"The EBIP was designed to provide California residents affordable and sustainable mobility without the ongoing financial burden of car ownership. Unlike electric vehicle incentives, which tie low-income households to costly expenses like car payments, insurance, maintenance, and charging, the EBIP would have empowered people with a low cost, environmentally friendly transportation option and encourage a shift away from car dependent infrastructure at a fraction of the cost of an EV incentive."
"CC4A requires that applicants scrap an automobile that is fifteen years old, that they have owned and operated in California for at least two years to receive money towards the purchase of a plug-in hybrid, electric or fuel cell vehicle. The program added the option to receive $7,500 towards the purchase of an e-bike (or multiple e-bikes) in 2024 but almost no one in the Sacramento region has chosen that option."
EBIP failed to serve many intended recipients due to program design, implementation errors, and insufficient management, leaving approximately $18 million unused. Program mistakes prompted multiple investigations and hopes for a new CARB program manager to improve efficiency and distribution. EBIP aimed to provide affordable, sustainable mobility without car ownership costs, offering a low-cost alternative to EV incentives. CC4A’s scrap requirement excludes many low-income households and differs from EBIP’s target population. CC4A added a $7,500 e-bike option in 2024, but uptake in the Sacramento region was minimal. SABA assisted applicants who depended on unreliable public transit.
Read at Streetsblog
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]