible and scalable blueprint plan for an investment-ready hydrogen fueling and heavy-duty freight truck network from Houston to LA (H2LA) along I-10, including the Texas Triangle region, and in the process develop methodology for future corridor plans across the country.  
• Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator: First to Last Mile: Creating an Integrated Goods Movement Charging Network around the I-710 Corridor. This project will create a plan for innovative infrastructure solutions at industrial facilities and commercial zones along critical freight arteries feeding into Southern California’s I-710 freeway. The project will explore how private sector fleets can establish an integrated network that leverages existing industrial and commercial real estate assets while providing greatest benefit to municipalities and communities.
• National Grid: Northeast Electric Highways Study. This project will forecast electric charging demand at traffic stops on freight corridors across Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey to help inform a blueprint for future large-scale, least-cost deployment of commercial EV charging and serve as an exemplar for other regions.
• Rocky Mountain Institute: San Francisco and Bay Area Regional Medium-and Heavy-Duty Electrification Roadmap. This project will create a roadmap for charging infrastructure to support the full electrification of three key trucking market segments – drayage, regional haul, and long-haul – in the Bay Area of California. 
• Utah State University: Wasatch Front Multi-Modal Corridor Electrification Plan - Greater Salt Lake City Region. This project will develop a community, state and industry supported action plan that will improve air quality in the underserved communities most impacted by high-density medium- and heavy-duty traffic in the greater Salt Lake City region. 

Notice of Intent to Issue Ride and Drive Electric Funding Opportunity Announcement

The Joint Office of Energy and Transportation has issued a funding Notice of Intent to address challenges to achieving an equitable clean transportation future by improving the charging experience for EV drivers and expanding charging infrastructure into underserved communities. Anticipated topic areas include:

• Enhancing EV Charging Resiliency 
• Community-Driven EV Charging Deployment Benefits Planning, Implementation, and Tracking in Underserved Communities
• Workforce Development
• Increasing Commercial Capacity for Testing and Certification of High-Power EV Chargers
• Validating High-Power EV Charger Real-World Performance and Reliability 

These announcements will directly help companies implement the requirements included in the recently published minimum standards developed by DOT with DOE input for federally funded EV infrastructure and will support the forthcoming $2.5 billion in competitive grants to build alternative fueling infrastructure in communities across the nation. The combined measures will be critical to achieving President Biden’s goals of 500,000 EV chargers and 50% of new light-duty vehicles sales being electric by 2030 and a net-zero emissions economy by 2050. Today's slate of announcements exemplifies the administration's commitment to a transportation future that is cleaner, more equitable and affordable, and provides economic opportunities to boost domestic manufacturing of EV materials and infrastructure and create good-paying jobs. 

Learn more about the selected VTO projects and the Joint Office intended funding.  

Battery electric trucks emit 63% less GHG emissions than diesel

From the extraction of raw materials to its operational phase, battery electric trucks produced in Europe today can deliver the largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions over their lifetime.— A new study compares the life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of electric, hydrogen, natural gas, and diesel trucks and buses in Europe. Its results indicate a clear pathway to decarbonize the sector: Battery electric models can deliver the greatest emission reductions even when using the EU’s average electricity grid mix, which is not fully renewable but will continue to improve during the lifetime of the vehicles.

To reach the Paris Agreement goal of keeping global warming below 2°C, Europe needs to urgently decarbonize its trucks and buses, the highest emitting vehicles on the road. They represent only 2% of vehicles on the road but contribute to a quarter of transport-related emissions. The study, carried out by the non-profit research organization International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), offers a comprehensive picture of the life-cycle emissions of different powertrains and fuel options of these vehicles on a fully harmonized basis.

Its methodology addresses not only CO2 emissions resulting from vehicle tailpipes but also the GHG emissions arising from the manufacturing of the vehicles and their components, vehicle maintenance, fuel production, and electricity production. The study factors in the changes in the average electricity and fuel mix during the lifetime of today's vehicles.

A key finding of the study is that the greatest climate impact produced by trucks and buses over their whole life comes from the use or fuel consumption phase, not from the extraction of raw materials, construction, or maintenance.

“The problem is not the factory but the road. The high greenhouse gas intensity of driving a truck during its whole life offsets the GHG emissions generated during manufacturing or the production of the fuel, or the energy it consumes. Our study addresses the uncertainties surrounding the share of emissions in all stages of the vehicle’s life. It shows that only battery electric and some fuel cell electric trucks can meet the climate targets in the sector,” says Nikita Pavlenko, ICCT’s Fuels Program Lead.

The comparison of the different powertrains and fuel options reveals that battery electric trucks take the lead in reducing GHG emissions. When estimated over the whole lifetime of a battery-electric 40-tonne tractor-trailer entering service in 2021, these vehicle models produce at least 63% lower emissions compared to diesel. As the grid continues to decarbonize, the emissions of these will fall—the study shows an 84% reduction of emissions when using only renewable electricity.

Fuel cell electric trucks using hydrogen produced from fossil fuel produce 15% less GHG emissions compared to their diesel counterparts. The emissions reduction depends heavily on the source of hydrogen. With hydrogen produced with only renewable electricity, emissions fall by 85%. The GHG emission savings from hydrogen trucks are less than can be achieved from a battery electric model when using a non-renewable energy source.

“Increasing energy efficiency is the game-changing factor in shrinking the carbon footprint of battery electric trucks compared to the rest of the technologies. These models become the cleanest option even if the source of electricity is not fully clean. This is not the case for hydrogen trucks, which can become a promising option in the future if hydrogen is produced from a 100% renewable energy source. Today, their capacity to reduce emissions is still limited,” says Felipe Rodríguez, ICCT’s Program Lead.

In the various scenarios, natural gas trucks and buses provide, at best, marginal GHG emission reductions compared to diesel. We find that 2021 vehicle models have life-cycle emissions ranging from 4% to 18% lower than their diesel counterparts. Methane, which is a potent GHG that leaks from the vehicle and throughout the production and supply of natural gas, is a significant driver of the powertrain’s emissions. However, the benefits from natural gas vehicles disappear when looking at short-term warming impacts, which result in 0% to 21% greater GHG emissions than diesel vehicles over natural gas trucks’ full lifecycle.

“The climate benefits of natural gas urban buses compared to diesel are marginal at best when compared to diesel. Methane leakage may undermine the benefits of transitioning bus fleets to natural gas. Cities should consider their transport policy strategies with these numbers at hand,” says Mr. Pavlenko.

The analysis evaluates the current best-in-class diesel models against their natural gas and zero-emission alternatives in the European market. Its methodology provides innovative contributions that distinguish it from other life-cycle analyses. The authors estimate present and projected future GHG emissions of trucks and buses and factor in the life-cycle average carbon intensity of fuel and electricity mixes, as well as changes in the fuel mix over the vehicle’s lifetime considering present energy policies.

Tax credits for the purchase or lease of EVs

The U.S. Department of Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has released three key pieces of clarifying information for consumers, businesses and other entities seeking to utilize the tax credits for the purchase or lease of EVs: 1) Frequently asked questions about the new, previously-owned and commercial clean vehicle credits (Sections 30D, 45W and 25E), 2) a notice clarifying the incremental cost in 2023 for commercial clean vehicles (Section 45W), and 3) a notice signifying the intent to propose regulations on the clean vehicles credit (Section 30D). The proposed guidance on the new sourcing provisions for the clean vehicles credit (Section 30D) will come in March, along with a notice of proposed rulemaking, according to the Treasury.

In response, Electrification Coalition Executive Director Ben Prochazka released the following statement:

“Oil has a monopoly on U.S. transportation which puts us at a great economic and national security risk.  By accelerating the transition to EVs, we can reduce the risk of our oil dependence. The tax credits and incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act will make America safer by accelerating this transition and helping to facilitate a secure, reliable, and sustainable supply chain.

“The information released today is an important step to clarify the new requirements for consumers, businesses, and state and local governments planning to buy electric vehicles soon. While the proposed guidance for sourcing provisions was not released today, a whitepaper on the direction the Treasury Department may take was released. The whitepaper helps clarify as manufacturers identify which vehicles may be eligible for the tax credits and when the new requirements go into effect.

“The EC applauds the Treasury for sharing initial thoughts on the sourcing provisions for the Section 30D credit. This preliminary information is helpful to manufacturers seeking to make their EVs eligible and to help consumers as they consider purchasing an EV. The early information appears to be a common-sense and straightforward approach that looks to accelerate adoption but we will still need to keep our eyes on the road to create a strong and reliable allied supply chain as the final rules are written. We look forward to seeing the actual proposed guidance when it is released in March.

Historic Investments to Electrify USPS Fleet Will Reduce Dependence on Oil, Protect National Securiy

• December 20, 2022
• 
  

Today, the Biden-Harris administration announced an investment of $9.6 billion to electrify the U.S. Postal Service’s delivery fleet over the next five years. Electrification Coalition Executive Director Ben Prochazka responded:

“Our nation’s dependence on oil for transportation has led to many national security risks, so our federal government must take all necessary steps to transition to vehicles powered with domestically- and diversely-produced electricity. The USPS delivery fleet is prime for electrification because it will reduce air pollution in our communities, reduce operating costs, and strengthen our national and economic security.

“The U.S. federal fleet is the largest vehicle fleet in the world, and the USPS delivery fleet is the largest and most recognizable fleet within that. Last year, a report by the Electrification Coalition and Atlas Public Policy demonstrated that if the USPS electrified its entire light-duty fleet by 2025, it would save $2.9 billion over the life of those vehicles.

 “The Biden-Harris administration has taken historic steps to transportation electrification, including passing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act earlier this year. This move further signals that electricity will power not only the next generation of passenger vehicles but also medium- and heavy-duty vehicles.

“Americans can look forward to receiving their daily mail from cleaner, quieter, and more efficient vehicles.”

ChooseEV” features educational information and resources including a public charger locator and savings calculator

As the demand for information about electric vehicles grows, Eversource, in collaboration with United Illuminating (UI), has unveiled “ChooseEV,” a new, online educational tool that features information and technical assistance. The platform, which will be available on Eversource.com and uinet.com, offers customers a variety of ways to learn more about EVs and help them make decisions when comparing vehicles and charging options.

“This new resource is a great way to provide customers with critical information they’re looking for about electric vehicles,” said Eversource Electric Vehicle Expert Enoch Lenge. “We’re proud to invest in digital tools designed to educate, inform, and make it easy for people to discover the right EV solutions for them, especially at a time when electric vehicles are playing an increasing role in helping to build our clean energy future.”

ChooseEV features advice on how customers can save both money and energy; select the right EV as well as the following information:   

• EV Incentives and Offers  
• Gasoline/Electric Savings Calculator 
• EV & Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Reviewer 
• Level 2 Charger Review Tool 
• EV Public Charger Finder 

In January, both Eversource and UI worked with the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) to unveil a statewide electric vehicle charging station installation program, designed to bolster the infrastructure required for meeting the state’s EV goals by 2025

EV incentive in the Inflation Reduction Act - Comments

Comments to IRS for IRA EV Incentive

November 13, 2022

by Barry Kresch, President EV Cub of Connecticut

Summary of Comments Submitted to the IRS

The EV Club has partnered with the Electric Vehicle Association to author comments for the in-process IRS rule-making regarding the implementation of the EV incentive in the Inflation Reduction Act.

There is a scrum of lobbyists from manufacturers and interests groups weighing in with their cadres of lawyers and tax accountants. The focus of the EV Club and the EVA is the consumer and that informs our perspective where we chose to focus our efforts.

Comments inform the details of enactment that are within the purview of the IRS, not the legislation itself, which cannot be changed without further legislation. The outlook for the legislation to be amended in the near-term is cloudy at best.

The usual disclaimer – This is based on the latest information available and is not a legal opinion.

Sourcing/Manufacturing Requirements

The focus of the IRA writ large is to “inshore,” or re-orient manufacturing to North America. It already seems to be having a material effect. This is a chart from Bloomberg showing significant announced investment levels that seemingly flow directly from the legislation.

The concern is timing. As of the date of this writing, we are not aware of any EV that would qualify for the full incentive when the requirements begin to phase in as of January, and we are aware of many that won’t qualify for any incentive. We are advised that the IRS does have within its power to grant a temporary waiver, and facing a potentially significant disruption in the ability of the consumer to access EV purchase incentives, we support a modest delay in the requirements so that supply chains have a little more time to adjust.

Certification

Our view is that the least well thought out part of the legislation is how the eligibility of a given vehicle is communicated to the consumer. There are requirements for final assembly, battery mineral sourcing, and battery manufacture. (Price, too, but we’ll get to that later.) The latter two change every year, so a car that is compliant in 2024 might lose compliance in 2025. The fact that the requirements change on a calendar year basis puts it out of sync with the model year focus of building cars, not to mention EPA certification and other regulatory things that happen with a new vehicle. If there is a list of vehicles, such as on Plugstar or the AFDC.energy.gov website, these sources are no longer able to provide definitive information regarding incentive eligibility. The best they can do is list cars that may be eligible, leaving it for the consumer to do their own research. The AFDC website directs consumers to contact the manufacturer or check on the IRS website. That sounds like fun! I wouldn’t be surprised if the confusion filters down to dealerships. It would be possible for a Volkswagen dealership, for example, to have a German made ID.4 parked next to the identical vehicle manufactured in Tennessee. The former is immediately disqualified due to the final assembly rule, while the latter might be available if the sourcing requirements are met.

The AFDC site also links to a VIN decoder. The VIN has the information needed to know if a vehicle qualifies. The problem is that a VIN isn’t available in anywhere near a timely way relative to the consumer shopping journey. By the time the VIN is known, a binding contract is almost certainly in place and the vehicle is almost at the point of delivery.

Proposed Solution

• Have the certification be on a model year basis and have it be available at the time the model year is initially offered for sale (which may precede deliveries).
• The manufacturer takes responsibility for the certification. If due to a certification running change, the model (or some units of the model) is subsequently found to not meet the requirements, any incentive claw-back would become the responsibility of the manufacturer.
• This timing would enable the certification to potentially be included on the Monroney sticker (the label affixed to the window of a new vehicle that displays the EPA mileage rating and other officially required information).
• Online tools like those referenced above would be able to definitively report the incentive status for a particular vehicle.
• This model year basis is consistent with how many state programs are run.

Our guiding principle is that an incentive must be simple, dependable, and easy to access. The intent of this proposed solution is make the inherent complexity of the legislation invisible to the consumer.

MSRP Cap

The bill specifies that a vehicle must have a maximum MSRP of $55,000 for a sedan or $80,000 for an SUV or light truck. It does not define how the MSRP is determined. Early reports about the legislation indicated that the MSRP would be defined as the final price of the vehicle, including options (but not taxes, title, or destination charges). There are MSRP caps in state incentive programs but they typically don’t work this way.

Most vehicles have multiple trim levels and then offer options within each trim level. The Connecticut program, CHEAPR, uses the base trim level MSRP. If a trim level is below the maximum allowed MSRP, ordering additional options does not affect eligibility. The California law is more generous. If the base price of the lowest priced trim level is below the cap, then all trim levels qualify. The EV Club and EVA are advocating for the CA definition. This would obviously allow more EVs to qualify. We can deal with that!

Transfers

Eager to get a purchase incentive but not happy about waiting many months until you file your taxes to realize it? The transfer option is designed as the answer. Becoming effective in 2024, the consumer has the option to transfer the incentive to the dealer (new or used) and receive the tax credit as a “cash on the hood” rebate. As we have been diving into the bill details, an important point about the tax treatment of the rebate is not clear. If someone elects the transfer, they receive the full amount. However, if they do not have the tax liability to absorb it, they are on the hook for paying the difference between their liability and the $7500. At least that is how several folks who know more about tax accounting then I have interpreted it.

Doing this kind of claw-back makes no sense on any level. The consumer is exposed to an unquantified risk. The dealer is receiving the credit, and  either using it or getting reimbursed by Treasury, so it would be a weird form of double taxation. Finally, it is self-defeating. The intended design of the incentive is to increase EV adoption among non-affluent consumers. This would act as a red flag for exactly the target consumer. The EV Club and EVA are advocating that anyone taking the transfer get the full incentive, full stop.

Transfers vs Leasing

A transfer works differently than a lease. If a customer leases, the incentive goes to the finance company or whomever holds the title. That entity can package the incentive into lower lease payments. It has always been a way for someone who does not have $7500 of offsetting tax liability to be able to take full advantage of the incentive. However, the title holder is not legally obligated to do this. They can just keep the incentive for themselves. It is why we have always advised consumers to discuss this specifically with the seller.

One of the good things about the transfer is that the rules require full disclosure on the part of the seller and that the seller passes the entire incentive through to the customer. The EV Club/EVA recommend that these requirements be expanded to include leasing customers.

Transfers and Income Eligibility

There are income caps in this program as we explain on our incentives page. If someone takes the tax credit the old-fashioned way, meaning when they file their taxes, income eligibility can be determined by either the current year or prior year modified adjusted gross income. In the case of a transfer, where the dealer is tasked with verifying eligibility, as an operational matter, the only option is to look at the prior year. It is the recommendation of the EV Club/EVA that the consumer, if determined to be ineligible for the prior year, be given the option of using the current year. In that scenario, the incentive would be given at the time of purchase. The consumer would take responsibility for current year eligibility (to be verified upon tax filing). If the consumer remains ineligible, it is their responsibility to repay the incentive. There are situations where someone has a pretty good idea whether they will have a change in taxable income and this expands their opportunity to receive an incentive.

These and some other, more technical, comments have been submitted to the IRS in the interest of making the incentive as user-friendly and easy to understand as possible. 

Taking freight trucks electric would have big economic and environmental benefits for India

DOE/LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY

 

Diesel-fueled freight trucks play an outsized role in producing India’s total greenhouse gas and air pollution emissions. While the country has promoted policies to transition to electric vehicles for public transportation buses and cars, batteries that can power such large trucks have been too heavy and expensive to make their electrification possible.

A new study from the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and UCLA shows that advances in battery technology and dramatically decreased battery costs in recent years have changed that. With the right policies and incentives, battery electric trucks would be more affordable to operate than diesel, and India could become a world leader in producing electric vehicles.

The transition would also help India reduce its reliance on imported oil, improve the air quality, and meet the goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2070. India imports 88% of the oil it uses and of the total petroleum consumed by the country’s transport sector, nearly 60% is used by freight trucks. These trucks are responsible for 71% of the carbon dioxide emissions, 74% of the particulate matter emissions, and 55% of the nitrogen oxide emissions from road vehicles.

“Electric trucks would be instrumental in enhancing India’s energy security and reducing the goods transport cost,” said Berkeley Lab Research Scientist Nikit Abhyankar, an author of the report. “Additionally, for any decarbonization and air pollution control strategy for the country, electric trucks are critical.”

Comparing costs: diesel vs electric

The researchers began rethinking the economic possibility of battery electric freight trucks with the dramatic drop in battery costs in recent years. In 2010, the battery cost per kilowatt-hour was about $1,200. The current global average is now $120 to $135 and expected to decrease. Battery energy density has also improved, making powerful batteries lighter.

To develop an accurate comparison of electric and diesel trucks specific to India, the team studied four sizes of trucks used in the country: 7.5 and 12 metric tons, mostly used for short-haul transport, and 25 and 40 metric tons, primarily used for long-haul and heavier freight transport. They analyzed initial purchase price, energy and fuel costs, and maintenance and operation costs, including the cost of battery charging infrastructure, to determine total cost of ownership.

They found that battery electric trucks make better financial sense for all truck types, albeit electrifying the heavier trucks is more challenging because they need bigger, heavier batteries. At the current battery price, a 25-ton electric truck, the most commonly used long-haul truck size in India, with a 569 kilowatt-hour battery pack and 400 kilometer operational range could deliver a 28% lower total cost of ownership per kilometer than a diesel truck.

The batteries’ weight might mean electric trucks could carry slightly less freight than diesel, but that could be offset by designing the trucks to be more lightweight and through fuel cost savings, the researchers noted.

Benefits beyond trucking costs

Based on India’s current grid emissions, electric trucks would reduce greenhouse gas emissions 9% to 35% per kilometer compared with diesel trucks, the researchers found. Electric trucks would also not pollute as they travel through communities. With diesel trucks, this local pollution can hit disadvantaged groups the hardest.

And electric trucks could eventually become carbon neutral if charged with renewable energy, particularly solar energy when its production is highest, the researchers found. Renewable energy could offer other benefits, they noted. The uncertain price of imported oil makes relying on it a disadvantage and can increase the costs of goods, contributing to overall inflation. But the norm in paying for renewable energy is a much more stable 25-year power purchase agreement.

Next steps

Achieving these benefits will require investments from the Indian government over the coming years, the researchers noted. India is one of the world’s largest automotive producers, but the government will need to promote policies to increase battery manufacturing and electric vehicle manufacturing and uptake. It will also need policies to support building a fast-charging infrastructure.

“India has embarked on very ambitious electrification policies prior to this,” said Deepak Rajagopal, an author of the report and a faculty scientist at Berkeley Lab and UCLA. “We find that the time is now ripe to put targeted policies on trucking.”

In related research published last year, Berkeley Lab scientists determined how battery-electric trains can deliver environmental justice, cost-savings, and resilience to the U.S.