DV Journal

The Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] has $5 billion in tax dollars to spend on its “Clean School Bus Program.” The program aims to get schools to dump diesel buses for electric, hydrogen, or natural gas vehicles. Nearly $56 million of that money, part of the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, is going to fund 213 clean school buses in 21 Pennsylvania school districts.

The question some ask is how much will it cost local schools to operate those “free” buses?

Electric-battery buses can travel about 100 miles on a charge, said Baruch Feigenbaum of the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank. While some manufacturers claim 200 miles, that depends on weather, topography, and load weight, among other factors

Depending on the battery type, it can take between four to eight hours to charge EV buses, which could be a problem for buses that are used for multiple routes on the same day. And a 2018 study of a Colorado school system comparing the use of diesel vs. EV buses found electric vehicles were less reliable and operating costs were actually higher: 84 cents per mile for diesel, but $1.11 per mile for the EVs.

The study was produced under direction of the U.S. Department of Transportation by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

The EPA said that in addition to Philadelphia, the Pennsbury, Unionville-Chadds Ford, and Rosetree Media school districts were awarded funding for the buses.

The Philadelphia School District will receive $8.9 million for 25 buses; Unionville-Chaddsford was awarded $1 million for five buses; Rosetree Media also receives $1 million for five buses; and Pennsbury will get $125,000 for five propane buses.

It’s unlikely the school districts would have made this change on their own. According to Wirepoints Illinois Financial News, the EV buses cost about $350,000 each, while a diesel school bus costs less than $100,000.

Critics of the Biden energy policy — forcing the shutdown of base load electricity from coal and natural gas while expanding the reliance on electric power — say this is yet another example of an administration at cross purposes.

“Ironically, the EPA is issuing grants to school districts to buy electric buses while also stifling the production and distribution of actual energy,” said Carl Marrara, executive director of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association. “More stress on our electrical grid plus prematurely shuttering compliant power plants equals less capacity for our already fragile systems to keep the lights on. ‘Recipe for disaster’ is the only way to describe it.”

James Whitesel, director of facilities for Unionville-Chadds Ford, says his district is “proud” to be one of the schools picked for EV funding.

“Our district is currently piloting two electric buses. We look forward to engaging our community in a conversation over the coming months on the progress of that program and the opportunity to leverage this $1 million rebate,” Whitesel told DVJournal.

State Sen. Gene Yaw (R-Lycoming), chairman of the Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, is less impressed.

“Forced mandates and government subsidies are being shoved down our throats. We have to stop kidding ourselves that electric vehicles will save the planet. EVs cost more than gas vehicles and now cost more to power, fuel, and charge those vehicles, even further straining our electric grid.”

Officials at Rosetree Media did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Not all the buses are electric. Derek Cesari, Pennsbury’s bus garage supervisor, said the grant will fund five new propane buses, each costing $140,000 to $165,000.

Five older diesel buses will be scrapped, which is another goal of the program.

“The requirements are that the bus must be a regular routed bus, with a diesel engine that has a built date of 2009 or older. The buses are then taken to a scrap yard; the yard punches holes in the engine blocks, cuts the bus frames in half, and crushes the bus bodies. All this work is fully documented, and pictures are included, which is all sent to the EPA and then the grant money is released.”

Destroying buses that are still operational and safe — and could be donated to struggling schools or used by community nonprofits — strikes some as wasteful. But getting these buses off the road is the point, rather than economic efficiency.

Amy Richards with the American Petroleum Institute Pennsylvania said, “While we support federal policies that are technology-neutral and allow all options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector, the EPA’s narrow focus on clean buses using electricity disincentivizes the development of other fuel-based technologies—including American-made renewable diesel—that are working in today’s heavy-duty fleet to reduce emissions more quickly and at a lower cost. Battery technology and infrastructure constraints remain significant challenges for all-electric heavy-duty vehicles like school buses.”

Asked about the environmental costs of lithium mining required for EV batteries, EPA spokesperson Shayla Powell downplayed the issue.

“Concerns about environmental impacts apply not only to lithium batteries for electric buses and other critical minerals but also to all extractive activities, including oil and gas production and the materials used in manufacturing all types of vehicles. Industry and the U.S. government are taking steps to lessen environmental impacts from mining in the U.S. and abroad. Specifically, for HEVs, PHEVs and BEVs, there are more than enough minerals to make enough to meet the demand for these vehicles,” she said.

Building other vehicles also has environmental impacts, she said.

For Yaw, the issue is the government intervention that’s creating artificial financial incentives.

“To transition to electric buses, school districts will have to rely heavily on government grants and incentives to cover the purchase and long-term maintenance costs. These costs are being borne by taxpayers and utility ratepayers, who are all paying a hefty price for the electric vehicle transition. Why are we mandating the unwanted and expensive?”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Pennsylvania lore talks of the fabled bus to nowhere—a mythical vehicle that provides rides to lost souls. And, by the looks of it, President Joe Biden appears to be driving this legendary vehicle.

To address climate change, “Scranton Joe” wants to swap the ubiquitous yellow school bus for something greener.

As part of a broader $5 billion grant competition under its Clean School Bus Program, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently announced its $47.3 million plan to help Pennsylvania school districts transition to electrical vehicles (EVs). The School District of Philadelphia will receive $7.9 million to purchase 20 “clean” school buses. Three southwestern Pennsylvania school districts, including Pittsburgh Public Schools, will receive 75 new buses.

“Thanks to President Biden’s historic investments in America,” said EPA Administrator Michael Regan in the January press release, “thousands more school buses will hit the road in school districts across the country, saving school districts money and improving air quality at the same time.”

But before fully converting to EVs, Pennsylvania school districts may want to seek a second opinion from the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA). For the commonwealth’s largest transit agency, EVs paint a hard-knock, costly lesson of “buyer beware.”

SEPTA once had the third-largest EV fleet. Today, the agency’s $24 million fleet of 25 electric buses collects dust. In 2020, SEPTA reported significant problems after finding cracked frames on its electric buses, forcing the agency to sideline its entire fleet. While parked at a SEPTA depot, one bus even burst into flames.

SEPTA purchased this dysfunctional fleet from Proterra, the nation’s largest electric bus manufacturer. In 2016, the company provided literal free rides to SEPTA executives during the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, just months before purchasing its sizable fleet of now-defunct EVs.

Proterra filed for bankruptcy in 2023, meaning SEPTA and countless other shorted agencies that converted to electric buses have zero chance of a refund on their faulty buses.

SEPTA isn’t the only agency experiencing problems with EVs. Similar accounts of faulty electric buses—and their myriad of mechanical and electrical shortcomings—are coming out of North Carolina, Colorado, California, Texas, Michigan, and Kentucky.

The market is quickly turning against EVs.

Federal dollars might be the only thing keeping electrical buses afloat. Electric buses cost more to purchase and maintain than regular diesel buses. Furthermore, these already-pricey buses also require costly equipment and infrastructure to keep them charged and road-ready. Taxpayers will have to pick up the burden of paying for unreliable buses in the name of alarmist climate action.

This bus initiative is not the administration’s only misplaced policy proposal affecting Pennsylvania. Biden’s recent ban on exporting liquified natural gas (LNG) also negatively impacts the Keystone State and its energy-rich markets.

Even U.S. Sens. Bob Casey and John Fetterman—loyal, party-line Pennsylvania Democrats—are pushing back on Biden’s misguided LNG ban.

“While the immediate impacts on Pennsylvania remain to be seen, we have concerns about the long-term impacts that this pause will have on the thousands of jobs in Pennsylvania’s natural gas industry,” Casey and Fetterman said. “If this decision puts Pennsylvania energy jobs at risk, we will push the Biden Administration to reverse this decision.”

Biden’s “green” crusade prioritizes extreme environmental activists and renewable-energy lobbyists over the needs and concerns of everyday Pennsylvanians.

Big-government policies coercively forcing EVs and renewables are not the silver bullet for climate action. The market can reduce carbon emissions and respond better when government policy prioritizes reliability and fiscal responsibility rather than picking industry winners and losers.

Instead of pushing EVs and banning affordable energy production, the Biden administration should focus on reducing the regulatory burdens inhibiting technologies that will positively impact our natural environment without jeopardizing our economic environment, such as carbon-capture technology and small module nuclear facilities.

Additionally, removing the pipeline permitting nightmares preventing Pennsylvania from unleashing its energy into the national and international marketplace should be a higher priority than unreliable “green” technologies.

Considering the importance of the Keystone State to his reelection campaign, Biden should tread carefully with Pennsylvanian voters. Otherwise, his reelection hopes might join him on that elusive ride to nowhere.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal