For my JOUR 305 Data Reporting & Visualization class, I was paired with a business major to scour raw government data records, generate visuals for it using Microsoft Excel and write a story on it. After looking through spreadsheets of government data, we found data on charging stations in California. My partner developed the data visualization in the story, while I interviewed sources and wrote the article. Shortly after we submitted this assignment, the Los Angeles Times released a story in its print edition with the same thesis, supported by the same data along with with a quote from the California Air Resources Board as well.

When David Mobley drives his family to Northern California, he prefers to do it all in one day. But as of now, he only does it in a gas car.

“First, I can’t fit them all in a normal EV, [and] second, even if I could, I couldn’t recharge fast enough to make this trip a reality,” said Mobley, a professor of pharmaceutical sciences at UCI who lives in Irvine with his family of eight, 600 to 650 miles away from his extended family. “It’d turn into a multiple-day trip.”

Although he owns a Nissan Leaf, he drives their family’s gas-powered Mercedes-Benz Sprinter to NorCal about once or twice a year. But even if California succeeds in its goal to sell only zero-emissions vehicles (ZEVs) on its market by 2035 and supply enough energy for a projected number of 5 million ZEVs and electric vehicles (EVs), Mobley says gas is still the most practical solution.

In 2018, California initially anticipated reaching 250,000 charging stations by next year, to solve Mobley’s practicality problem, and dedicated $2.9 billion to build 80,000 charging stations, according to the California Energy Commission (CEC). But a data analysis of California’s 2020-2023 public charging network from the CEC reveals that California is over 20 years behind on its goal.

One of the reasons lies in the slow rate of infrastructure growth. Using these records and its current rate of growth, California is predicted to reach 250,000 stations by 2040 at best. 

The CEC’s data only records public stations and certain shared private stations. This excludes what California Air Resources Board Communications Specialist John Swanton identifies as proprietary and private charging infrastructure.

“An example of proprietary infrastructure is the Tesla network, where it is only open to certain manufacturers’ vehicles, and private infrastructure is typically residential or workplace charging only available to residents, employee’s, or customers,” Swanton said. “Private infrastructure is not required to participate in any data sharing, or counts of installed chargers, and much of the data for proprietary networks is considered confidential unless they start accepting public funds for open access to all vehicles.”

Despite this caveat, a Stanford research article published in February still recognized a delay, and determined over four complex reasons for it, including long waits for permits to begin building, limits on grid capacity and staff capacity and uncertainties regarding access to funding. The most effective solution to accelerating California’s installation progress, it said, was expanding the state’s grid capacity to support more infrastructure.

“Timeframes can be on the order of months or even multiple years for large installations,” according to the article, which cited a June 2023 Inside Climate News article. “Reasons for these delays vary, ranging from the complex regulatory process of laying new transmission lines to utility service department delays and shortage of transformers needed for site upgrades.”

Similar complexities in the regulation and permitting processes have prompted legislative action aimed at accelerating the task, but the Stanford article noted a lack of evidence proving the effectiveness of these solutions.

Speaking for the CARB, Swanton said the board and its partners are working to further streamline the process in tandem with such legislation.

“All of the bills cited in the Stanford study have made critical contributions to reducing barriers to construction of new infrastructure and CARB staff provide technical support for additional legislation when requested by the legislature,” said Swanton, who also addressed lobbyists attempting to slow growth even more. “As new laws are enacted that streamline and standardize these processes, and demand for infrastructure increases along with the growth of the ZEV popularity, the ability of any one stakeholder to significantly impede projects is reduced.”

Not all hope is lost

Although California may not meet its charging infrastructure goal according to the current numbers, its plan may prove feasible in regards to its goal of 5 million ZEVs on the road by 2035.

A data analysis from the CEC’s record of ZEVs in California from 2022-2023, after the COVID-19 pandemic, predicts California reaching this goal by 2032-2033, ahead of schedule.

“Overall the sales of ZEV’s is already trending [on an increase], not only in the California market, but similar markets worldwide,” Swanton said. “While there has been a recent dip in ZEV sales, in-line with an overall slump in new vehicle sales, the long-term trend is towards continued growth and generally ahead of projections when these standards were adopted.”

Houston Chronicle energy reporter Claire Hao acknowledged the increase, but noted practical factors similar to Mobley’s circumstances.

“In general, the first buyers on EVs have all finished buying, those who were really interested in having one specifically or tech enthusiasts who like having the latest gadgets,” said Hao, who previously wrote at the San Francisco Chronicle as an environment reporter. “As the industry tries to win over the rest of the market, one of the biggest barriers, if not the biggest, is lack of charging. And thus, range anxiety, which is people’s fears that their EV will run out of charge in the middle of their drive when they’re far from a charging station. And that they can’t drive long distances with an EV.”

At least from the data alone, California still has hope of selling, if not supplying energy for, 5 million ZEVs.

But with almost 10 years left until 2035, California’s goal still seems too lofty for Mobley.

“I think, and still think, this is ridiculous virtue signaling,” said Mobley, who owns a gas-powered car and a small electric vehicle. “It’s great to have optimistic goals about transitions to alternative energy sources, etc., but one can’t mandate science and infrastructure progress nor changes to human behavior, many of which would need to come together to make this actually work.”