RICHMOND, Va. -- After passing the Clean Economy Act this year, Virginia is in the vanguard of states moving toward 100% clean electricity. But a new report shows barriers such as low electric-vehicle inventories could prevent the Commonwealth from reaching that goal.

The Virginia Drives Electric report shows more than half of Virginians say they are likely to consider an electric vehicle for their next car, according to Stuart Gardner, program director at Generation 180, which put out the report. But the state lacks pro-EV policies such as those in neighboring Maryland, including requiring automakers to sell a certain number of low-emissions cars.

"We compared six comparable cities in Maryland vs. Virginia and we found, of those six cities, Virginia had 44% - 54% fewer electric vehicles in stock," Gardner said. "So inventory is really a barrier that the average Virginian, even if they want to go electric, they can't because they're just not there at the dealer."

The president of the Virginia Automobile Dealer's Association says it supports efforts to increase EV sales, but policymakers need to conduct additional studies about financial incentives and battery-charging infrastructure in the state.

Gardner said spending time on more studies will just delay taking action on what he thinks is an alarming level of transportation emissions in the Commonwealth. He said the time is right because the General Assembly convenes January 13, and is considering two bills related to EVs. One is a clean-car standard that requires manufacturers to send a certain number of EVs to the state.

"And the other is an incentive, an equitable incentive, that puts, as they say, cash on the hood to help people buy the electric vehicle, to really drive demand, to get people to switch, have their next car to be electric," he said.

In a letter to Virginia's General Assembly leadership, a coalition of environmental groups called on lawmakers to make transportation electrification a top priority for the upcoming session. The group said transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse-gas emissions in the state, making up 48% of carbon-dioxide emissions.


get more stories like this via email

Gov. Tom Wolf announced Pennsylvania is moving forward with plans for industrial-sector decarbonization, with a proposal to the federal government for the state to host a hydrogen and carbon capture hub.

The hub would include the creation of hydrogen from natural gas, along with a large pipeline network which would carry captured carbon emissions from factories to areas where the carbon would be injected underground for permanent storage.

The White House Council on Environmental Quality estimates the hubs would cost between $170 billion and $230 billion to construct.

Sean O'Leary, senior researcher at the Ohio River Valley Institute, said the cost of such a project outweighs the benefits.

"Developing the hydrogen hub and using the carbon capture equipment in factories, in power plants, wouldn't actually do anything to increase their output or the value that they're delivering to the economy," O'Leary argued. "It would simply increase their cost of doing so."

He added it is a cost we would see in our taxes and electric bills. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act included $8 billion to create four hydrogen hubs nationwide. Critics of carbon-capture technology contended it is untested at a large-scale level, is expensive, and does not reduce carbon in the atmosphere.

Joanne Kilgour, executive director of the Ohio River Valley Institute, said the governor and some state lawmakers are proposing a number of subsidies and regulations related to the hub. She added as the project moves forward, state officials must be transparent with the public.

"This is fundamentally about spending public money on decarbonization solutions that are supposed to be helping to improve public health and address the climate crisis," Kilgour stated. "And yet the public has largely not had a way to get involved."

Wolf emphasized pursuing the hub will promote the creation of clean jobs in Pennsylvania while supporting the Biden Administration's commitment to significantly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050.

Pennsylvania is the second-largest producer of natural gas in the country.

New York elected officials are calling on the General Assembly to pass legislation to transition new buildings off fossil fuels, saying it would make the state cleaner and healthier.

The All-Electric Building Act would require new buildings to have all-electric appliances for space and water heating and cooking by 2023. It also would mandate state agencies to identify policies to make electricity more affordable and accessible for low-income residents.

Dominic Frongillo, co-Founder of Elected Officials to Protect America, said it is about saving lives and money.

"Right here in New York, air pollution from burning gas and buildings leads to about 1,000 deaths a year and most of those are in communities of color," Frongillo reported. "It's a real, real harm to our public health."

New York burns more fossil fuels in its buildings than any state in the country. Research shows an all-electric home in New York City would save households $6,800 over the course of 15 years.

The bill received a hearing last week and must be passed by the end of the legislative session June 2.

William Reinhardt, an Albany County legislator, and a former professional energy analyst with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, said in the long run, it makes the most sense economically to introduce new technologies through new construction.

"If you compare an all-electric building, new construction now, to a fossil-fuel building with central air conditioning, again new construction, so we are comparing apples to apples, the all-electric building is actually cheaper," Reinhardt pointed out.

Under the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act of 2019, New York is mandating 70% of all electricity generated in New York be from renewable sources by 2030. Officials say getting all newly-constructed buildings to be fossil fuel-free is key to achieving the goal.

CORRECTION: Enbridge is proposing a rerouting of its existing Line 5. An earlier version incorrectly stated the project involved an expansion. (2:40 p.m. MST, May 17, 2022)

It's been a year since Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's order to close the Line 5 pipelines was supposed to take effect - but the pipeline system is still operating, and its company Enbridge Energy is proposing a reroute.

The reroute would take Line 5 through hundreds of waterways in Michigan and Wisconsin, and the company also plans to build a tunnel around the existing pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac.

Jannan Cornstalk is director of the Water is Life festival and a citizen of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians. She is among those who signed a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, asking them to reject permits for expanding Line 5.

"Our community is a tribal fishing community," said Cornstalk. "If and when the pipeline breaks anywhere along the line, it will affect so many tributaries, inland streams, lakes, not just the Straits."

According to the National Wildlife Federation, Line 5 leaked 29 times from 1968 to 2017.

A company spokesperson said an estimated $46 million dollars will be spent with Native-owned businesses and communities for the rerouting, and the project is undergoing reviews by state and federal regulators.

The integrity of those reviews has been questioned by tribal leaders and environmental groups.

Bill Latka is one of the co-founders of the coalition Oil and Water Don't Mix. He pointed to research that shows anchor strikes are the most likely way that the pipelines could rupture.

"It's located in the middle of a business shipping channel," said Latka. "And when you put those two things - pipelines and anchors - next to each other, it's bound to happen. There's bound to be a rupture."

Cornstalk added that it's important for the Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies responsible for issuing permits to consult with Tribal Nations that have been stewards of the land for centuries.

"As tribal people, it's like we need to be included in the conversation, immediately have consultation from the beginning," said Cornstalk, "because we are supposed to have a government-to-government relationship, and many times that doesn't happen."