Since the introduction of electric vehicles (EVs) in the US market, there have been no adjustments to evacuation planning to address their unique charging needs. EV drivers may face range anxiety, and long recharging times while navigating sparse public charging networks, which challenge both preemptive and short-notice evacuations. This research proposes a multi-criteria vulnerability assessment of coupled EV driver and charging station networks in various evacuation scenarios. We study flooding evacuations in Chicago, Illinois, and hurricane evacuations in the Southeast Florida road networks. Our findings show that vehicle and infrastructure characteristics (i.e., charging stations network, driving range, and vehicle type heterogeneity) and evacuation characteristics (i.e., network scale and topology, hazard type, and warning system type) impact evacuation feasibility and performance and increase drivers' vulnerability. Furthermore, the initial state of charge is critical in determining EV drivers’ capability to initiate an evacuation. Last, we discuss potential infrastructure and preparedness measures that can curb vulnerability and better accommodate EV evacuations.

Vehicle electrification is a key component of sustainable development goals yet the mass adoption of electric vehicles can lead to unintended consequences on community mobility during natural hazards. Electric vehicles pose a challenge to owners during natural hazards which lead to power outages, as a lack of home charging limits the mobility of EV owners. Due to the direct relation between driving distance to essential services and vehicle battery consumption, changes in mobility will be impacted by geographic and technological factors. Geography determines the driving distance to essential services which will be translated to electricity consumption devoted to transportation and technology determines the size of electric vehicle batteries and vehicle efficiency. The linkage between mobility, electric power availability and quality-of-life has broad implications for community resilience as equitable access to essential services has been identified as the most important aspect of community resilience. In this work we develop a computational modeling framework to quantify the impact of vehicle electrification on limited mobility and access to essential services in urban areas during prolonged blackouts. We define measures of access risk and evaluate how risk changes across large urban centers in the U.S. Our results indicate inequalities in access to essential services will be exacerbated by vehicle electrification during blackouts. We also find that urban areas with high population density are associated with lower levels of access risk whereas high car ownership rates correlate with higher access risk. Moreover, we test different electric vehicle technologies and find that increased battery size lowers access risk by increasing potential driving distance, however the impact of battery size is highly dependent on the geography of each city. Finally, we test how vehicle to grid (V2G) technology creates a trade-off between access to services and use of household amenities and find that V2G disproportionately benefits access-rich households.

Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber and Lyft have been rapidly growing. This growth could increase greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and health risk by air pollutant emissions, as well as congestion, noise, and crashes. In this study, we identify 1 million trips from real-world travel data recorded by TNC services in Chicago. We then assess the social cost of these trips–including GHG emissions, health damages from other air pollution (PM2.5, NOx, SO2, VOC), congestion, and crashes. We repeat the analysis for two cases: one in which we assume that the trips are performed using gasoline vehicles, and other in which we assume that they are performed using electric vehicles. The data record how much the customer paid for the trip and its approximate duration. For each trip, we then use the Google Maps API to identify a method by which the trip could have occurred using only transit. For this transit alternative, we calculate monetary costs, travel time, as well as the same set of social costs we estimate for the TNC trips. We then compare the cost of performing the trip using a TNC ride and using transit. The analysis allows us to characterize the trade-offs between the different types of private and public costs incurred by each mode. By combining trip data with historical weather data, we are also able to quantitatively describe how this trade-off varies with weather conditions (e.g., if, in extreme cold, people use TNCs for trips where the time savings do not compensate for the extra cost). Preliminary results indicate that the total social cost of a TNC trip is $1.5 for electric vehicles and $1.7 for gasoline vehicles. These are significantly higher than the social costs of a transit trip, which range between $0.1 and $0.3. However, these dynamics shift when considering private costs, including both monetary fares and time value. The fare alone of a TNC trip is on average $20, six times that of a transit trip. But when factoring in the monetized value of additional time needed for transit, the private costs would be approximately equal between TNCs and transit. Further analysis revealed that 60% of the monetized additional time cost in transit trips was allocated to walking and transferring, and 40% to waiting time. These primary findings indicate that riders are acting rationally in choosing TNCs over transit, and given the relatively small magnitude of external vs private costs, would continue to make the same choice if external costs were internalized. A policy to improve transit frequency and location of stops could potentially enhance the appeal of transit and increase the social benefits. With more in-depth analysis of these cost trade-offs under different weather conditions and times of day, we discuss further potential policy interventions.

In order to combat the increasing impacts of climate change, countries around the world are pursuing a transition away from fossil fuels and towards electricity and renewable energies. In pursuit of this, California has set goals to have Zero-emission Vehicles (ZEV) account for 100% of new vehicle sales by 2035 (California Air Resources Board, 2022). This goal was enacted to address the ongoing climate crisis, as vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICE) rely on highly emitting fuel sources. ZEVs are instead powered by hydrogen or electricity which makes improving the rate of ZEV adoption key to the sustainable energy transition. However, to meet these goals, California will need to accelerate ZEV sales, support, and infrastructure. In order to understand the existing efforts toward increasing ZEV adoption in California, we evaluated county- and city-level plans for ZEV adoption, their likelihood for success, and the constraints on their success. We implemented a detailed and thorough review of existing ZEV adoption plans and their current results. We will continue to focus on California ZEV adoption blueprints and plans to investigate the current state of planning and knowledge, as well as evaluate case studies from other locations to aid our conclusions. Through our completed and future assessments, we will determine the opportunities for adoption growth, build a solid understanding of existing barriers to ZEV adoption, and format a process for reducing barriers and improving adoption. Our current findings suggest that the greatest barriers to adoption are split between social, political, technical, and economic factors. Many existing plans reference infrastructure needs as well as strategies for reducing the economic burden for consumers. However, very few plans delve into the complex social and political issues associated with ZEV technology and widespread adoption. These issues include lack of access, negative public perception of ZEVs, cost of personal infrastructure, and concerns related to infrastructure and hardware for rural communities. This is the area that presents the most complex barriers with very few proven solutions. As we continue this work, I expect to find further barriers in the social sphere. To complement this work, we are exploring data to identify common socio-economic and ZEV adoption correlations. Once these correlations are clearly identified, we will utilize the results to identify outlier communities. We will find where communities have higher or lower adoption rates than other similar communities. Identifying these communities will open new areas for research and determine what steps can be taken in similar communities to boost adoption. The focus area for this research will be California, however, our findings, particularly concerning outliers and how to improve ZEV adoption, will be widely applicable and important as the world works to prioritize de-carbonizing the transportation sector. The big question moving forward is how our knowledge of existing barriers can inform the solutions and strategies that are implemented to improve ZEV adoption.

While the US rapidly increases electric vehicle (EV) sales to meet decarbonization targets for the transportation sector, its second-hand (SH) EVs have entered international used vehicle markets. Introducing a radically new technology such as EVs without responsive measures in SH market regions may lead to an unintended transfer of economic and environmental burdens to lower and middle-income countries (LMICs) if they are unprepared to manage EVs, especially at the end of life (EOL).

It is unclear if SH exports provide receiving countries environmental benefits, particularly considering the battery state of health, the extended use, the electricity grids used to charge them, local maintenance and repair practices, and available EOL management systems for EV batteries. Additionally, exported SH vehicles could reduce the potential circularity of domestic EV battery production.

Previous EV lifecycle assessments (LCA) have failed to account for exports to international SH markets, assuming EVs operate only in the country where they are sold. Such studies have predominantly focused on developed nations with well-established waste management systems and robust regulation and enforcement systems, underestimating their full lifecycle impact in LMICs.

This research focuses on US-Mexico SH vehicle trade. According to National Customs Agency of Mexico (ANAM) data, Mexico is the largest export market for US SH vehicles, with over 9 million imports between 2005 and 2023, representing over 30% of registrations in Mexico during the period, with recent estimates suggesting the share may be higher due to illegally introduced SH vehicles.

We use LCA modeling to analyze the expanded lifecycle environmental impacts of US-exported EVs reaching EOL in Mexico.

However, Mexico is notorious for the informality of its waste management system, lacking dedicated EOL vehicle management regulation and capacity to enforce applicable health, safety, and environmental regulations. Thus, collection, dismantling, recycling, and data recording are primarily market-driven and carried out informally, posing a major barrier to obtaining comprehensive information on Mexico's EOL vehicle management system and its strategies to accommodate the increasing number of EVs.

To address this gap, we conducted qualitative research through semi-structured interviews with industry and public sector stakeholders. These interviews and an extensive literature review informed our LCA modeling.

Results offer insights into the extended lifecycle environmental impacts of US-exported EVs reaching EOL in Mexico, potentially informing regional policies to prevent the transfer of environmental burdens and maximize economic benefits to the region.

Key interview findings include: (1)Overwhelmingly, EVs reaching EOL in Mexico are SH imports from the US. (2)SH hybrid-electric vehicles are widespread, while SH battery-electric vehicles remain uncommon. (3)The most common chemistry of the spent SH vehicle batteries is nickel-metal hydride, but lithium-ion is increasing. (4) No official regulations exist for EOL EV batteries. (5)Recyclers do not accept spent EV batteries, leading to stockpiling and landfill disposal.

While our study focuses on the US-Mexico trade, our modeling approach and findings offer insights into other LMIC SH vehicle trade relationships, contributing to a deeper understanding of the nascent global SH EV trade implications.