California Tells VW To Place Charging Stations For Expensive EVs In The Poorest Part Of Town

Here's a smart idea: Build charging stations where they are needed. That way, they'll be sure to be used.

Tyranny

California in many respects does seem like a socialist state (welfare, immigrant policies,...) but its effort to improve air quality is just and is for the benefit of ALL of its people.

The author's image of the homeless may throw you off, but the article does not specify or imply that charging stations be built in the ghettos.

The top 4 cities with worst air quality in the entire US are: Bakersfield, Visalia, Fresno and Modesto in that order. All 4 are considered "poor" compared to other cities in the Golden state. They are all located in the Central Valley between 2 interstate highways I-5 and I-99 where traffic is very heavy - especially I-99 where most of diesel trucks traverse.

VAG penalty monies will be in good use if the air quality if these cities can be improved because of it. It could serve as a marketing move for VAG to turn it into a goodwill project and bring in new customers for its EVs.

This is more of California's Socialist fascism at play.

Putting charging stations on the wrong side of the tracks won't cause people on welfare to buy EVs...unless of course California buys welfare freeloaders EVs.

Putting charging stations in Bakersfield, Visalia, Fresno and Modesto won't cause a surge in EV sales, but even if they did, the impact to the air would be negligible because the air quality in the Central Valley has many contributors among them agriculture and dust.

Indeed - in one area of California - a study said that the high levels of hydrocarbons was the result of emissions from evergreen trees.

However - putting EV charging stations in ALL areas where driving occurs is logical - since eventually even the rich will trade in their trendy SUV for some other one. And if the charging stations are only in the "rich" areas - they will have no lower class people to sell their old junkers too.

Air quality in California is adversely affected by a line of mountains that restrict the air - allowing greenhouse gasses to build up before then - since the prevailing winds are normally from the shore west - to east. This is a problem that will never be solved - so California will always have an air quality problem as long as humans inhabit it.

It's obvious this move is for publicity more than anything else. Pollution in California is a complicated issue due to geography, industries, population ... Social engineering may not solve the problem in the short term, but it can shape people's mindset that will benefit in the long run. No one should have any doubt that CARB has been instrumental in improving air quality not only for California but also help shaping the auto industry that have positive effects worldwide.

Practically even the full $800M amount wouldn't do much to help solve the pollution problem for the Central Valley - a problem due to particulates emitted from diesel trucks as well as agricultural activities and perpetuated by geography. Greenhouse gas emission (CO2, methane) is a different thing, and does not directly affect people's health as discussed in the article.

While CARB and the trucking industry have been fighting over emission standards, and California agriculture with its 2% share of state economy has been untouchable, VW with its sin is easy picking for the state bureaucrats. VW should take this opportunity to promote EVs in these areas to its advantage.

One again @TomM, your elitist bigotry and illogic are shown. Putting EV chargers in areas where there is a higher concentration of EVs makes sense, but putting them wherever driving occurs will (1) not in and of itself improve air quality, nor (2) cause people to buy EVs.

This is classist bigotry: "And if the charging stations are only in the "rich" areas - they will have no lower class people to sell their old junkers too."

As for location...

Putting charging stations on the I-5 in the Central Valley makes sense. The Tesla charging station at the Harris Ranch on I-5 @ Hwy. 198 is always busy as is the Tesla station near the merge/split of Hwy. 99 and I-5. Adding to those locations would be logical.

Another logical place would be on the I-10 east of Palm Springs.

These placements would not only be convenient, but they would improve safety.

Dear Matt - sorry but it is you who shows elitist bigotry by trying to allow concentration of these facilities in only RICH areas.

However - My statement about putting the facilities in all areas so the rich can sell their used Junkers to the lower class - was obviously tongue in cheek - and that you cannot see that means you have lost it.

Of course - EVs themselves are NOT a solution for polution and will not be until they come down in price substantially. If only rich people can afford to buy - and only rich people have charging stations available to them - the polution - which is centered in areas where rich people tend not to be - is unlikely to be helped.

Certainly - the location of any such facility is based on Profit Potential - and since the likelihood of making a profit off poor people is less - companies are unlikely to put facilities near them. Of course - it would also mean that such facilities would not be as profitable in areas of lower population of rich people as well - so they will likely be concentrated around Malibu and other areas where rich people like you tend to concentrate.

But - once the cars have lost their charm - people who do not have a charging station near them are less likely to buy the Junkers. So by targeting initial buyers only - the manufacturers and the charging station owners are simply shooting themselves in the foot because their resale value will drop off like water over the Niagara falls.

Charging stations themselves are not the solution since most of these cars are likely to be charged at residences or businesses where the owners work. Of course - again - that favors the rich - since many poor people cannot afford to have charging stations - have no place to put them (Apartment buildings have no place for them) - nor do they have garages to hide the equipment. At businesses - it also favors those who make more money since they are likely to have the ability to have a designated parking space which can be so equipped .

As far as convenience - again it depends on WHO you are talking about.

@TomM As a Liberal, you use typical Liberal debate tactics that are illogical.

Show me where I said to put all the charging stations where rich people are. You won't be able to find it. That makes you either unintelligent or hateful or both. Typical of Liberalism.

Nice try at saying your comment was tongue in cheek. As an elitist who constantly brags of Mercedes S Class ownership, we know better.