DOCSLIB.ORG

State Transportation Electrification Scorecard Bryan Howard, Shruti Vaidyanathan, Charlotte Cohn, Nick Henner, Ben Jennings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State Transportation Electrification Scorecard Bryan Howard, Shruti Vaidyanathan, Charlotte Cohn, Nick Henner, Ben Jennings The State Transportation Electrification scorecard Bryan Howard, Shruti Vaidyanathan, Charlotte Cohn, Nick Henner, Ben Jennings RESEARCH REPORT FEBRUARY 2021 EV SCORECARD © ACEEE Contents About the Authors ..............................................................................................................................iii Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................................................iii Glossary of Frequently Used Terms ................................................................................................ iv Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... vi Chapter 1. Introduction, Methodology, and Results ...................................................................... 1 Scoring Methodology .............................................................................................................. 3 State Actors ............................................................................................................................... 7 Metrics Not Included ............................................................................................................... 9 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2. Planning and Goal Setting ............................................................................................ 15 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 15 Results and Key Takeaways ................................................................................................. 15 Unscored Metrics ................................................................................................................... 22 Chapter 3. Incentives for EV Deployment ..................................................................................... 23 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 23 Results and Key Takeaways ................................................................................................. 24 Unscored Metrics ................................................................................................................... 36 Chapter 4. Transportation System Efficiency ................................................................................ 37 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 37 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 37 Unscored Metrics ................................................................................................................... 42 Chapter 5. Electricity Grid Optimization ....................................................................................... 43 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 43 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 44 i EV SCORECARD © ACEEE Unscored Metrics ................................................................................................................... 48 Chapter 6. Equity ............................................................................................................................... 50 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 50 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 51 Unscored Metrics ................................................................................................................... 54 Chapter 7. Transportation Electrification Outcomes .................................................................... 57 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 57 Results and Key Takeaways ................................................................................................. 57 Unscored Metrics ................................................................................................................... 62 Chapter 8. Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 63 References ........................................................................................................................................... 65 Appendix A. Full State Scores ......................................................................................................... 73 Appendix B. Planning and Goal-Setting Metrics .......................................................................... 88 Appendix C. Incentives for EV Deployment Metrics ................................................................... 94 Appendix D. Transportation System Efficiency Metrics ........................................................... 134 Appendix E. Electric Grid Optimization Metrics ........................................................................ 138 Appendix F. Equity Metrics ........................................................................................................... 147 Appendix G: Transportation Electrification Outcomes Metrics ............................................... 152 ii EV SCORECARD © ACEEE About the Authors Bryan Howard oversees work related to research, technical assistance, and implementation of energy efficiency policy at the state level. Prior to joining ACEEE, Bryan worked as the legislative director for the U.S. Green Building Council, where he played a key role in enacting legislation to modernize federal disaster response programs, tax incentives, education and training, and government building efficiency. Before joining the Council, he served as a legislative aide in the U.S. House of Representatives. Bryan holds a bachelor of arts in political science from Mesa State College. Shruti Vaidyanathan oversees research on vehicle efficiency and systemwide transportation efficiency. She has 10 years of experience in transportation efficiency issues, and her work has most recently focused on passenger and freight mobility best practices at the state and local levels and the role of emerging mobility options and autonomous vehicles in sustainable urban transportation systems. Shruti holds a master of science in public policy and management from Heinz College at Carnegie Mellon University and a bachelor of arts in economics and environmental studies from Grinnell College. Charlotte Cohn conducts research and analysis on utility energy efficiency policy. Prior to joining ACEEE, she worked with the Vermont Law School Institute for Energy and the Environment on building community solar projects for low- to moderate-income communities in New Hampshire. She holds a master’s degree in energy regulation and law from the Vermont Law School and a bachelor’s degree from the University of Vermont. Nick Henner conducts research and analysis on clean energy finance strategies, working within ACEEE’s state policy program and collaborating with teams across the organization. Before joining ACEEE, Nick worked at the City and County of Honolulu’s Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resiliency, where he focused on energy efficiency and equity projects. Nick earned a master of science in sustainability management from American University and a bachelor of science in finance from the University of Arizona. Ben Jennings assists ACEEE’s transportation program with various projects including research tasks related to ACEEE’s City Scorecard and International Scorecard. Prior to joining ACEEE, Ben interned with the City Bureau of Planning in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where he helped to research, write, and edit the city’s Municipal Operations Climate Action Plan. Ben holds a bachelor of arts in environmental studies and politics from Oberlin College. Acknowledgments This report was made possible through the generous support of Xcel Energy, Consolidated Edison, and the Merck Family Fund. The authors gratefully acknowledge the external reviewers, internal reviewers, colleagues, and sponsors who supported this report. We also thank the many individuals from national and regional organizations who participated in our advisory group and provided input on the methodology, including most of the external expert reviewers listed here. External review and support do not imply affiliation or endorsement. These include, in no particular order, Nick Nigro (Atlas Public Policy), Phil Jones (Alliance for Transportation Electrification), Jeanette Shaw (Forth), Steve iii EV SCORECARD © ACEEE Kalland (NC Energy Tech Center), Katherine Stainken (Plug In America), Terry Travis (EVNoire), Erin K. Falquier (Chicane Labs), Grace Relf (Hawaii Public Utility Commission), Camille Kadoch (Regulatory Assistance Project), Larissa Koehler (Environmental Defense Fund), Matt Rogotzke (National Governors Association) Annie Gilleo (Greenlots),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • POSITION STATEMENT: UNFAIR TAXES for ELECTRIC VEHICLES This Position Is Supported by the Following Drive Electric Minnesota Policy Committee Members
    POSITION STATEMENT: UNFAIR TAXES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES This position is supported by the following Drive Electric Minnesota Policy Committee members: Alliance for Transportation Electrification Minnesota Electric Vehicle Owners American Lung Association in Minnesota Minnesota Power City of Minneapolis Otter Tail Power Company Connexus Energy Plug In America Elk River Municipal Utilities Shift2Electric Fresh Energy Xcel Energy Great River Energy Electric vehicle (EV) users should pay their fair share for the use of Minnesota roads, but they should not pay MORE than owners of equivalent conventional vehicles or than their fair share. Upkeep for Minnesota’s roads relies significantly on the Highway Users Tax Distribution Fund, which is funded through a combination of fuel tax revenue (including gasoline tax and $75 EV tax), license fees (including registration taxes), and motor vehicle sales taxes. Auto parts sales taxes and other sources also provide funding.1 Why is Drive Electric Minnesota concerned about unfair new taxes on EVs? • EVs already pay more than their fair share. EV drivers currently pay a $75 annual tax in lieu of a gas tax in addition to paying more in motor vehicle sales tax and registration tax than someone buying a comparable gasoline vehicle. In total highway taxes, EV owners already pay more over the life of the vehicle than the average gas vehicle driver, as shown in figure 1. • Inconsistent with the user-pays principle: The current gas tax model assesses a fee on a driver based on their vehicle’s fuel economy (miles per gallon) and how much they drive. Drivers of vehicles with low fuel economy (few miles per gallon) need to fuel their tank more, as do drivers that drive a lot.
    [Show full text]
  • Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance
    Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance Mark Singer National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Technical Report Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy NREL/TP-5400-75707 Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC July 2020 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance Mark Singer National Renewable Energy Laboratory Suggested Citation Singer, Mark. 2020. Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-5400-75707. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/75707.pdf NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Technical Report Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy NREL/TP-5400-75707 Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC July 2020 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, CO 80401 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov NOTICE This work was authored by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Vehicle Technologies Office. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Remarks
    Plug In America 6380 Wilshire Blvd Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90048 323-372-1236 June 19, 2020 Nevada Legislative Committee on Energy 401 S. Carson Street Carson City, NV 89701-4747 Submitted via email to Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno ([email protected]); Senator Chris Brooks ([email protected]); and Marjorie Paslov-Thomas ([email protected]) Re: SCR 3 Transportation Funding Solutions Dear Chair Monroe-Moreno and Vice-Chair Brooks: On behalf of the electric vehicle (EV) drivers in Nevada that we represent, Plug In America would like to thank you for your leadership with the Senate Concurrent Resolution 3 (SCR3) process, particularly given these challenging times. EVs provide significant benefits to all Nevadans, and we urge you to take these benefits into account as you finalize the report on alternative solutions for transportation funding in Nevada, including what fees – if any – should be assessed to EV drivers in Nevada. Plug In America is the nation’s leading independent consumer voice for accelerating the use of EVs in the United States to consumers, policymakers, auto manufacturers and others. Formed as a non-profit in 2008, Plug In America provides practical, objective information collected from our coalition of plug-in vehicle drivers through public outreach and education, policy work and a range of technical advisory services. Our expertise represents the world’s deepest pool of experience of driving and living with plug­ in vehicles.1 The solutions to solving the immediate transportation funding shortfalls in Nevada – and also nationwide – require major shifts in how the funding has historically been implemented.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Drive by '25
    ELECTRIC DRIVE BY ‘25: How California Can Catalyze Mass Adoption of Electric Vehicles by 2025 September 2012 About this Report This policy paper is the tenth in a series of reports on how climate change will create opportunities for specific sectors of the business community and how policy-makers can facilitate those opportunities. Each paper results from one-day workshop discussions that include representatives from key business, academic, and policy sectors of the targeted industries. The workshops and resulting policy papers are sponsored by Bank of America and produced by a partnership of the UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center & Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment and UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment. Authorship The author of this policy paper is Ethan N. Elkind, Bank of America Climate Policy Associate for UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center & Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment and UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment (CLEE). Additional contributions to the report were made by Sean Hecht and Cara Horowitz of the UCLA School of Law and Steven Weissman of the UC Berkeley School of Law. Acknowledgments The author and organizers are grateful to Bank of America for its generous sponsorship of the workshop series and input into the formulation of both the workshops and the policy paper. We would specifically like to thank Anne Finucane, Global Chief Strategy and Marketing Officer, and Chair of the Bank of America Environmental Council, for her commitment to this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Clean Air Rule
    Small Business Economic Impact Statement Chapter 173-442 WAC Clean Air Rule Chapter 173-441 WAC Reporting of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases June 2016 Publication no. 16-02-009 Publication and Contact Information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1602009.html For more information contact: Air Quality Program P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: 360-407-6800 Washington State Department of Ecology – www.ecy.wa.gov o Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 o Central Regional Office, Union Gap 509-575-2490 o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 Accommodation Requests: To request ADA accommodation including materials in a format for the visually impaired, call Ecology at 360-407-6800. Persons with impaired hearing may call Washington Relay Service at 711. Persons with speech disability may call TTY at 877-833-6341. Small Business Economic Impact Statement Chapter 173-442 WAC Clean Air Rule Chapter 173-441 WAC Reporting of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases Prepared by Kasia Patora Shon Kraley, PhD Rules & Accountability Section Rules & Accountability Section WA Department of Ecology WA Department of Ecology Supporting work by: Carrie Sessions, Rules & Accountability Section, WA Department of Ecology Neil Caudill, Air Quality Program, WA Department of Ecology Bill Drumheller, Air Quality Program, WA Department of Ecology for the Air Quality Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ii Chapter 1: Background and Introduction .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Area—Plug-In Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan—Summary 2013 Executive Summary
    California Energy Commission DOCKETED 14-IEP-1B TN 72532 AUG 04 2014 Bay Area Plug-In Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan Summary 2013 December 2013 Prepared for In Partnership with Prepared by Disclaimer This report was prepared as a result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Commission, its employees, or the State of California. The Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, expressed or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this document; nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report was also prepared as a result of work sponsored, paid for, in whole or in part, by a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Award to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of SCAQMD or the DOE. The SCAQMD and DOE, their officers, employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, expressed or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report. The SCAQMD and DOE have not approved or disapproved this report, nor have the SCAQMD or DOE passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information contained herein. Acknowledgements The Bay Area is fortunate to have a broad and diverse set of contributors working to enable this region to support an accelerated adoption rate of plug-in electric vehicles between now and 2025. Stakeholders contributed to the preparation of this document by conducting targeted outreach and interviews and by providing key data and valuable feedback.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulletin STATEN ISLAND’S 157-YEAR-OLD RAILROAD
    ERA BULLETIN — SEPTEMBER, 2017 The Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 60, No. 9 September, 2017 The Bulletin STATEN ISLAND’S 157-YEAR-OLD RAILROAD Published by the Electric (Continued from August, 2017 issue) Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated, PO Box Before the end of 1925, the railroad was Buses adjacent to the railroad appeared in 3323, New York, New able to operate full electric service from St. the 1920s, but the railroad still made a profit. York 10163-3323. George to Tottenville, South Beach, and Ar- Several years later, railroad riding declined lington with 100 new M.U. electric cars. The because of competition from the buses. For general inquiries, or fleet was composed of 90 motor cars num- When the Isle Transportation Company sur- Bulletin submissions, bered 300-389 and ten trailers numbered rendered its franchise on February 23, 1947, contact us at bulletin@ erausa.org. ERA’s 500-509, of which five were eventually con- the Board of Transportation started operating website is verted to motors. Freight was also carried on the buses immediately, retaining the five-cent www.erausa.org. nearly the entire line, including the non- fare with several five-cent zones depending electrified track extending from Arlington on the distance. On July 1, 1948, bus fares Editorial Staff: across the bridge to Cranford Junction, New were increased to seven cents, zone fares Editor-in-Chief: Bernard Linder Jersey. Because the passenger service usu- were abolished, and passengers could buy a Tri-State News and ally operated at a deficit, the company was 2-cent transfer valid on subway lines at Commuter Rail Editor: unable to spend $17 million to extend the South Ferry, Manhattan.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Proxy Statement 1 Proxy Statement Summary Evergy, Inc
    TM Evergy, Inc. One Kansas City Place 1200 Main Street Kansas City, Missouri 64105 March 24, 2021 Dear Shareholder: We are pleased to invite you to the annual meeting of shareholders of Evergy, Inc. For the health and safety of our shareholders and employees during the COVID-19 pandemic, the meeting will be held via live audio webcast and using online shareholder tools at 10:00 a.m. Central Daylight Time, on Tuesday, May 4, 2021, at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/EVRG2021. At this meeting, you will be asked to: 1. Elect the nominees named in the attached proxy statement as directors; 2. Provide an advisory non-binding vote to approve the 2020 compensation of our named executive officers; 3. Ratify the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2021; and 4. Transact any other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof. The attached notice of annual meeting and proxy statement describe the business to be transacted at the meeting. Please review these materials and vote your shares. Your vote is important. I encourage you to complete, sign, date and return your proxy card or use telephone or internet voting prior to the annual meeting so that your shares will be represented and voted at the meeting even if you cannot attend. Sincerely, David A. Campbell President and Chief Executive Officer A Letter from Your Board of Directors Dear Fellow Shareholders: We join David in inviting you to Evergy’s 2021 annual shareholder meeting. We are proud of the financial and operational results that we delivered in 2020 and are humbled by Evergy’s tireless essential employees who helped keep the lights safely on during the pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • INSTITUTION Congress Cf the US, Washington, DC House Committee
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 307 767 EC 220 276 TITLE H.R. 4904, Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Select Education of the Committee on Education and Labor. House of Representatives, One Hundredth Congress, Second Session. INSTITUTION Congress cf the U.S., Washington, D.C. House Committee on Education and Labor. PUB DATE 30 Jun 88 NOTE 105p.; Serial No. 100-103. Some pages contain small print. AVAILABLE FROMSuperintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090) EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS *Assistive Devices (for Disabled); *Disabilities; *Federal Legislation; Hearings; Normalization (Handicapped); Program Development; State Programs; *Technology IDENTIFIERS Congress 100th; Proposed Legislation ABSTRACT Testimony is presented on H.R. 4904, "Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988." The legislation allows states to apply for grants to be used to- develop and implement a consumer-responsive statewide program of technology-related assistance. States may develop the program by providing assistive technology devices and services, by developing ,..n information dissemination system, by establishing or enhancing training and technical assistance, or by designing public awareness projects. Statements, letters, and supplemental materials are included from: (1) two Representatives in Congress, Steve Bartlett and James Jeffords;(2) representatives of government agencies, including the Minnesota Governor's Initiative on Technology for People with Disabilities and the Rehabilitation Services Administration; (3) representatives from private agencies, including Coalition on Technology and Disability, Apple Computer, Inc., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and Council for Exceptional Children; and (4) a private citizen with quadriplegia.
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Equipment Safety Standards; Final Rule
    Tuesday, April 23, 2002 Part X Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 49 CFR Parts 216 and 238 Passenger Equipment Safety Standards; Final Rule VerDate 11<MAY>2000 16:42 Apr 22, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23APR4.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23APR4 19970 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2002 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 21, 1997. FRA considered the comments substituted throughout this part for the received on the NPRM and advice from phrases ‘‘the FRA Regional Director for Federal Railroad Administration its Working Group in preparing a final Railroad Safety,’’ ‘‘the FRA Regional rule establishing comprehensive safety Director of Railroad Safety,’’ ‘‘a Regional 49 CFR Parts 216 and 238 standards for railroad passenger Director,’’ and ‘‘the Regional Director.’’ [FRA Docket No. PCSS–1, Notice No. 7] equipment, which was published on For a discussion of FRA’s amendments May 12, 1999. See 64 FR 25540. to this section, see 64 FR 25575. RIN 2130–AB48 Following publication of the final Amendments to 49 CFR Part 238 rule, parties filed petitions seeking Passenger Equipment Safety FRA’s reconsideration of requirements Subpart A—General Standards in the rule. These petitions principally Section 238.1 Purpose and Scope AGENCY: Federal Railroad related to the following subject areas: Administration (FRA), Department of structural design; fire safety; training; FRA has amended this section by Transportation (DOT). inspection, testing, and maintenance; restoring paragraphs (c)(1)–(3) of the May 12, 1999 final rule. See 64 FR ACTION: and movement of defective equipment.
    [Show full text]
  • March 30, 2021 the Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal
    March 30, 2021 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE Washington, DC 20426 RE: Southwest Power Pool, Inc., Docket No. ER21-___ Submission of Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement and Network Operating Agreement Dear Secretary Bose: Pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. § 824d, and section 35.13 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (“Commission”) regulations, 18 C.F.R. § 35.13, Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (“SPP”) submits: (1) an executed Service Agreement for Network Integration Transmission Service (“Service Agreement”) between SPP as Transmission Provider and Evergy Metro, Inc. (“Evergy Metro”) as Network Customer (“Twenty-Third Revised Evergy Metro Service Agreement”); and (2) an executed Network Operating Agreement (“NOA”) among SPP as Transmission Provider and Evergy Metro as Network Customer, and Evergy Metro, Evergy Missouri West, Inc. (“Evergy Missouri”), and Evergy Kansas Central, Inc. (“Evergy KS”) as Host Transmission Owners (“Twenty-Third Revised Evergy Metro NOA”).1 The Twenty-Third Revised Evergy Metro Agreements modify and supersede the Service Agreement and NOA among the Parties accepted by the Commission in Docket No. ER21-482-000.2 SPP 1 The Twenty-Third Revised Evergy Metro Service Agreement and Twenty- Third Revised Evergy Metro NOA are referred to collectively as the “Twenty-Third Revised Evergy Metro Agreements,” and SPP, Evergy Metro, Evergy Missouri, and Evergy KS are referred to as the “Parties.” The Twenty-Third Revised Evergy Metro Agreements are designated as “Twenty-Third Revised Service Agreement No. 1276.” 2 See Sw. Power Pool, Inc., Letter Order, Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • BULLETIN - JANUARY, 2009 Bulletin New York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association Vol
    TheNEW YORK DIVISION BULLETIN - JANUARY, 2009 Bulletin New York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association Vol. 52, No. 1 January, 2009 The Bulletin THIRD AVENUE RAILWAY CONVERTIBLE Published by the New CENTENNIAL York Division, Electric CENTENNIAL Railroaders’ Association, For many years, street railways had been power from overhead trolley in the Bronx and Incorporated, PO Box 3001, New York, New operating two fleets — open cars in the sum- underground conduit in Manhattan. York 10008-3001. mer and closed cars during the rest of the We do not know when the straight side con- year. To help them reduce expenses, the car vertibles were transferred from Manhattan to builders produced a car that could be oper- the Bronx or Yonkers, but we have a fairly For general inquiries, ated all year. It was a car whose windows complete record of the cars transferred to contact us at nydiv@ electricrailroaders.org were removed in the summer. Steinway lines: or by phone at (212) Brooklyn Rapid Transit ordered 500 cars in DATE CAR NUMBERS 986-4482 (voice mail 1905-6 and Third Avenue followed in 1909, a available). ERA’s hundred years ago, with its great fleet of 400 September 5, 1922 1-25 website is convertibles. June 30, 1926 1-30 www.electricrailroaders. org. They were placed in service on the follow- June 30, 1927 1-33 ing Manhattan lines: Editorial Staff: December 31, 1928 1-36 DATE LINE Editor-in-Chief: June 30, 1930 17-34 Bernard Linder January 10, 1909 Third & Amsterdam Avenues News Editor: December 31, 1930 1-23 (A) Randy Glucksman May 5, 1909 Broadway Contributing Editor: June 30, 1934 1-15 May 17, 1909 125th Street Crosstown Jeffrey Erlitz December 31, 1934 1-10 June 4, 1909 Broadway, Amsterdam Avenue & th Production Manager: 125 Street (A) Cars 1-23 transferred to Kingsbridge in the spring of David Ross September 12, 1909 Tenth Avenue 1931.
    [Show full text]