Contributed by Todd Perry, CEO, PPM Consultants
On May 22, 2025, the U.S. Senate voted 51–44 to block California’s EPA-granted waiver that would have allowed the state to enforce stricter emissions standards, including a ban on new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035. The decision was supported by many automakers and Senate Republicans, who argued that the mandates were unrealistic, costly, and harmful to both consumers and infrastructure.
While environmental advocates called the move shortsighted, the Senate’s action reflects broader concerns about the pace of electric vehicle (EV) adoption in the U.S. Despite strong federal and state policy support, electric vehicles face substantial challenges that suggest they are not yet ready for widespread, mandated deployment.
- Strain on the Electric Grid
One of the most pressing concerns about EV adoption is the strain it will place on America’s electrical grid. California, which has been at the forefront of EV mandates, currently has about 84,000 public EV chargers. However, it is estimated the state will need 1.2 million by 2030 to support its projected EV population.
EV charging often occurs during peak residential demand hours, particularly in the evenings. Without major infrastructure upgrades—including new transformers, expanded distribution networks, and additional generation capacity—the grid will struggle to accommodate the added load. In many regions, these upgrades are years away from being realized. This gap between policy ambition and infrastructure readiness could lead to reliability issues, rate hikes, and delayed adoption.
- High Cost of Entry
Despite falling battery prices, EVs remain considerably more expensive than traditional internal-combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. After federal tax credits, a typical EV still costs between $10,000 and $20,000 more than its gasoline-powered counterpart. In addition to the sticker price, most EV owners must install a home charging unit, which can cost $1,000 to $2,500 or more, especially if electrical panel upgrades are needed.
Long-term ownership can also carry hidden costs. While EVs benefit from fewer moving parts and lower fuel costs, battery replacement—often needed after 8 to 10 years—can cost between $5,000 and $15,000 depending on the vehicle. These added financial barriers make EVs inaccessible to many middle- and lower-income families, particularly in rural or underserved areas where public charging is limited.
- Battery Materials and Environmental Footprint
EVs may produce no tailpipe emissions, but the environmental cost of their battery production remains high. Batteries rely on critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, which are extracted through energy-intensive mining practices that often have significant ecological and human rights concerns.
For example, more than 70% of the world’s cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo, where child labor and unsafe mining conditions are well-documented. Much of the refining and processing of these minerals occurs in China, adding geopolitical risk to the supply chain. Meanwhile, the infrastructure for battery recycling in the U.S. remains underdeveloped, raising concerns about long-term waste and resource recovery.
- Battery Performance and Reliability
Although EV technology has advanced, battery performance continues to vary widely based on usage, climate, and age. High temperatures and frequent use of fast charging degrade battery life faster. Many EV owners report noticeable range reductions after 100,000 miles, which significantly impacts resale value and consumer confidence.
Moreover, there is no industry standard for battery pack repairs or replacements. As a result, even minor battery issues can require full replacements through the original manufacturer—adding thousands to repair costs and increasing long-term ownership risk compared to ICE vehicles.
- Unrealistic Rollout Timelines
California’s phased approach requires that 35% of new vehicle sales be zero-emission by 2026, rising to 68% by 2030 and 100% by 2035. These goals may be aspirational, but they appear misaligned with current adoption trends and manufacturing realities.
As of 2024, approximately 25% of new car sales in California were zero-emission vehicles. Nationwide, that number is much lower—hovering around 7% to 10%. Automakers have expressed concern about the feasibility of meeting these benchmarks, warning that doing so might require them to buy regulatory credits from companies like Tesla rather than develop their own scalable EV production.
Additionally, battery supply chains, chip shortages, and skilled labor shortages continue to hamper production timelines. Charging infrastructure has also failed to scale with demand in many regions, creating further obstacles to compliance.
- Social and Economic Equity Concerns
Mandated transitions to EVs may unintentionally widen social and economic gaps if not carefully managed. Lower-income households are less likely to own homes with garages or have the ability to install chargers. Rural communities face long distances between charging stations and limited infrastructure investment.
At the same time, millions of workers in auto repair, gas station services, and ICE manufacturing are at risk of displacement. Small business owners who specialize in traditional automotive services will need new training and equipment to adapt—expenses many may not be able to afford. Without targeted support programs and workforce development initiatives, these communities risk being left behind.
- Legal, Regulatory, and Market Uncertainty
The Senate’s move to revoke California’s EV waiver has triggered a new legal battle over state authority. California officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, have pledged to sue, arguing that the state has the right to set its own vehicle emissions standards under the Clean Air Act.
This conflict introduces uncertainty into national EV policy. Automakers, already adjusting to a patchwork of federal and state regulations, now face additional risks as the rules shift. Investors are reevaluating their EV portfolios in light of these policy changes. Even Tesla, typically a beneficiary of ZEV credits, has seen investor focus shift toward AI and autonomous driving technology rather than state-driven EV mandates.
Conclusion: Time for a Balanced Road to Decarbonization
Electric vehicles have a significant role to play in the future of transportation, but they are not yet a one-size-fits-all solution. Key pieces—such as grid readiness, affordability, battery sustainability, and equitable access—are still in development.
Rather than relying solely on mandates, policymakers should adopt a more balanced approach that includes:
- Grid investments to support charging demands.
- Targeted subsidies for consumers who lack access.
- Expanded research into battery recycling and ethical sourcing.
- Support for hybrids, which offer lower emissions without full dependence on charging infrastructure.
- Workforce retraining for auto repair, service, and manufacturing sectors.
Innovation is coming—but in the meantime, realistic timelines, practical solutions, and inclusive policies will be critical to ensure that the transition to cleaner transportation benefits all Americans, not just the few who can afford to be early adopters.