We’ve all been there. A big thing is happening. And there’s a big problem with it (or more than one). But nobody wants to talk about the problem. It’s uncomfortable. It’s easier to just proceed. I proceeded with drafting most of this newsletter before I locked eyes, uncomfortably, with the elephant. Then I started rewriting.
On the positive side, I’m confident the Clean School Bus Program (CSBP) being administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will meet its goal of getting thousands of electric school buses (ESB’s) on the road over the next five years. The staff describe the 5 billion program (half for electric, half for alternative fuels that may include electric) as seed money for fleet transformation. The program prioritizes school fleets with the worst inequities. All good.
Think of the elephant below as representing this wicked problem: the school bus fleets serving the kids and communities suffering from the worst air quality, worst health care and lowest graduation rates (all those are closely related) will have, far and away, the hardest time making use of the CSBP, if they even learn it’s available. This newsletter is about that wicked problem and possible solutions, and will close with next steps and a cool new ESB resource just released by my home state of Oregon.
This newsletter’s knowledge-base comes from:
- Relationships with a variety of bus fleets, including rural, low income and Tribal (CSBP priority fleets)
- Breadth of knowledge gained from fellow members of the Alliance for Electric School Buses (this newsletter respects the Alliance but never speaks for it)
- Relationships with ESB manufacturers, dealers, Highland, etc.
- The objectivity of not selling anything
The CSBP originates in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill (pages 894-897), summarized in the CSBP’s FAQ’s. Since I’m your friend who wants to save you clicks I’ll bottom-line some of the FAQ’s here:
CSBP priorities: high need local education agencies, Tribal schools, rural schools, low income area schools, and those bringing cost-share (match funds) including public-private partnerships, grants from other entities and school bonds. Further criteria (no preference between these):, lowest cost; local conditions (routes/weather) technologies that most reduce emissions; help scale fleets up or promote cost parity between old and new technologies. Broad geographic distribution is required, with no state to receive more than 10% of funds.
I learned additionally in a cordial January 24 meeting between lead EPA/CSBP staff and Alliance members that the CSBP will
- Do a nationwide solicitation (not separate state ones)
- Probably include a rebate structure (it’s efficient)
- Be wide open to the help and input of other organizations
- Need to reach many districts, Tribes etc. new to the ESB conversation, and new to grants in general
- Do course corrections over the five years of the program
I have no argument with those things. The following describe what I see as the elephant in the room.
Problem 1.) Competition is required for CSBP funds. Unfortunately, many of the prioritized bus fleets are not attracted to competitions. They’re more oriented to surviving. Painfully, they’ve been forced to cut routes for lack of drivers and spacing requirements. Their kids are already way behind due to Covid. Electric buses are the last things on their minds; I’ve even heard well-resourced school districts say so.
Partial solution: districts should only compete for funds with districts similar to themselves. The Alliance and Highland are promoting this peer- tiered approach to the EPA. It seems like common sense, but let’s look deeper. Powhatan County Public School board in Virginia ended up declining to receive Dominion Energy’s grant for two ESB’s, after competing for it and winning, citing that ESB’s were not among their pre-existing goals and alluding (correctly) to the project using human resources that wouldn’t be reimbursed Richmond Times-Dispatch). But Powhatan is among the richer districts in Virginia. Poorer districts with fewer resources than Powhatan could win funds in a user-friendly competition and find themselves unable to use them. This leads to:
Stronger solution: invest in bus fleets’ capacity to electrify. CSBP grants must cover not just the electric buses and their charging infrastructure but the time it takes to make them happen. It’s not enough to help under-resourced districts apply for grants. Bus fleets need to hold the necessary meetings with their utility, research and plan their charging infrastructure, prepare and train their mechanics and drivers. All of this is work above and beyond what they’re currently doing. To not invest in the people-hours required for ESB projects to succeed could potentially sabotage the projects.
Problem 2.) Fleet financing models may attract, and therefore favor, rich school districts. For example, the largest ESB project in the nation (326 buses) is the Montgomery County School District (MCSD) fleet transition being financed and managed by Highland. MCSD is one of the most affluent, and least equitable, districts in Maryland (Wallethub, which has similar data on many states’ school districts). Highland-type financing can create as much torqued acceleration for zero-emissions school bus adoption, and air quality improvement, as electric drivetrains create for the vehicles they locomote (confession: I love passing other cars in my all-electric Nissan Leaf).
I talked yesterday with Matt Stanberry from Highland. “ESB’s need to be for everyone, we take that seriously,” he told me when I shared the MCSD data with him. “For example, we’re spending a ton of time talking with Roanoke Electric Cooperative and Bertie County Schools in North Carolina. The area is hugely disadvantaged” (see supporting data at Public School Review, which gives data for schools and districts nationwide).
”No single [ESB financing] contract is all that profitable for us, ” Matt went on. “We make money by doing lots of projects of all kinds, not by doing one or two hugely profitable projects.” I mentioned two Transportation Directors I know doing ESB pilots that candidly state they cannot see scaling their whole fleets to electric. Too hard, they say. Matt serenely pointed out that those districts got started before ESB technology improved and before Highland came along.
Possible solution: The CSBP might require that low income bus fleets be proportionately represented, over time, among fleet financing partnerships. Outcomes and results drive equity.
Problem 3.) Tribes and their school bus systems may not relate well to the CSBP and accompanying bureaucracy. I’d say this is our problem to solve, more than the Tribes’ problem. I worked with three of Oregon’s Tribes from 2012-2017, handling their state-administered transit grants. I made the mistake initially of being my briskly cheerful, take-charge, white-style self. This didn’t play well. I needed to slow down, build trust and not be wedded to rigid rules. Many Tribes have trust issues with the federal government, for good reasons. Trying to hurry Tribes along with things, or squeeze them into predetermined boxes, is counterproductive and not respectful.
I talked the other day with Jessica Boyd, Acting Lead Driver at Many Farms Community School in the northeastern corner of Arizona. the Navajo reservation. The Navajo are the largest tribe in the U.S., by population, reservation size and I assume number of school buses, which are distributed over many schools that, I gather, operate independently of each other. I asked Jessica about her bus fleet and students, and eventually broached the topic of electric buses. “We know about them. But they’d never work for us, our distances are too far,” she said. Fair enough.
Possible solution: CSBP outreach to Tribes needs to come from those who have existing relationships with Tribes. Tribal cultures are relationship-based. Outreach needs to listen closely to the details of each particular school bus system. Never assume that one Tribe or Tribal school resembles another. Note that Cost-share (match) is typically out of reach for Tribes. And we can’t assume electric buses will work for any given Tribe, even if the grants represent so-called free money. ESB’s are labor-intensive, and most Tribal employees already wear multiple hats and are stretched thin.
Wrapping up, that’s how I see the elephant, the hard-to-discuss problems, in our shared CSBP room. this transition to ESB’s that will make our kids, communities and climate healthier. Submit your input to EPA, soon, at cleanschoolbus@epa.
EPA’s Clean School Bus Program plans to publish its initial program guidance in mid March. So, we plan to report on that, and more, in our late March newsletter.
Also, Neil and I plan to present a webinar this spring on applying for CSBP funds. Doubtless the EPA will do one or more of those, too. We’ll keep you posted on all of it. Feel free to forward this newsletter; new readers can subscribe here.
Finally, I’m delighted that my home state of Oregon, the Department of Energy specifically, has published online its Guide To School Bus Electrification. Neil and I were among the many contributors.
Alison Wiley (she/her/hers)
I am on the ancestral lands of the Multnomah, Chinook and Cowlitz peoples.
Whose land are you on?