search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
The non-profit Vermont Energy Invest-


ment Corp. (VEIC) has a clean transportation team specializing in programs and projects supporting electric vehicle fleet adoption and


alternative fuel vehicle technology. VEIC published a report last September for the


Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) on ESB performance, summarizing eval- uation activities and results associated with ESB


deployments in the program over the 2023-2024 academic school year. The report found ESBs performed well in all


weather conditions and route types. In extremely cold conditions, vehicle efficiency was reduced by up to 40 percent. However, ESBs were found to start up more consistently and reliably than diesel buses. ESBs also had better acceleration and quieter operation than diesel buses, but a lower top speed. Each ESB averaged $1,575 in annual fuel savings compared to diesel buses. The report indicated primary vehicle downtime caus-


es were related to components outside of the electric drivetrain. Resolving these issues proved more challeng- ing with some vendors than others. Incorporating feedback from interviews with 15 school transportation managers, school bus drivers and mechanics who engaged the most with ESBs in this pro- gram, the final section of the report offers key guidance for future ESB deployments in Montana, including in the areas of training and support, charge management, regenerative braking, and charging strategies. Dan Rispens, superintendent of East Helena (Montana)


Public Schools, noted his district received a grant through Montana’s Department of Environmental Quality that was derived from the Volkswagen settlement of 2016-2017. “Grant funds offset approximately 80 percent of the


purchase price of our bus,” said Rispens. “We were mo- tivated by the prospect of new technology and reduced operating costs, but the primary force in our decision was grant funding.” Its Lion Electric C bus was ordered in 2021 and deliv- ery was accepted last August. Rispens said the district received EPA rebates to supply three additional Lion Electric buses, but East Helena passed on purchasing them given Lion Electric’s current financial status. Speaking to the challenges East Helena Public Schools has encountered with its electric bus, “delivery timelines are challenging due to backlog in manufacturing and supply chain disruptions,” Rispens said. “Our vendor does not have a nationwide network of


dealers, so any technical assistance or warranty work is done by remote consult or sending technicians out on the road, making it cumbersome and complicated.” Local mechanics do not know how to fix or repair the bus and do not have service manuals for it, Rispens added. “Our bus has been here since last summer and has


only been used for about a month on an actual route,” he said. “The heat system was found to be non-functional. We are still waiting on repairs. This left the bus unusable during Montana’s harsh winter.” Last July, the World Resources Institute’s Electric School Bus Initiative reported that while the EPA had by that point funded more than 8,000 electric school buses through the EPA Clean School Bus Program, demand for ESBs is outpacing funding. States, financing entities and utilities continue driving


momentum for ESBs, noted WRI spokeswoman Kather- ine Roboff.


“The Maryland Energy Administration recently


launched a new funding program in support of school bus electrification,” she said. “We are tracking $2.3 bil- lion in state-level funding for which ESBs are eligible. California and New York are good examples of robust state-level funding. “We have also been in conversation with a wide range


of green banks and financial institutions across the country who are also exploring the topic of financing electric school buses,” Roboff continued. “The Connecti- cut Green Bank, for example, has developed a new ESB financial product.” However, the EPA is revoking $20 billion in contracts


the Biden administration approved with at least eight green banks. Many Republican leaders call green banks “slush funds,” the Associated Press reported last month. At press time, the Connecticut Green Bank was one of seven green banks still listed on the EPA website.


States Continue Funding Work The Public Service Commission of Maryland recently ap-


proved an electric school bus utility pilot program, Roboff added. The program is one of a dozen nationwide that recently closed or soon will close applications for funding. Districts also continue to explore electrification through transportation-as-a-service providers and other innovative business models built around subscription fees, Roboff said. “School districts across the country continue to grow their electric school bus fleets,” she added. For example, the Beaverton School District in Oregon has been adding ESBs on an annual basis, leveraging a range of funding sources. In 2021, Beaverton was the first school district in Oregon to acquire an ESB and has added them yearly for a current total of 15 electric buses and 31 charging stations. Among the funding sources was a voter-approved $723 million bond, a portion of which is designated for replacement of diesel-powered buses with propane and electric buses. Other funding sources include the Oregon Depart-


ment of Energy’s Public Purpose Charge Program, Portland General Electric’s Electric School Bus Fund—funded through the Oregon Department of Envi- ronmental Quality’s Clean Fuels Program—and the EPA.


www.stnonline.com 23


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56