With $197 million to fight climate change, Oregon doubles down on cars

An electric car recharging station on SW Salmon that’s owned and operated by Shell, an oil and gas company. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

The State of Oregon has received a $197 million grant from the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, all the funds devoted to the transportation sector — which is Oregon’s largest source of GHG emissions — will be spent to help people purchase and drive electric cars.

Oregon’s award is part of over $4.3 billion given out through the Biden Administration’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. 

As I clicked through the press release from Governor Tina Kotek’s office and the supportive material about the grant, I was surprised to see that all the funds awarded to Oregon will be spent on cars. Regardless of how they are powered, state subsidies for cars will increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT), lock more Oregonians into lopsided financial relationships with banks and major corporations who benefit from people who use the most expensive transportation option available, cause more deaths and injuries on our roads, create more traffic bottlenecks, clog neighborhoods with parked cars, and perpetuate highway building and expansions.

The $197 million will be split into three sectors of spending: residential and commercial buildings, materials and waste, and transportation. Of the $66 million going to transportation, $52 million will go toward e-car rebates and $14 million will be spent on charging infrastructure.

Getting fossil fuel powered vehicles off the road and helping people with lower incomes is important, but the lack of balance in Oregon’s funding plans is striking.

Several other states and local governments across the country who received funding from this same grant program spread the money around and will make bicycling and transit investments.

Austin plans to expand transit and invest in, “expansion of the local electric bikeshare system and micromobility choices.” Austin will also use the money to, “construct large-scale bicycle storage at 16 mobility hubs,” and “reduce vehicle-miles-traveled and increase equity by improving transit and mobility infrastructure in low-income and disadvantaged communities.” New Orleans plans to spend their funding on, “transportation access for disadvantaged communities… via 148 new bike share stations, 2,500 new bikeshare e-bikes, and incentives for 3,000 new e-bikes for residents.” Northwest Arkansas will, “construct bicycle and pedestrian trails to improve electric bike access, including vouchers reserved for income-qualified applicants.”  The Nez Perce Tribe will, “create a fleet of e-bikes for staff at field facilities,” and Utah plans to, “Deploy up 2,000 electric bikes with a focus on low-income communities.”

It’s not as if Oregon didn’t know people wanted this money to go toward VMT reduction and things that would promote more bicycling and transit. Below is an excerpt from a feedback summary on the transportation sector shared in the Oregon DEQ Priority Climate Action Plan (the EPA-funded planning document required as part of the grant application):

Reduction of vehicle miles traveled was also a theme throughout the transportation feedback. Suggested actions included the promotion of biking, walking, and public transit through increasing safety, infrastructure, and rebates on micro mobility devices such as electric bicycles. Longer term actions included designing communities to encourage driving reductions.

The State of Oregon also asked Native American Tribe members what they wanted this money to be spent on. According to a table on page 16 of the Priority Climate Action Plan, the “priority tribal measures” included:

  • Transit improvements, clean diesel, and bus electrification.
  • Increase the number of electric vehicles, gas electric hybrid automobiles, and fuel-efficient vehicles in the tribe’s fleet.
  • Expand electric vehicle charging infrastructure for government operations and employees.
  • Increase use and fleet of available eBikes Improve public transit service and infrastructure.
  • Non-motorized Transportation: Walking and biking trails and safety infrastructure.
This program was recommended, but didn’t make the final funding cut.

And State of Oregon agency staff who worked on the Priority Climate Action Plan suggested funding for a program called, “Oregon Micromobility Accelerator” that would promote things like bicycling, e-bikes, e-scooters and other small mobility devices.” The program would have provided financial support for bike and scooter share systems in Portland and Eugene as well as a statewide e-bike rebate program. Unfortunately those micromobility investments, which are backed up by a 2023 ODOT report that recommended more investment in e-bikes and scooters, did not make the final priority list. And despite having e-car rebates in place for many years, the Oregon Legislature failed to pass a similar program for bikes last year.

This grant award reflects the consequence of concerns we raised in 2021 that Oregon’s transportation electrification plans tend to marginalize and/or dismiss electric bicycles. Accompanying this systemic issue in Salem is the fact that Oregon has a statewide nonprofit electric vehicle advocacy group, Forth, that is almost wholly focused on electric cars and car charging infrastructure.

While there are many other funding sources and grants for transportation that do (and will) include non-driving investments, the way Oregon has chosen to invest this grant illustrates the continued primacy of car-centric planning at state agencies and continues our imbalanced approach to climate change mitigation and transportation electrification.

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Founder of BikePortland (in 2005). Father of three. North Portlander. Basketball lover. Car owner and driver. If you have questions or feedback about this site or my work, feel free to contact me at @jonathan_maus on Twitter, via email at maus.jonathan@gmail.com, or phone/text at 503-706-8804. Also, if you read and appreciate this site, please become a supporter.

Thanks for reading.

BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.

Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

4 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Aaron
1 hour ago

Obviously the person buying a $50k e-car needs a rebate more than a person buying a $3k e-bike, imagine the immense privilege of being able to afford spending $3k on a nice e-bike when the driver can only afford to devote tens of thousands of dollars towards their transportation. (I hope it the sarcasm was obvious)

So many people take car ownership as the default that buying an e-bike to replace some car trips is considered an extra luxury that only the affluent can afford on top of their car expenses. Using those rebate dollars to make that e-bike cheap or even free would remove that perception and make e-bike replacement of short car trips more mainstream.

Really the most frustrating thing here is that we don’t have money to maintain our car infrastructure anymore and yet we’re not doing anything to reduce our need for it. Imagine how much world-class bike/ped/transit infrastructure we could build and maintain easily with the PBOT and ODOT budgets if their budgets were primarily focused on that instead with car infrastructure being the afterthought. We’d likely have a surplus we could use to pay off our debt instead of continuing to take out yet more debt for new car infrastructure that will need even more expensive maintenance in 30 years which we also can’t afford.

Lois Leveen
Lois Leveen
5 minutes ago
Reply to  Aaron

Yes, people always ask what I spent for my ebike, and when I say, “$3,000,” they gasp. But I bought it to commute to/from work, and in 8 months, I’ve put nearly 2,000 miles on it. Imagine the cost of 2,000 miles for gas and auto insurance, plus parking, plus vehicle maintenance (SplendidCycle, where I bought the bike, has given me multiple routine “check ups” to ensure the bike is running well, at no cost.). Oh, and I am able to charge it at work using the same outlet as my office computer. Plus I have the mental and physical health benefits of exercise, rather than the stress of being stuck in traffic and having to find parking. Why in the (rapidly overheating) world are we NOT making this a no-cost/low-cost option for more people?

System
System
8 minutes ago

There is money for heat pumps, energy efficient housing and buildings, and waste reduction. It’s not ALL going to cars and car infrastructure. But I wish the lion share of the transportation money was going to transit and non car infrastructure. Putting more money into cars while not investing a commensurate amount into non car transportation will move us in the wrong direction.

Will the last bike commuter turn off their lights
Will the last bike commuter turn off their lights
1 minute ago

An electric car recharging station on SW Salmon that’s owned and operated by Shell, an oil and gas company.

Let’s just make things up to fit our narrative, shall we.

The city of Portland, PSU and PGE extended the Electric Avenue project twice at its original location … The project partners agreed to relocate Electric Avenue rather than shut it down.

https://wtcpdx.com/ElectricAvenue/