Federal Funding to Help California Expand Electric Vehicle Charging Network

By Caltrans

California has the green light to start using federal infrastructure funding to expand electric vehicle (EV) charging stations along the state’s interstates and highways following the recent federal approval of a joint plan by Caltrans and California Energy Commission.

The U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation’s signoff on the California Deployment Plan for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program makes an initial $56 million in funding available to install charging stations throughout the state. Funded by the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 (IIJA), California expects to receive a total of $384 million for the program over the next five years. The federal funding will build on California’s historic $10 billion, multiyear investment to accelerate the transition to zero-emission vehicles by improving affordability and expanding charging infrastructure.

“Thanks to the Biden-Harris Administration’s approval of California’s NEVI plan, we can start putting historic levels of federal infrastructure funding to work to close gaps in our state highway system’s evolving EV charging network and improve availability and reliability for low-income and rural residents,” said California Transportation Secretary Toks Omishakin. “Coupled with unprecedented levels of state investments in zero-emission vehicles, this funding will help supercharge California’s nation-leading efforts to drastically cut climate-changing pollution from the transportation sector.”

The IIJA funds will add to efforts to complete a 6,600-mile statewide charging network and deploy 1.2 million chargers by 2030 to meet the anticipated charging needs of the state’s EV fleet.

” With this unprecedented federal investment, California can advance our vision of a unified network of charging stations along the state’s busiest corridors,” said California Energy Commission Commissioner Patty Monahan. “This new network will increase charging access, particularly in the rural areas of our state, and help EV drivers charge up on long trips.” 

The state’s NEVI plan focuses on construction of fast-charging stations near interstates, U.S. routes and state routes throughout California. These charging stations will increase the availability of charging options, improve the reliability of the charging network and remove barriers to accessing EVs. NEVI funding will also support upgrades to existing infrastructure, charging stations’ operation and maintenance costs, community and stakeholder engagement, workforce development, and related mapping and signage.

California surpassed one million zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) sold in 2021 and leads the country in all ZEV market metrics including the highest level of public funding, the largest EV market share percentage, and the most extensive public charging infrastructure. The success of the state’s programs has led to ZEVs becoming a top export and has spurred major advances in manufacturing and job creation.

For more information on the NEVI Formula program, visit FHWA’s NEVI website and DriveElectric.gov. For the latest developments on California’s deployment efforts under the NEVI program, please visit the CEC’s NEVI website.

For more information on the state’s progress, explore CEC’s Zero Emission Vehicle and Infrastructure Statistics dashboards.


Written by caltrans

What do you think?


6 Comments deleted by Administrator

Leave a Review or Comment


  1. I’m all for saving the planet and everything, but too many people who think of themselves as “eco-warriors” or energy progressives seem to be just fine with filthy/dirty energy generated outside of the State of California. The Tesla fire going on right now up in Moss Landing is a good example of “you get what you wanted.” I’m no expert, but my guess is that the air in the fire/burn area is not very healthy, and should be a warning to those who want to run head-first into so-called green energy….it’s not very green (to say the least). A huge percentage of EV car owners rent gas-powered vehicles when they need to go more than a couple hundred miles. I wish I had a penny for every time I told someone whose mind I changed by pointing out that hybrids are the way to go IF you can afford one. BTW, fire departments h-a-t-e dealing with EV car fires all the time. Maybe we should revert to riding animals like the person who was dressed as a nun while riding a donkey in the last Fiesta Parade (better than digging up the Earth for a handful of “precious” minerals/metals).

  2. That battery fire should be a major concern to AGW concerned EV drivers.
    Lithium battery fires emit flouride gases which are 25,000 X worse than carbon dioxide
    “F-gases are often used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances, because they do not damage the atmospheric ozone layer. However, F-gases are powerful greenhouse gases, with a global warming effect up to 25 000 times greater than carbon dioxide (CO2).” (see link at bottom)
    Toxic Flouride gas emissions from Lithium-ion Battery Fires
    Here is your Hazardous substance fact sheet on Lithium
    I’d rather be working around diesel fuel exhaust than around lithium burning and lithium battery packs are prone to fires when over charged or damaged.
    The more of these battery storage facilities we build to store wind and solar, the more fires we will see belching a volcano of pollution that contributes god knows what to AGW… oh wait, here is a study

  3. Who is going to tell the struggling mother of two children who scrape together $1500 to buy a small gas car that she has and now purchase a very expensive vehicle in the state of California they can’t do it it’s so totally unfair to those who can’t do it to make it a mandatory thing by 2035 it’s absolutely ludicrous I’m sure like everything else they’ll try to substitute of those that can’t afford it but those that can barely afford it is still gonna have to pay for it it makes absolutely no sense

  4. Great, more tax dollars used to fund private interest, whether we want it or not here comes EUV’s. Does this mean addressing grid capacity as well? How about big rigs, aviation and maritime do they go green as well? Heavy equipment/excavators as well?
    No, just butterflies and unicorns so we all feel better about ourselves. And folks who can’t afford EUV’s, will there be subsidies?
    Just more of the liberal, nanny state forcing us into compliance, knowing what’s best for us.
    No doubt this will have to be decided in the courts, after massive law suits filled by consumer groups and oil interests, driving up costs further!

    • That is a big problem with the liberal elite who use their money and influence to get their way. While they feel all good for driving EV’s, shutting down fossil fuel plants, limiting oil and gas development, and mandating unreliable and expensive green energy sources the consequences of their policies – significantly higher energy costs – don’t impact them.

  5. Out of curiosity I checked out the chargers at a rest stop on interstate 5. There were four chargers and two of them were obviously out of order. I.e. one totally dead screen and the other was displaying an “out of service” message. I was just looking so I don’t know if either of the other two chargers were functional. I have heard that this is a common issue.

  6. Last time I looked, gas car batteries were not 900lbs… and if you paid attention I also referenced the battery fire up in Moss Landing because of all the storage you will need for solar and wind in order to charge cars in off hours.
    Religious zealots rarely pay attention to details that run contrary to their belief systems

  7. Santa Barbara elites are great. They’ll tell you how their $100,000 Tesla (subsidized) gets free power at any Tesla supercharger that only takes 18 minutes. Or how they can paid an additional $2000 for unlimited supercharging. Like their housekeepers and gardeners can afford that.
    Or they ignore that the charging cost per mile to supercharge are energy equavalent to $8.76 per gallon (“We have received a lot of questions about our calculation that using a Supercharger can cost the equivalent of $8.76 per gallon. That number is based on the EPA’s equivalency factor that an average gallon of gas contains 33.7 kWh of energy.”)
    “Owning a Tesla Model 3 (or any electric car) can substantially reduce fuel costs compared to a gas-powered car, but only when it’s charged at home.”

  8. Climate heretics dare to ask out loud if 900lbs battery accidents at 25,000 X damage of carbon dioxide matter.
    Religious fanatics cry out for burning heretics at stake.. resulting in more damage to environment. Trot out comparisons of battery arrays measuring in tons to 30 lbs gas car battery and can’t figure out there is a difference

  9. Same chorus of buffoonery and lies from social justice, green warriors. Talk about science denial! Seriously, petroleum products are a part of everyday modern life, multiplies of products, countless applications. Wind and solar to replace petroleum as a national or global energy policy is beyond stupid, beyond irrational and is truly pathological.
    My advice to these folks, get over it, cuz a huge tidal wave of red is coming…and man, are they pissed!

  10. People here citing the $8 per gallon “equivalence” of supercharging are really clueless. What they’re really pointing out, if you know math and physics, is that internal combustion engines are only 40% efficient and that we should really be charging more than that for gasoline to make up for all the downsides.

    • The article I linked showed their math and explained it better.
      “A gallon of gas contains 33.7 kWh of energy.” that calculation is motor neutral.
      Some of you should really check your SB Elite privilege at the door. Poor people in San Bernardino are not buying EV’s and it isn’t because they are dumber than you. They are smart enough to know what works for their budget with their needs. They can’t afford a Tesla that only gets driven to Lazy Acres or to the Climate Change Fundraiser… you know the places you can be sure to be seen in all your glorious benevolence

    • Wind and solar isn’t heavily subsidized? No mining, extraction and transportation involved in manufacturing and installing solar panels and wind turbines? There aren’t losses when transmitting electricity? And I’m leaving things out? Modern gasoline engines are rather efficient so saying they burn it inefficiently isn’t accurate at all, only new nat-gas plants can more efficiently turn fossil fuel into energy and even then it’s going to 40% in an ICE to 60% in a nat-gas plant. Nice insult on the end, really helps summarize and solidify you point.

    • What you’re leaving out of the equation is it depends on how that electrical energy from the grid was generated. An EV is just a battery, it only stores energy it doesn’t produce it. While an EV may use 60% of it’s stored electrical energy towards propulsion if that electricity was produced via natural gas, which would have an efficiency closer to an ICE engine, the net overall efficiency would be lower. Another great reason not to shut down our existing nuclear power plants.

    • 8:34@
      Now, that’s a remarkably convoluted attempt to justify your non-fact-based opinions. It turns out the electricity generated for our grid is mostly renewable.
      What you leave out of all of your contortions is taking into account all the environmental damage caused in the extraction, refining, and transporting of all that heavily-subsidized fossil fuel so that you can burn it inefficiently and contribute to the destruction of a livable planet for humans.
      Learn something: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62892013
      Although, we won’t expect much, since your previous behavior demonstrates remarkable clue-resistance on myriad subjects.


The Day After 1/9