Say NO to a Special Session Workaround to Mandate EVs in Connecticut

An electric car charging in California


TwitterFacebookCopy LinkPrintEmail

To the Editor:

The Governor and Assembly are considering a special session on 30 & 31 January to find ways to eliminate consumer choice and forcing people to buy EVs by 2035.

Recent news reports about difficulties of charging electric vehicles (EVs) at charging stations during the frigid temperatures in the mid-west have shown in graphic detail that while EVs may be a choice, they are NOT ready for mass use, certainly not as a government mandate. 

Auto companies are now backing away from prior commitments (and tax subsidies) made to build EVs. Without continued, massive subsidies to manufacturers and consumers, EVs simply don’t make economic sense. Hertz, struggling to emerge from bankruptcy, pledged to buy 100,000 Tesla EVs, using tax subsidies to support that pledge. Their customers have resisted  renting these cars. Higher insurance and repair costs for EVs have added to the business losses for Hertz.  

Proponents of EVs tout them as a panacea for clean air. However, when the entire supply chain for manufacturing of EVs and their batteries is considered, there is no net environmental gain. Carbon-based fuels generate the electricity to charge the batteries. The mining and processing of lithium and cobalt generate significant pollutants. Coupled with the geopolitical aspects of the supply chain with the real threat of embargoes of critical minerals, the negatives far outweigh the positives. If those considerations aren’t enough, consider that in Connecticut, there will be no measurable impact on global emissions given that we are only one percent of the US population.

One must ask, what is the hurry for the Governor and the Assembly? The Governor wants to move forward to pass legislation, stating that if flawed, it could be corrected in future. His reported comments state that 2035 is many years away – ignoring the fact that the mandates are to be phased in starting as early as 2026.  

The citizens of Connecticut stood up and said “no” to this initiative two months ago. We need to call and write our elected representatives to say NO once again.  

Perhaps in rejecting EV mandates, (or mandates of any kind) we should remind our elected representatives that THEY work for US.

Robert Ham
Cheshire, CT