PART 2 : Navigating Policy Uncertainty – Adapting Zero Emission Transition Plans for Fleet Agencies with CTE's Steve Clermont

In part 2 of The Plugged In Podcast, host Kevin Christopher  with Steve Clermont, Managing Director of Planning at the Center for Transportation and the Environment (CTE) discuss, Navigating Policy Uncertainty – Adapting Zero Emission Transition Plans for Fleet Agencies.

They explore how shifting federal priorities, grant program changes, and rapid technological advancements are forcing fleet operators to rethink their transition strategies. From hybrid vs. fully electric procurement decisions to the need for living transition plans and real-world KPI tracking, this conversation uncovers how data-driven planning can help agencies stay agile and efficient in a constantly changing landscape.

You’ll learn:

• Why some plans made just 12 months ago are already outdated
• How to use performance data to avoid overdesign and wasted capital
• What it means to treat a ZEV transition plan as a “living document”
• The growing role of hybrid technologies in federal funding priorities

Whether you're just starting your ZEV journey or already deploying vehicles, this episode is packed with insights to help you plan smarter, adapt faster, and future-proof your fleet.

www.zeromission.io

Reach out to us on Email: info@zeromission.io

Follow us on LinkedIn

Connect with our team Alan Crowley, Kevin Christopher, Brenda Shanahan, Eduardo Espinal, Stephen Breen, Liam Nolan, Callum Hennessy Cian Kavanagh, Niamh Quinn

Transcript

Navigating Policy Uncertainty: Adapting Zero Emission Transition Plans for Fleet Agencies

A lot of fleets that we've talked with, uh, today are trying to navigate this policy uncertainty and, and particularly at the federal level where it seems that, you know, federal grant programs seem to be shifting their priorities in terms of, uh, qualifications that, you know, agencies need to prepare for acceptance into different programs that they still have on the table. And so, in your perspective, how is zero emission transition planning being impacted by, uh, these shifting, uh, US and federal level policies?

And particularly, as it relates to the prioritization of low emission technologies over the full spectrum, uh, including low to no emissions or bus and bus facilities? Well, firstly, you know, most policies are locally driven, so regardless of federal policies, agencies will be driven by the goals and policies set by their communities or by their state. So, there may be less funding potentially for zero emission buses through discretionary programs like Low No.

ZEBs can still be purchased using formula funds from many agencies. Additionally, federal policy on discretionary funding may incentivize some agencies that had no prior plans for zero emission buses at all to consider hybrids instead of diesels which can absolutely benefit those communities that they're in. Very good. And so we're also hearing from several agencies that plans made even 12, 18 months ago are needing to be re-looked at or updated.

Um, whether that's due to advancements in technology, y- maybe delays in delivery or adjustments in approach on funding. What are some ways that you've seen fleets adapt their zero emission vehicle strategies as the, these different areas of the landscape continue to evolve? When we develop transition plans, we, we call them living documents because agencies should review and modify their plans or update their plans at least once every two years, if not annually.

Because, you know, the market is changing so rapidly on a number of different fronts, so the cost of the technology is changing and that needs to be reflected in plans. The capability of the technology is advancing, so that needs to be reflected in plans. And again, as you mentioned, the, you know, policies are gonna change and funding is gonna change, so that needs to be reflected in the plans. It needs to be looked at, again, whether if discretionary funds are not available or more difficult to get at, then they'll need, start needing to look at alternative funding sources like, you know, either through their, their state or even just using the standard formula funds to, you know, start purchasing new vehicles or report their operations.

And in that same vein, looking more at the downstream impact of plan versus reality. So for agencies that stick to plan and they get these technologies and they're, they're working through their pilot operations, let's say, we do find that in some cases there is a gap. In some cases it's a good gap, uh, maybe systems perform better than expected in certain environments, in other cases maybe they're not up and available or performing as expected, and it's really important in our opinion to close that loop using, you know, real data information and insights.

From your perspective, how important is it for these agencies to have a, you know, a baseline plan and then a, uh, kind of a process or methodology by which they can then compare that plan to the real world performance and the data that they're seeing off the, the systems in their actual operation? Every project that we get involved with, we advise our clients to consider and install the hardware and software needed to collect and analyze data and create key performance indicators over a period of time.

These are essential in understanding the effectiveness of these new technology vehicles that have just been delivered, benefits that you're getting out of it, and how does that performance compare to your legacy vehicles? This information, as you gather over time, will go a long ways to determine how well the vehicles are being managed. Sometimes we see where the vehicles aren't being managed properly that the benefits aren't being achieved and these KPIs can identify those challenges upfront and refocus an agency into operating their vehicles differently or, or more effectively to get the benefits that they expect.

Then this becomes a feedback loop. All right? So once we have baseline data or comparison between new technology and old technology, we can use that as a feedback loop into readjusting transition plans going forward. Right, and I think that's so critical. One, one of the takeaways I've seen from a number of projects is, and particularly projects that were planned several years ago, there was a lot of ranging anxiety, that piece that you mentioned there about the questions on performance, particularly with battery electric vehicles.

And we've seen in some cases operators that oversize effects on available energy on vehicles and then upsize charging requirements and then, you know, all of those, you know, kind of the appeasements of the range anxiety have a real cost that's baked in on the capital side. But when we look at the actual operational data, uh, the customers or operators may not actually even be using that increased amount of energy that they put on the vehicle.

So we've seen a lot of benefit in using those KPIs to look back and see, okay, how did we do relative to plan? And then from our standpoint, it becomes important to roll that into the next phase so you can make more informed capital decisions and hopefully streamline those budgets in, in light of a, you know, environment now whether may be less ... apparent, uh, becomes real important to have that kind of capital efficient planning upfront for clients.

We can't stress the need to, in the early phases, establish what success means for you as an agency with the plan that you're putting together and to have the right tools in place once you deploy to measure your operational performance and progress against that plan.