California Governor’s Office releases 2013 ZEV action plan; 1.5M ZEVs on CA roadways by 2025
07 February 2013
California Governor Jerry Brown’s Office and state agencies issued a 2013 Zero-emission Vehicle (ZEV) Action Plan. The Action Plan follows on Governor Brown’s Executive Order (B-16-2012) released March 2012, which set required milestones for state government to enable 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles on California roadways by 2025. (Earlier post.) The Action Plan details concrete actions that state agencies are taking to help accelerate the market for plug-in electric vehicles and fuel cell electric vehicles.
For the purposes of the executive order and action plan, ZEVs include hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs), battery electric vehicles (BEVs), and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). They also address light-duty passenger vehicles and heavier vehicles such as freight trucks and public buses.
The action plan—which will be adjusted over time to address changing market conditions—is the product of an interagency working group led by the Governor’s Office that includes several state agencies and associated entities and builds upon significant work already undertaken by these agencies.
The action plan also benefits from input from outside stakeholders, including the California Plug-in Electric Vehicle Collaborative (PEVC) and the California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP). The Governor’s Executive Order specifically directs collaboration with these two organizations.
The Executive Order established several milestones organized into three time periods: by 2015, by 2020, and by 2025. The Executive Order also directs state government to begin purchasing ZEVs. In 2015, 10% of state departments’ light-duty fleet purchases must be ZEVs, climbing to 25% of light duty purchases by 2020.
The Action Plan outlines actions grouped under four broad goals that state government is currently taking or plans to take to help expand the ZEV market:
- Complete needed infrastructure and planning
- Expand consumer awareness and demand
- Transform fleets
- Grow jobs and investment in the private sector

Complete needed infrastructure and planning. This action plan is intended to help provide sufficient infrastructure to support up to 1 million ZEVs by 2020. Further actions beyond 2020 will likely be necessary to reach the Executive Order’s target of 1.5 million vehicles by 2025, the plan notes. Due to the changing nature of the ZEV market, the action plan does not address infrastructure and planning-related actions after 2020.
The 45 detailed actions under this goal are grouped into 13 areas:
- Provide crucial early funding for ZEV charging and fueling infrastructure.
- Support ZEV infrastructure planning and investment by public and private entities.
- Enable universal access to ZEV infrastructure for California drivers.
- Ensure pricing transparency for ZEV charging and fueling.
- Expand appropriate ZEV-related signage on highway corridors and surface streets.
- Support local government efforts to prepare communities for increased PEV usage and the coming commercialization of FCEVs.
- Ensure that hydrogen and electricity can legally be sold as a retail transportation fuel.
- Make it easier to locate and install public PEV infrastructure.
- Ensure a minimum network of hydrogen stations for the commercial launch of fuel cell vehicles between 2015 and 2017.
- Streamline permitting of hydrogen stations.
- Plan for and integrate peak vehicle demand for electricity into the state’s energy grid.
- Establish consistent statewide codes and standards for ZEV infrastructure.
- Coordinate with other “Section 177 states” that have adopted California’s ZEV mandate to learn from each other’s innovations and enable a seamless consumer experience for ZEV drivers across the country.
Expand consumer awareness and demand. The action plan includes several strategies to help expand consumer awareness and interest in ZEVs, including reducing upfront purchase and operating costs, promoting consumer awareness and strengthening the connection between ZEVs and renewable energy. The 30 actions are grouped into seven areas:
- Reduce up-front purchase costs for ZEVs.
- Encourage and support auto dealers to increase sales and leases of ZEVs.
- Reduce operating costs for ZEVs.
- Develop and maintain attractive non-monetary incentives for use of ZEVs.
- Strengthen connections between research institutions and auto makers to better understand how ZEVs are being used.
- Promote consumer awareness of ZEVs through public education, outreach and direct driving experiences.
- Provide plug-in vehicle (PEV) drivers with options to connect PEV charging with energy efficiency and renewable energy.
Transform fleets. The Governor’s Executive Order aims to expand ZEVs in both public and private vehicle fleets. The order specifically directs DGS and state departments to increase the share of ZEVs in their own fleets through the normal course of fleet replacement. The action plan also calls for expanded ZEV deployment within private vehicle fleets, including public transportation and freight transport.
The plan identifies a range of actions that state government should take to encourage increased ZEV deployment in private fleets including providing funding support, keeping fueling affordable, and increasing coordination and communication among fleet users.
For both state and private fleet, the plan outlines 30 actions grouped into 10 areas:
- Incorporate ZEVs into state vehicle fleet.
- Identify funding to expand fleet purchases of ZEVs and ZEV infrastructure.
- Track benefits of fleets’ transition to ZEVs to the extent practicable.
- Complete necessary infrastructure to allow for 10% ZEV purchases by 2015.
- Maximize use of ZEVs in state-sponsored car rentals.
- Ensure that state vehicles can benefit from evolving benefits associated with ZEVs and position state vehicle fleets to participate in technology demonstrations.
- Expand use of ZEVs for private light- and medium-duty fleets.
- Help to expand ZEVs within bus fleets.
- Reduce cost barriers to ZEV adoption for freight vehicles.
- Integrate ZEVs into freight planning.
Grow jobs and investment in the private sector. While state government continues to provide publicly funded financial incentives to expand the consumer market for ZEVs, the state’s actions are intended ultimately to build a ZEV market that is sustainable without public subsidies through growing consumer demand and private investment.
The plan outlines 15 actions grouped into four areas:
- Leverage tools to support business attraction, retention and expansion of ZEV companies.
- Support demonstration and commercialization of ZEV-related technologies by California companies.
- Support R&D activities at California universities and research institutions.
- Prepare California workers to participate in ZEV-related jobs.
Resources
A very comprehensive plan brought to you by the state asking "Who Killed the Electric Car".
It doesn't appear that Bush/GM can crush this "..10% ZEV purchases by 2015", though the spots and flocks remain the same
http://jalopnik.com/5979658/bailed-out-gm-executives-got-excessive-pay-according-to-watchdog?tag=Inside-8-Mile
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7208201&page=1
Posted by: kelly | 07 February 2013 at 07:37 AM
Kelly, you need to get that BDS looked at
Posted by: Herm | 07 February 2013 at 09:52 AM
Herm, you need to note history. A fired GM CEO is collecting $20 million as we comment.
Another Florida 'chad' problem and the pension "turn around"/party calling Tesla, with a 10,000 COTY order backlog, a loser could be overriding this article.
ZEVs could be further delayed and the US launched into another "Hydrogen Initiative" - with many, many $billions spent and not one FC car marketed.
Posted by: kelly | 07 February 2013 at 12:07 PM
Detroit also discussed this California law: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130131/AUTO01/301310351
"The original "zero emission" mandate, set in 1990, would have required the six largest automakers to produce 10 percent of their combined fleet as zero-emission vehicles by 2003, but that was scrapped after automakers fought it."
"In March 2008, the board required the automakers to sell a combined 7,500 zero-emission vehicles between 2012 and 2014, down from 25,000 vehicles."
Pretend this were a non-corrupt industry and CA required .03 percent of the new products sold in CA to be non-polluting - but the industry would rather attack the law and watch Californians(customers) die for decades from industry product pollution.
Especially in LA, the people know the air they breathe and the thousands of times car cost that ICE respiratory disease, healthcare, and death inflicts.
Imagine 'company stores' that only sell or service a THIRD of their (ex: Ford EVs) non-polluting products, yet the people should cheer.
This seems historic. Wasn't there something about EV and NON-EV water fountains, seating areas, and such..or was that the benefits of tobacco smoking?
Posted by: kelly | 07 February 2013 at 03:23 PM
No what Bush did was note that its best to get the heavy fuel uses over to something new and better then it is to just focus on the small segment that uses very little fuel at all.
Thats the part that fuel cells play. To replace heavy systems. Things with engines bigger then your house will need something to run on other then oil. Things with engines as big as your bathroom also will need something other then oil to run on.
Bush didnt need to worry about the small stuff as idiots were tunnel visioned onto it and were forgetting all the rest. He just had to deal with the other 94% or so of the fuel use they were missing.. No big deal.
Sometimes I wonder just how stupid humanity can manage to be..
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 07 February 2013 at 04:16 PM
@w2k, light vehicles ARE most oil use and the Bush Hydrogen Initiative is pure market failure. Bush states(ten years ago) that one's first car will be fuel cell powered.
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/h2_fuel_initiative.html
http://articles.cnn.com/2003-02-06/politics/bush-energy_1_hydrogen-power-fuel-cells-dependence-on-foreign-oil?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS
Posted by: kelly | 07 February 2013 at 05:02 PM
Kelly even in the light duty market most of the fuel used is in cars and trucks that will not be serviced by batteries alone for a very long time because they simply require far too much total energy. Simply put they gobble energy.
This means that while say 3% of the market might be bev by 2025 it wont make up 3% of the fuel used or even 1%. But if 3% of the market by then is also fuel cells its very likely more then a combined 4% of the fuel will be replaced by eltric and hydrogen sources.
I dont wana wait the time it would take for batteries alone to replace enough fuel use to make a real difference.
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 07 February 2013 at 08:48 PM
w2k, EVs(90% efficient) use less than 1/3 the energy of ICE(20 to 30%).
Already, 20 mile range plug-in EVs can eliminate most commute light gas use(20 X 365 = 7300 miles annual) with just one daily charge.
Posted by: kelly | 08 February 2013 at 12:43 AM
We will see soon enough. As soon as we have enough of both kinds of cars on the road we should start to get a real world look at what impact they actualy have.
My bet right now is even with bev and fc and some others we will still fail to do all that well this side of 2030.
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 08 February 2013 at 09:11 AM
@wintermane2000
It would appear that you have kelly's number. Bush was able to take the long view on energy and look 50 years down the road when we might need many alternatives.
Kelly is wrong on so many levels. This is because kelly is stuck in the past with some petty political agenda and is too lazy to do the work. If one would take the time to read the DOE link they could learn that the focus HFCV was city buses in the time frame of 2015 to determine if commercially viable.
That sounds like a pretty good plan and has nothing to do with BEV which are a different market. Two plans are better than one unless you are kelly and only like one silly plan that will not work.
We should look at this in the context of 2003 but many things have changed since then. First air pollution has improved in cities and is no longer a health threat. Such things as low sulfur diesel fuel.
California is trying to fix a problem that has been fixed.
The second thing that has changed is the increase in US oil production. We still need to look 50 years down the road but we have added 20 years to when we might actually have to relie on alternatives.
Third, one alternative has actually been proven. My old truck has been running on E10 for more than 6 years now. I am a little disappointed in the progress biodiesel has made. LCA clearly shows that it has the potential for reducing environmental impact of transportation fuel.
Posted by: Kit P | 09 February 2013 at 07:13 AM
@Kit P " is too lazy to do the work" of reading the links to reality provided by a dozen other comments and, for months, too wrong to find links supporting his nonsense.
Posted by: kelly | 09 February 2013 at 10:01 AM
Bush Nearly Turns a Hydrogen Car into the Hindenburg
For you, Kit P, there is even a picture!
"Credit Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally with saving the leader of the free world from self-immolation.
Mulally told journalists at the New York auto show that he intervened to prevent President Bush from plugging an electrical cord into the hydrogen tank of Ford's hydrogen-electric plug-in hybrid at the White House last week."
http://www.democrats.com/bush-hydrogen-car
Posted by: kelly | 09 February 2013 at 10:38 AM
I happen to like Bush. Thought he was a good POTUS.
However, maybe Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally belongs in jail. If you deliver a product that could get people killed if they make a mistake, then you criminally neglegent.
I always thought it was funny how idiots would try to make fun of Bush. Like pointing out that he was a fighter pilot in the National Guard. Not getting yourself killed becoming a fighter pilot is an accomplishment few can match.
Personally am not too impressed with being a activist in Chicago.
Posted by: Kit P | 09 February 2013 at 11:29 AM
@Kit P, no one doubts you like the US President, who's final eight year approval rating was 20%, only to have VP Cheney hated more, with 13% approval while they handed out no WMD wars, no-bid war contracts, stalled ZEVs, etc.
I am honorably discharged from the US Army.
Jet pilot Bush(stripped of flight status) was at Yale in 1972, but 'stationed' in Colorado, and claimed attending monthly meetings in Alabama, BUT A YEAR PASSED W/O ANY ATTENDANCE OR A SINGLE ATTENDANCE RECORD.
If one in the military is AWOL for months, they are deserters. W is a DESERTER. http://www.awolbush.com/
Historians easily consider the Bush administration the most corrupt in US history.
Posted by: kelly | 09 February 2013 at 12:43 PM
@Kit P, no one doubts you like the US President, who's final eight year approval rating was 20%, only to have VP Cheney hated more, with 13% approval while they handed out no WMD wars, no-bid war contracts, stalled ZEVs, etc.
I am honorably discharged from the US Army.
Jet pilot Bush(stripped of flight status) was at Yale in 1972, but 'stationed' in Colorado, and claimed attending monthly meetings in Alabama, BUT A YEAR PASSED W/O ANY ATTENDANCE OR A SINGLE ATTENDANCE RECORD.
If one in the military is AWOL for months, they are deserters. W is a DESERTER. http://www.awolbush.com/
Historians easily consider the Bush administration the most corrupt in US history.
Posted by: kelly | 09 February 2013 at 12:43 PM
“no one doubts you like the US President ”
I am not too impressed with the current one. I judge each POTUS what they do not what a few loons thing of him.
“I am honorably discharged from the US Army. ”
Not too impressed with that either. Did you accomplish anything and what did you learn?
I was a nuclear trained navy officer and used my experience to work in the power industry. While my accomplishment does not demean others, kelley spends a lot of time disrespecting a retired POTUS.
The same event can be viewed in different ways. When Bush was on the White House lawn with future technologies, I saw someone who took the time to think about the future of our country. It takes a wild stretch of credibility to think Bush was trying to set himself on fire.
Posted by: Kit P | 10 February 2013 at 06:59 AM
"Tricky Dick" Nixon, the only crooked US President fully forced to resign, was a Navy officer also.
To reiterate: US, Japan, and German nuclear power plants have been shut down or further permits refused.
3. Japan implements generous feed-in tariff, sparks huge solar power growth. It installed 725 MW of non-residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and 306 MW of residential solar PV systems in just in July and August.
2. Australia — hidden decentralized solar giant — sees strong solar growth and better than grid parity solar prices. In October, Giles noted that “Australia now sports a rooftop array on one out of every 10 households.” That figure is 1/5 in South Australia.
1. Germany’s wicked growth and new records.
2012-05-25-Germany-PV-Solar-Record
Published May 30, 2012 at 1000 × 800 in In-Depth: Germany’s 22 GW Solar Energy Record
Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2012/12/31/top-10-solar-power-stories-of-2012/#MQGxmqiddXx050KU.99
Be glad it's our ALLIES making these pollution-free, economic electric power gains supplying tens of millions of households..
Concerning Bush, please read the below report(32 pages) - military man to military man: "By way of background, I am a retired (1999) Army colonel with active Marine enlisted service (1967-69)..This analysis concluded that Bush failed to fulfill faithfully and fully the solemn obligation he accepted when he enlisted in the Texas ANG (TXANG) in 1968.. Moreover, he received fraudulent payments for INACDUTRA....."
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/opinion/lechliter.pdf
Posted by: kelly | 10 February 2013 at 08:45 AM
“I am a retired (1999) Army colonel ”
Very good but what happened to the 'degreed, experienced electrical engineer'. I am correct that kelly has no experience in the power industry.
What I find sad about kelly now that we have heard about the Army colonel thing is the remarkable resemblance to to a high school debater. The complete lack of wisdom that comes with age.
Not only did I vote for Bush twice, I really liked his energy policy. I read it and have on the bookshelf in front of me. I have also read the California energy policy that took five years longer to produce.
For California, wind and solar are shiny things to distract folks like kelly from realizing how much natural gas they are burning.
“Be glad it's our ALLIES making these pollution-free, economic electric power gains supplying tens of millions of. ”
I am not glad because solar is not pollution-free. Try reading a few LCA. They are not economical. They they supply zero households families with power.
The power industry supplies customers power 24/7. Solar can supply some electricity on nice days when it is needed the least.
Posted by: Kit P | 10 February 2013 at 03:59 PM
@Kit P, I am trying to be polite.
DO YOU KNOW HOW TO OPEN A WEB URL(LINK) AND READ?
“I am a retired (1999) Army colonel ” Col. Lechliter wrote
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/opinion/lechliter.pdf , 32 pages, which you were asked to please read AND PROVES Bush is a DESERTER AND THIEF.
Do you know ANYTHING about electricity? "Germany’s 22 GW Solar Energy Record" alone is the power of ~20 nuclear power plants.
You appearently don't realize how stupid and out of date you are, so I'm including US Navy nuclear power cost figures:
"The newly calculated life-cycle cost break-even cost-ranges, which supercede the break-even cost figures from the 2005 NR quick look analysis, are as follows:
—$210 per barrel to $670 per barrel for a small surface combatant;.." http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33946.pdf
I'm an EE/MBA with over forty years experience and you ignore facts. Read what you write, or at least what others have, esp. Update 1:..
Posted by: kelly | 10 February 2013 at 06:10 PM
My over forty years of experience is in producing power. To bad kelly will not tell us what kind of experience. Every old person has forty years experience, so what?
Maybe kelly was an MBA at ENRON with lots of skill at cooking the books.
“—$70 per barrel to $225 per barrel for a medium-size surface combatant”
It would appear that kelly does not understand the difference between stationary power plants and various kinds of navy ships. One ot the things that sets our navy apart is the ablity to refuel underway. However, during underway refueling ships are at their most vunerable. Nuke ships do not have to refuel when responding at fuel speed to a crisis.
For the record, I served on the USS Texas and USS Virginia which were medium-size surface combatants.
“alone is the power of ~20 nuclear power plants ”
Again that is not true. GW indicates capacity to produce power. A 1000 MWe nuke plant produces a 1000 MWh every hour 90% of the time. Nuke plants schedule refueling and maintenance on nice spring days when not much power is needed.
Solar has 10% capacity factor and makes no power when it is needed.
Germany’s 22 GW Solar = 0 GWh on cold winter nights.
Germany holds the record for buying junk.
Those are the facts.
Posted by: Kit P | 11 February 2013 at 07:01 AM
"Solar has 10% capacity factor and makes no power when it is needed." Tell that to Germany, Spain, Italy, Australia,..
Solar follows the sun, like PEAK electric power usage(work day, 9AM to 5AM). "..over forty years of experience is in producing power." and you don't understand peak power says enough.
If you had read all the links, you would see that solar is complimented by wind and natural gas turbines for night electric and load balancing. Off-shore wind energy is virtually 24/7.
Power need projections are made on ~all large grids as the earth rotates, the sun sky position varies, weather changes, wind changes etc.
Germany's power is now mainly it's renewable energy mix. You will say that's a lie, BUT Germany has 'pulled the plug' on nuclear and the lights are still on.
http://cleantechnica.com/2012/02/09/clean-energy-loving-germany-increasingly-exporting-electricity-to-nuclear-heavy-france/ Nuclear is expensive and being closed.
It's impossible to defend Bush after reading his records and Col. Lechliter's 32 page report.
Oh, and German engineering does NOT "holds the record for buying junk."
No one can believe you.
Posted by: kelly | 11 February 2013 at 08:04 AM
"9AM to 5PM" correction, http://cleantechnica.com/2012/12/31/top-10-wind-power-stories-of-2012/
Posted by: kelly | 11 February 2013 at 08:20 AM
“like PEAK electric power usage”
Really!
I just checked real time grid demand, PJM peaks today at 6 pm. CA ISO peaks at 7 pm. Midwest ISO at 10 pm. RTE (France) at 7 pm.
In fact RTE lets you check to see how of much of each source is providing power. At noon solar was producing 0 MW in France and nuclear 56,306 MW. France was exporting 3150 MW to their neighbors.
“If you had read all the links, you would see that solar is complimented by wind and natural gas turbines for night electric and load balancing.”
I have links to many ISO and there is no reason to think that wind and solar are complementary.
“Germany's power”
The fact is that Kelly cannot get anything right but keeps repeating links to a nice spring day in Germany. I really care about how power is produced on the PJM because that is where I live. Germany not so much but there is no chance that Kelly has a clue.
“It's impossible to defend Bush”
I think Bush did a great job on energy issues. See not so impossible after all.
“Power need projections are made …”
That is correct. We have clearly demonstrated that we can managed around making some power with wind and solar. Not very much where I live.
Posted by: Kit P | 11 February 2013 at 01:48 PM
Bush is a proven deserter and election fraud. 50 states and only his gov brother's one has election "chad/vote count problems".
The world knows Bush had fewer votes and is a fraud. Defending Bush's year AWOL perhaps says something about Navy service.
Renewables are replacing nuclear and fossil fuels. The beauty of customer solar is in reducing our utility bill.
So of course power companies lie about distributed solar costs to protect their profits.
Like GM crushing EVs and CARB laws, like tobacco companies calling smoking "good" and "healthy", power plant monopolies are lying, blocking progress, and piling up profits.
Every five minutes someone switches to solar power. http://www.solarcity.com/
Some areas of the US have 250% more radiant energy than Germany. Non-renewable fuels are being reduced to backup service.
The Ameren power company has even voided customer land titles at the Missouri Lake of the Ozarks, besides jacking rates, breaking state and federal laws, failing maintenance, being sued for the above, etc, etc..
Posted by: kelly | 11 February 2013 at 03:58 PM
“Some areas of the US have 250% more radiant energy than Germany. ”
How about where kelly lives and gets his electrical power from the evil Ameren?
It would seem that Ameren promotes solar and not blocking progress .
http://www.ameren.com/Solar/Pages/SolarEnergyProject.aspx
“The goal of Ameren’s Solar Energy Project is to provide a state-of-the-art testing ground to compare various solar technologies. This allows our customers to determine which photovoltaic components will best suit their home or business needs. ”
Here the output is provided:
http://www.ameren.com/Solar/Pages/EnergyProducedbyTechnologyType.aspx
http://www.ameren.com/Solar/Pages/TotalSolarCapacityChart.aspx
The four different types of PV have a capacity of 115 kw. The actual annual production for 2012 was 132,327 kwh. That works out to about a 13% capacity factor. Just what you would expect for that part of the country for a utility-scale PV project.
The tracking system did 25% and the best fix system got 15%.
That called real data for kelly's backyard.
Posted by: Kit P | 11 February 2013 at 06:23 PM