Year Two Final Report - MOR-EV€¦ · Year Two Final Report (May 2015 – June 2016) ... Toyota...

Year Two Final Report(May 2015 – June 2016)

Submitted to Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources

Prepared by Center for Sustainable Energy October 2016

Submitted by the Center for Sustainable Energy

Headquarters 9325 Sky Park Court, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92123 858.244.1177 energycenter.org

Office Locations San Diego, CA Los Angeles, CA Oakland, CA Boston, MA

MOR-EV: Year Two Final Report 1

Table of ContentsProgram Overview .................................................................................................... 3

Program Update ........................................................................................................ 9

Changes to Rebate Amounts Based on MSRP...................................................... 9

New Eligible Vehicles ............................................................................................ 11

Outreach and Education ........................................................................................13

Consumer Outreach .............................................................................................13Events ...........................................................................................................13Social and Traditional Media ........................................................................16

Dealer Outreach ....................................................................................................16

Future Outreach ....................................................................................................17

Operations ...............................................................................................................19

Rebate Processing ...............................................................................................19Quality Assurance and Control .....................................................................19Efficiency Improvements ..............................................................................19

Appeals ................................................................................................................20

Canceled Rebates ................................................................................................21

Program Participation ............................................................................................23

Participation by Vehicle Model ..............................................................................23Participation by Manufacturer ...............................................................................25Participation by Vehicle Type ................................................................................26Participation by Geography ..................................................................................27

Survey Results & Analysis.....................................................................................29

Methodology .........................................................................................................29

Survey Results ......................................................................................................30Massachusetts Zero-Emission Vehicle Drivers ............................................ 30MOR-EV Impact ...........................................................................................34Rebate Availability ........................................................................................36Purchase and Lease Motivation ................................................................... 37Valued Dealership Services .........................................................................40Workplace Charging Availability ................................................................... 41Utility Time-of-Use Rate Availability .............................................................. 42

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................45

Appendix 1: Program Website Interactive Data Tools ........................................ 47Appendix 2: Year Two Final Report Data ..............................................................51Appendix 3: Program Participation by City .........................................................52


Program OverviewThe Massachusetts Offers Rebates for Electric Vehicles (MOR-EV) program is funded by the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) and Department of Energy Resources (DOER)1 and is administered by the Center for Sustainable Energy (CSE). The program promotes the production and use of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) by offering consumers rebates of up to $2,500 and increasing consumer and dealer awareness of battery electric, plug-in hybrid electric and fuel cell electric vehicles.2 MOR-EV launched in June 2014 in support of the state’s goals to reach 300,000 ZEVs on the roads by 2025. The program is designed to accelerate deployment of ZEVs in the Commonwealth by incentivizing residents to purchase or lease vehicles that will help:

Protect public health and air quality by reducing transportation-related air pollution that contributes to the formation of smog and related health effects such as asthma and heart attacks

Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that contribute to climate change

Enhance energy diversity and security

Save drivers money

Promote economic growth

The MOR-EV website and rebate application provide project terms and conditions, including eligibility requirements. These requirements and other program guidelines are updated at minimum annually in the MOR-EV Implementation Manual. All project documents are available on the MOR-EV website (mor-ev.org).

1 The agencies authorized use of Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) auction proceeds to fund MOR-EV for year two.2 For the purposes of the program, ZEVs encompass multiple vehicle types including battery electric vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and zero-emission motorcycles. Electric vehicle (EV) and ZEV are used interchangeably in this report.

The program promotes the production and use of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) by offering consumers rebates of up to $2,500 and increasing consumer and dealer awareness of battery electric, plug-in hybrid electric and fuel cell electric vehicles.

http://www.mor-ev.org

4 Center for Sustainable Energy

The program provides consumer rebates of varying levels for five different vehicle types: all-electric battery electric vehicles (BEVs), fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs), all-electric zero-emission motorcycles (ZEMs) and two categories of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) based on the vehicle’s battery capacity. Table 1 outlines vehicle type details and associated rebate levels.3

Table 1. Vehicle Type Definitions and Rebate Amounts

Vehicle Types Definition Energy Source Rebate Amount*

BEV Battery Electric Vehicle Electricity $1,000 - $2,500

FCEV Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Hydrogen fuel cell $1,000 - $2,500

PHEV+ Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle with battery capacity ≥ 10kWh Electricity and gasoline $1,000 - $2,500

PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle with battery capacity < 10kWh Electricity and gasoline $1,000 - $2,500

ZEM Zero-Emission Motorcycle Electricity $750

* The lower dollar amount is for vehicles with a base MSRP greater than or equal to $60,000.

3 The program website, www.mor-ev.org, lists all eligible vehicle models by vehicle type.

http://www.mor-ev.org


From the launch date, the program reserved rebates for 2,242 new ZEVs, totaling $4,990,750.

From the program launch date, June 18, 2014, through June 30, 2016, the program reserved rebates for 2,242 new ZEVs, totaling $4,990,750. Figure 1 displays rebates by vehicle type for each program year as well as the cumulative program total.

Figure 1. Total Program Year Rebates by Vehicle Type

TotalYear 2Year 1

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

169

117

534

315

243

857

484

360

1,391

BEV PHEV PHEV+ ZEM


Rebates have been issued for twenty-seven different vehicle models that are eligible for a rebate. Over 90 percent of rebates have been distributed to eight vehicle models. The percent of rebates reserved by vehicle model through program year two is displayed in Figure 2. The majority of rebated vehicles are BEVs (62 percent), and the most rebated vehicle is the Tesla Model S with 560 rebates.

Program data is available via an interactive dashboard and mapping tools on the program website (mor-ev.org/program-statistics). This data supports program transparency and informs zero-emission vehicle market stakeholders. Estimated cumulative GHG emissions reduction totals are provided on the website to track program impact. The program has reduced GHG emissions by 6,285 short tons in the first two program years. Figure 3 displays GHG emissions reductions by vehicle type for each program year as well as the cumulative GHG emissions reduction total.4 Examples of the program statistics webpage, rebate distribution maps and GHG reductions tool are in Appendix 1.

4 Calculated as the difference in annual emissions for a BEV, PHEV+ or PHEV versus emissions from a typical internal combustion gasoline vehicle. A complete list of assumptions can be found on the GHG Reductions tab of the MOR-EV Statistics Webpage (https://mor-ev.org/program-statistics). GHG emissions reduction calculations do not include estimates for ZEMs.

25.0%

20.5%

15.7%

5.7%

5.0%

5.0%

2.8%

7.2%

6.0%

Tesla Model SChevrolet VoltNissan LEAFFord Fusion EnergiFord C-MAX Energismart electric fortwoBMW i3 and i3 RExVolkswagen e-GolfTesla Model XMercedes-Benz B-ClassFord Focus ElectricCadillac ELRBMW X5 xDrive40eToyota Prius Plug-in HybridAudi A3 e-tronBMW i8Hyundai Sonata Plug-in HybridPorsche Cayenne S E-HybridVolvo XC90 T8Mitsubishi i-MiEVHonda Fit EVPorsche Panamera S E-HybridZero DSZero SZero FXZero SRZero XU

Figure 2: Percent of Rebates by Vehicle Model through Program Year 2

http://mor-ev.org/program-statistics

https://mor-ev.org/program-statistics


Figure 3. Total GHG Emissions Reductions by Vehicle Type

This report summarizes activity and data from the program’s second year, which spanned May 2015 through June 2016. The MOR-EV program issued and reserved 1,422 rebates in year two, totaling $3,057,750. GHG emissions were reduced by 3,961 short tons as a result. The majority of rebated vehicles in year two are BEVs (60 percent), and the Tesla Model S accounted for almost 30 percent of total rebates. Statistics for rebated vehicles in year two are in Appendix 2.

BEV PHEV PHEV+

TotalYear 2Year 1

GH

G e

mis

sion

s re

duct

ions

(sho

rt to

ns)

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

1,602

199524

2,571

413

977

4,173

612

1,500

The MOR-EV program issued and reserved 1,422 rebates in year two, totaling $3,057,750.


Program UpdateMOR-EV experienced several changes during program year two. This section presents information on the most significant changes.

Changes to Rebate Amounts Based on MSRPThe Department of Energy Resources chose to reduce the rebate amount for eligible vehicles above a set manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP). The new criteria, which went into effect on February 29, 2016, apply to battery electric vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles with a base MSRP greater than or equal to $60,000. These vehicles now receive a rebate of $1,000 rather than the previous rebate amounts of $1,500 or $2,500. Table 2 lists the affected vehicles and the change in their rebate amount.

Table 2. Affected Vehicles and Change in Rebate Amount

Affected Vehicles Initial Rebate Amount

New Rebate Amount

BMW i8 $1,500 $1,000

BMW X5 XDrive40e $1,500 $1,000

Cadillac ELR $2,500 $1,000

Porsche 918 Spyder $1,500 $1,000

Porsche Cayenne S E-Hybrid $2,500 $1,000

Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid $1,500 $1,000

Tesla Model S $2,500 $1,000

Tesla Model X $2,500 $1,000

Volvo XC90 T8 $1,500 $1,000

New rebate amounts of $1,000, which went into effect on February 29, 2016, apply to battery electric vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles with a base MSRP greater than or equal to $60,000.


For applicants who ordered their vehicle before but took delivery after the effective date, DOER provided an option for them to be eligible for the previous rebate amounts of $1,500 or $2,500. To exercise this option, applicants had to meet the following criteria:

Submit a rebate application prior to July 1, 2016

Provide documentation of a deposit on an eligible vehicle dated prior to March 1, 2016

Register the eligible vehicle in the name of the person who placed the deposit prior to July 1, 2016

Of the 186 applications that were reviewed to determine eligibility, 92 met the criteria and were approved for the previous rebate amounts. The remaining applications did not meet the criteria and were subject to the reduced rebate.


New Eligible VehiclesMOR-EV added eight new vehicle models to the eligible vehicles list in year two of the program. The increase in eligible vehicles and wider variety of ZEVs available in Massachusetts should continue to attract new ZEV owners. Notably, Audi, Kia and Volvo each released their first vehicle eligible for MOR-EV during year two. Table 3 presents the new vehicle models and the calendar year they were added to the program.

Table 3. New Vehicle Models and Year Added

New Models Calendar Year Added

Audi A3 e-tron 2016

BMW X5 xDrive40e 2015

Hyundai Sonata Plug-in Hybrid 2016

Kia Soul EV 2016

Tesla Model X 2016

Toyota Mirai 2016

Victory Empulse TT 2016

Volvo XC90 T8 2016

The increase in eligible vehicles and wider variety of ZEVs available in Massachusetts should continue to attract new ZEV owners.


Outreach and EducationTargeted marketing of the MOR-EV program to consumers and dealers is critical to its success. Building and reinforcing knowledge of MOR-EV’s existence, availability and guidelines is the goal of MOR-EV outreach.

Consumer OutreachConsumer education is an integral part of increasing ZEV awareness and adoption. Community events have served as the primary platform for outreach with staff providing consumers with direct information on MOR-EV and basic ZEV knowledge. During a two-month trial period, social and traditional media activity also contributed to successful outreach efforts.

EventsParticipation at consumer events has successfully increased program exposure and availability of information about ZEV adoption. In program year two, MOR-EV outreach staff participated in 16 consumer events with more than 1,100 program-specific interactions. The number of program-specific interactions doubled from year one, due to an increase in total events attended and availability of ZEV-specific events. MOR-EV staff counted materials distributed and person-to-person interactions to measure program-specific interactions. Consumers continue to be particularly attracted to the poster display depicting program-eligible vehicles and associated rebate amounts.

In year one, outreach staff noticed increased consumer interactions at events involving on-site eligible vehicles. As a result, program staff prioritized attending events in year two that featured ZEVs on display and available for test drives. When possible, staff supported event organizers in facilitating test drives because the experience increases consumer interactions and serves as a major draw for event attendance.

In program year two, MOR-EV staff participated in three successful ZEV event series:

The MASS DRIVE CLEAN (MDC) campaign (massdriveclean.org) is the statewide ZEV ride-and-drive effort aimed at providing test drive opportunities across Massachusetts. All MDC events

In program year two, MOR-EV outreach staff participated in 16 consumer events with more than 1,100 program-specific interactions.

http://massdriveclean.org


feature ZEV vehicles on display and available for test drives, which not only engages consumers with ZEVs but also with program staff. MOR-EV staff have participated in these events since the campaign launched in June 2015.

National Drive Electric Week (NDEW) is a week-long celebration of events focused solely on plug-in electric vehicles. Events are hosted nationwide to raise ZEV awareness and promote adoption. MOR-EV staff have participated in annual NDEW events since 2014.

Turbine Tours from Mass Energy combine multiple energy topics, including wind energy, solar energy and electric vehicles, giving attendees a big picture view of the nexus of renewable energy technologies. Turbine Tour events are heavily attended by consumers who are already interested in sustainability, which creates impactful learning experiences and discussions. MOR-EV staff participated in these events for the first time during program year two.

A complete list of consumer events, dates, descriptions and associated MOR-EV interactions and leads (characterized by the number of incentive flyers distributed) for program year two are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Consumer Outreach Events

Event Event Date(s) DescriptionMOR-EV

Interactions & Leads

Turbine Tour - Berkshire East August 9, 2015Collaborative event with

Mass Energy featuring static display vehicles and a tour of

a local wind turbine25 people

GreenFest August 21-23, 2015

Community environmental festival featuring static

display vehicles, test drives and sustainability-focused

events and vendors

70 people

Mass Drive Clean (MDC) - UMass Lowell September 15, 2015

Campus sustainability event featured ZEV test drives, static display vehicles and

energy-related vendors70 people

National Drive Electric Week (NDEW) - Legislative Ride & Drive at State House

September 17, 2015ZEV promotion event to raise ZEV awareness and offer test

drives to state officials and policy influencers

50 people

NDEW - Worcester Polytechnic Institute September 17, 2015

ZEV-specific event showcasing 30+ privately

owned ZEVs with ZEV owners sharing their

experiences

60 people


NDEW - Natick Farmer’s Market ZEV Event September 19, 2015

Farmers market event involving ZEV test drives and

static display vehicles40 people

NDEW - Larz Anderson Auto Museum September 19, 2015

ZEV-specific event featuring 35 on-site ZEVs and energy-

related vendors60 people

Turbine Tour - Lynn September 26, 2015Collaborative event with

Mass Energy featuring ZEV test drives and a tour of a

local wind turbine30 people

Turbine Tour - Medford Harvest Your Energy Festival October 3, 2015

Collaborative community-based event with Mass

Energy featuring ZEV static display and a tour of a local

wind turbine

50 people

AltWheels Fleet Day October 7, 2015

Collaborative event with Mass. Clean Cities targeting

fleet managers and consumers and featuring

test drives and static display vehicles

40 people

MDC - Raytheon October 13, 2015Employee ride-and-drive event featuring ZEV test

drives, static display vehicles and environmental vendors

50 people

MDC - National Grid Energy Efficiency Summit October 15, 2015

Large energy-focused event featuring ZEV test drives,

breakout sessions and energy-related vendors

100 people

MDC - Newton Harvest Fair October 18, 2015Community fair featuring a

ZEV showcase with 50 ZEV test drives and static display

vehicles140 people

Worcester State University Sustainability Food Fair October 22, 2015

Campus sustainability event including 20 ZEV test drives and static display vehicles

65 people

New England International Auto Show January 14-18, 2016

Collaborative event with Mass. Clean Cities and

Mass. Chapter of the Sierra Club targeting consumers

and eligible OEMs with multiple ZEVs on display and

available for test drive

280 people

Ford Fleet Preview March 24, 2016Ford 2017 model year fleet preview featuring

static display vehicles and automotive vendors

15 people


Social and Traditional MediaIn year two, program staff and partners initiated promoting MOR-EV on social media and in newspaper articles, expanding program awareness to reach a wider audience. Program partners used their active social media networks to reach more than 22,000 Facebook and Twitter users in September and October 2015. This sharing of social media posts increased online viewership and exposure of MOR-EV program content, consumer events and basic ZEV information. Due to other outreach priorities, staff and program partners did not continue social media activity after the two- month trial period. Increased social media outreach is recommended in future program years to grow program awareness. Table 5 displays Facebook and Twitter posts, shares and viewership totals.

Table 5. Consumer Outreach via Facebook and Twitter

Facebook Twitter

Number of Posts 16 31

Number of Shares/Reposts/Engagements 186 126

Total Number of People Reached/Impressions 3,091 19,748

Dealer OutreachEducated and engaged eligible-vehicle dealers are crucial to the success of electric vehicle adoption and MOR-EV program objectives. Continuing education and relationship development with dealers is extremely vital in supporting program efforts to accurately inform consumers about available incentives. MOR-EV staff take every opportunity to educate dealers who participate in the program. Additionally, the Massachusetts State Automobile Dealers Association (MSADA) plays an important role in sharing program information with their membership and providing valuable dealer-focused perspectives.

In addition to educating dealers on the program, staff invited dealerships to participate in scheduled consumer events, such as those listed in Table 4. These events served as an opportunity to get dealerships in front of the community and provided another avenue for program education.

As a result of the MSADA partnership, MOR-EV was featured in the cover story of the March 2016 issue of Auto Dealer magazine in an

Educated and engaged eligible-vehicle dealers are crucial to the success of electric vehicle adoption and MOR-EV program objectives.


article titled “Making the Connection.” The article provided high-level program information and detailed dealership resources, including webinars and training materials. Publishing program-related articles in Auto Dealer magazine is recommended in future program outreach.

Dealership engagement and outreach remains a challenge that requires multiple approaches to address. MOR-EV staff continue to work with participating dealers to identify opportunities and efficiencies that will enable effective and long-standing dealership outreach methods.

Future OutreachProgram staff recommend prioritizing events with test drives whenever possible. Staff have witnessed increased consumer engagement and excitement at such events, because behind-the-wheel driving opportunities allow people to experience firsthand the benefits of ZEVs. Research has indicated that test drive events increase driver’s positive perceptions of ZEVs and increase likelihood that they will purchase or lease a ZEV.5 Given these benefits, program staff will continue to prioritize events with test drives for future consumer outreach.

Continued dealer outreach and education is crucial as dealerships remain the primary channel through which consumers learn about the rebates. To meet this need, MOR-EV staff are developing dealership promotional kits that will provide resources they need to better understand the program and educate their customers about it. The kits will include materials covering topics such as program overview, rebate amounts, eligibility requirements, application process and other incentive information (federal tax credit and links to other statewide incentives). Dealership promotional kits are provided at no cost to the dealers and can be requested at outreach events, during webinars and through other interactions with program staff.

Increasing ZEV awareness in central and western Massachusetts is a priority for future outreach. Working with DOER, MOR-EV staff will provide targeted consumer and dealership outreach in these regions through more consumer events in program year three. Staff will continue to contact local and regional dealerships to promote consumer event participation and deliver program information. By working with program partners and by speaking with consumers at events, staff will seek to identify any barriers to adoption in regions with lower participation and will conduct outreach to raise ZEV awareness.

5 Center for Sustainable Energy (2016). Metropolitan Transportation Commission Experience Electric Campaign Report. Release Date: August 2016. Retrieved from http://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/MTC_EXEL_Final_Report.pdf.

Program staff recommend prioritizing events with test drives whenever possible.

http://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/MTC_EXEL_Final_Report.pdf

http://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/MTC_EXEL_Final_Report.pdf


OperationsRebate ProcessingProcessing rebates accurately, efficiently and transparently is central to the success of the MOR-EV program. During program year two, CSE continually improved rebate processing to better manage increased application volume and provide first-rate customer service to applicants. In year two, the number of rebates issued and reserved increased by 24 percent.

Quality Assurance and ControlUsing a detailed understanding of the rebate application process and database, staff proactively identified and resolved potential issues, including the following:

Implemented a QC process where 25 percent of applications reviewed are selected for a secondary review by a team lead prior to approval, which helps ensure processing accuracy and identifies areas where a rebate processing specialist may need additional training.

Developed a standardized training program to provide consistent, effective training for new staff while also providing increased oversight from experienced rebate processors and management.

Refined manual emails sent to applicants throughout the rebate process to improve customer service and foster greater project accountability and transparency.

These measures improved project quality and laid groundwork for additional improvements planned in program year three.

Efficiency ImprovementsCSE invested in the following areas to improve efficiency in year two of the program:

In August 2015, CSE released updated supporting documentation requirements to save program staff time and streamline the process for applicants.

In year two, the number of rebates issued and reserved increased by 24 percent.


Program staff documented and refined 17 standard operating procedures to ensure consistency in processing and define expectations for various tasks.

AppealsBetween May 2015 and early April 2016, program staff received 57 appeals from applicants whose rebate application was denied. The most common root cause for an appeal was dealers providing incorrect or no information about the program. DOER and CSE staff determined that dealers and program staff alike are responsible for informing consumers about the program and consequently granted 42 appeals. Program staff contacted these applicants, informed them that their appeal had been granted, and invited them to reapply for the rebate. Those who did received a rebate. The types of appeals are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. Appeals by Reason and Number

Reason for Appeal Total Appeals Approved

Exceeded 3-month Eligibility Requirement 50 38

Issue with Vehicle New/Used Status 4 4

36-month Ownership Requirement Not Fulfilled 1 0

Business Application 1 0

24-month Lease 1 0

Total 57 42

Since April 2016, program staff have received more appeals that are not included in the table above. Because the current appeal process takes a significant amount of program and DOER staff time to address each case, CSE is working to streamline the process. Based on DOER feedback, CSE will implement clear guidelines for accepting and processing these appeals.


Canceled RebatesIn year two, 139 rebate applications were canceled. Table 7 lists cancellation reasons, shows the total number of cancellations by reason and indicates what happened with the canceled applications. In 61 cases, applicants reapplied, and their applications were ultimately approved. In some cases, applicants were not eligible to reapply due to their failure to meet program eligibility requirements.

Table 7. Canceled Rebates by Reason and Number

Cancellation Reason Total Cancellations

Reapplied and Approved

Did Not Reapply

Did Not Submit Documents Within Time Allowed 48 21 27

Missing Required Information to Complete Application 32 22 10

Business Application 18 N/A 18

Early Application (Applied Before Being Rebate Eligible) 15 15 0

Used Vehicle 10 N/A 10

Applied After 3 Months 8 0 8

Request to Cancel Application 5 3 2

Lease Term Less Than 36 Months 2 N/A 2

Out-of-State Applicant 1 N/A 1

Total 139 61 78


Program ParticipationMOR-EV program participation is defined as the percentage of registered eligible vehicles that received a rebate. This is a key measure of statewide program awareness and helps direct future outreach efforts.6 For this analysis, MOR-EV staff compared Registry of Motor Vehicle (RMV) registration data from June 18, 2014, through March 31, 2016, to program rebate data from June 18, 2014, through April 30, 2016. MOR-EV program data includes one additional month to capture vehicles that were registered in March 2016 but applied for a rebate in April 2016. Vehicles purchased after March 31, 2016, were not included in this analysis.

Participation by Vehicle ModelDuring this period, a total of 2,819 eligible vehicle models were registered with the RMV. Of these, 1,910 received a MOR-EV rebate.7 Table 8 shows the percent of registered vehicles compared to vehicles that received a MOR-EV rebate. The data is organized by vehicle type and then sorted by the vehicle model with the highest percent of rebates.

6 Program-eligible models with less than 36-month lease terms are not eligible to apply for a rebate. Registration data includes vehicle models with lease terms that are less than the program-required 36-month lease term; this may affect the overall participation rate.7 Not all passenger ZEVs in the state are eligible for the MOR-EV program.


Table 8. Program Participation by Vehicle Model

Program participation rates by vehicle model provide insight into dealer engagement and overall program understanding. For example, every smart electric fortwo Coupe registered in the state has received a rebate. No other manufacturer or model with five or more total registered electric vehicles has a 100% participation rate. This suggests a high likelihood that the smart sales model incorporates the MOR-EV rebate. Similarly, the Chevrolet Volt, Volkswagen e-Golf and Tesla Model S are all models with high registration to participation ratios.

Vehicle Type Eligible Vehicle Model Total Registrations

Percent Rebated

BEV smart electric fortwo Coupe 105 100%Honda Fit EV 2 100%Volkswagen e-Golf 104 92%smart electric fortwo Cabriolet 15 87%Mitsubishi i-MiEV 7 86%Nissan LEAF 402 84%Tesla Model S 660 75%Mercedes-Benz B250e 45 73%Tesla Model X 23 70%Ford Focus Electric 38 61%BMW i3 REx 193 38%BMW i3 76 37%

PHEV Hyundai Sonata Plug-in Hybrid 3 100%Volvo XC90 T8 2 100%BMW X5 xDrive40e 13 54%Ford C-MAX Energi 238 43%Ford Fusion Energi 305 42%Toyota Prius Plug-in Hybrid 40 30%Audi A3 e-tron 26 27%BMW i8 43 23%Porsche 918 Spyder 3 0%Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid 3 0%

PHEV+ Chevrolet Volt 404 95%Cadillac ELR 35 46%Porsche Cayenne S E-Hybrid 29 21%

ZEM Zero (S, SR, DS, XU, FX) 5 80%Total 2,819 68%


Participation by ManufacturerProgram participation by automobile manufacturer indicates the majority of manufacturers with eligible vehicles have an 80 percent or higher MOR-EV participation rate. Figure 4 displays participation rate by manufacturer.8 Of the manufacturers with at least 10 vehicles registered during this time, Mercedes-Benz, which includes the smart electric models, had the highest participation rates of all manufacturers. Mercedes-Benz also had the highest participation rate in year one of the program. In year two, more than 98 percent of all smart electric models and 73 percent of B250e vehicles registered in the state received a rebate. In addition, 91 percent of eligible GM vehicles (Chevrolet Volt and Cadillac ELR) received rebates. High participation rates could be attributed to manufacturers incorporating available incentive information into their sales training.

Lower program participation rates can indicate a need for manufacturer-targeted dealership outreach. For example, a 44 percent participation rate for Ford vehicles indicates that dealers may not be aware of or understand the value of the MOR-EV program as a sales tool. Outside of awareness, 24-month leases impact program participation rates because of the required 36-month lease term; unfortunately, these leases cannot be identified in the registration data. This situation could explain the lower participation rate for BMW, which offers competitive 24-month leases, causing many of their vehicles to be ineligible for the rebate.

Figure 4. Program Participation by Manufacturer

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Audi

BMWFord GM

Merced

es-B

enz

Nissan

Porsch

eTe

sla

Toyo

ta

Volksw

agen

Tota

l reg

iste

red

vehi

cles

27% 17% 30%37%44%

91%

92%

84%

75%

92%

Unrebated Vehicles

Rebated Vehicles

8 Figure 4 includes information for all manufacturers that have 10 or more eligible vehicles registered in Massachusetts.

Program participation by automobile manufacturer indicates the majority of manufacturers with eligible vehicles have an 80 percent or higher MOR-EV participation rate.


Participation by Vehicle TypeFigure 5 shows participation rate by vehicle type. The PHEV+ vehicle type category has the highest participation rate, with 87 percent of registered vehicles receiving rebates. PHEVs have a participation rate of less than 50 percent, which could be due to a number of factors. For example, several program-eligible PHEV models have a standard hybrid counterpart that is not eligible. This could lead to dealer and consumer confusion about available incentives. PHEVs also receive lower rebate amounts, which may not motivate as many consumers to apply for the rebate.

Figure 5. Program Participation by Vehicle Type

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

80%

74%

40% 87%

BEV PHEV PHEV+ ZEM

Unrebated Vehicles

Rebated Vehicles

Multiple manufacturers produce eligible vehicle models in several vehicle type categories. Participation rate by vehicle type varies, indicating that program awareness is not exclusively associated with specific manufacturers and their dealer networks, but also with specific vehicles. For example, the battery electric Ford Focus has a 61 percent participation rate, while the PHEV Ford Energi models have an average participation rate of just 42 percent. This finding supports the assumption that both consumers and dealers associate all-electric vehicles with consumer incentives. Further education and outreach with a focus on all program-eligible vehicles could be an effective method for improving participation rates in all vehicle types, but especially for PHEVs.

Participation rate by vehicle type varies, indicating that program awareness is not exclusively associated with specific manufacturers and their dealer networks, but also with specific vehicles.


Participation by GeographyMOR-EV participation varied significantly across Massachusetts in program year two. Figure 6 shows that no clear patterns exist in participation rates by city. This finding indicates that MOR-EV awareness is roughly equal across the state, with no large geographic areas having especially low or high awareness. Lower participation rates are typically reflected in areas with less than 10 registered electric vehicles. CSE will continue to provide targeted outreach to central and western Massachusetts, which have lower electric vehicle adoption rates. A full list of program participation rates by city is available in Appendix 3.

Figure 6. Program Participation by City

No Data 0%

1%-10

%

11%-20

%

21%-30

%

31%- 4

0%

41%-50

%

51%-60

%

61%-70

%

71%-80

%

81%-90

%

91%-10

0%

Participation Rate (%)


Survey Results & AnalysisMethodologyTo better understand ZEV driver motivations, demographics and program effectiveness, MOR-EV conducts an ongoing voluntary survey of rebate recipients. They are invited to participate in the online survey when their application is approved, and again when they are notified that their rebate check has been mailed; however, only one response per applicant is included in the analysis. The survey has 39 questions and takes approximately 15 minutes to complete, with respondents having the ability to save and complete the survey at a later time if they prefer. The survey covers various topics, including demographics, adoption motivations, the importance of the MOR-EV rebate and the dealership experience. In order to generate comparable data, the survey has several components that are analogous to other ZEV statewide rebate recipient surveys, specifically in California and Connecticut.

The following analysis covers survey responses from year two rebate recipients. Of the 1,422 applications received in year two, 683 applicants completed the survey, indicating a 48 percent response rate. To make the sample representative of the overall rebate population, the data was weighted based on the following measures: 1) choice of vehicle type, 2) choice of EV model, 3) decision to buy or lease the vehicle, 4) the quarter in which the vehicle was purchased and 5) geographic location by county. In the analysis, comparisons between year one and year two recipients are highlighted where noteworthy and significant.

In year two, 683 applicants completed the survey, indicating a 48 percent response rate.


Survey Results

Massachusetts Zero-Emission Vehicle Drivers

Gender

9

Age Distribution

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55-59

60-64

65-69

70-74

75-79

80-84 85

+

Per

cent

Age

9 Center for Sustainable Energy (2016). California Air Resources Board Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, EV Consumer Survey Dashboard. Retrieved 8/25/2016 from http://cleanvehiclerebate.org/survey-dashboard/ev.

Female

Male

20%

80%

MOR-EV participants are predominantly male, which is similar to the California ZEV adopter population.9

MOR-EV participants range in age from 21 to 90 years old. The average age is 52 years old.

http://cleanvehiclerebate.org/survey-dashboard/ev



MOR-EV participants boast a high educational attainment with nearly all holding at least a four-year degree and more than half with a postgraduate degree.

Educational Attainment

MOR-EV participants boast a high educational attainment with nearly all holding at least a four-year degree and more than half with a postgraduate degree. Less than one percent of all respondents do not have a high school degree.

12th grade or less

High school graduate

Some college

Associate degree

Bachelor’s degree

Postgraduate degree

29%

2%5%

2%

62%


Annual Household Income

MOR-EV participants have a median household income of $150,000 to $199,999. Twenty-one percent of respondents did not provide information about annual household income and are excluded from the data. As a point of reference, in 2011, new-vehicle adopters in Massachusetts (MA), defined as those who reported owning a model year 2011 vehicle in the 2011 MA Travel Survey, had a median household income of $136,091.10 The 2014 median household income for MA residents was $69,160.11

10 2010-11 Massachusetts Travel Survey, calculations by the National Renewable Energy Lab.11 U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Supplemental Estimates.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Less

than

$24,9

99

$25,0

00 to

$49,9

99

$50,0

00 to

$99,9

99

$100

,000 t

o $14

9,999

$150

,000 t

o $19

9,999

$200

,000 t

o $24

9,999

$250

,000 t

o $29

9,999

$300

,000 o

r more

Per

cent

of r

espo

nden

ts

MOR-EV participants have a median household income of $150,000 to $199,999. In 2011, new-vehicle adopters in Massachusetts had a median household income of $136,091.


Is There an Operating Photovoltaic (PV) System Installed at Your Residence?

Yes, I have a PV system installed

No, but I am planning to install PV within the next year

No, and I have no plans to install PV

22%

18%60%

Twenty-two percent of survey respondents currently have a PV system installed. This is a six percent increase from the 16 percent of respondents in year one. In California, the opposite trend existed in the early stages of the ZEV market. In late 2012, 27 percent of California ZEV survey respondents stated they had a PV system installed with the number dropping to 17 percent in early 2015.12

12 Center for Sustainable Energy (2016). California Air Resources Board Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, EV Consumer Survey Dashboard. Retrieved 8/25/2016 from http://cleanvehiclerebate.org/survey-dashboard/ev.

Twenty-two percent of survey respondents currently have a PV system installed.




MOR-EV Impact

Importance of MOR-EV Rebate in EV Purchase Decision

Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of the MOR-EV rebate in their decision to acquire an EV. Sixty-four percent of adopters said the MOR-EV rebate was an “extremely” or “very” important factor in the decision-making process.

Initial Interest in EVs

The majority of participants indicated they had a strong interest in an EV when they began shopping for a vehicle. In contrast, only a quarter of participants had a slight interest and approximately three percent had no interest in acquiring an EV.

Extremely important

Very important

Moderately important

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

36% 28% 18% 12%

Only slightly important

Not important at all

I was ONLY interested in an EV

I was very interested in an EV

I had some interest in an EV

I had no interest in an EV

I did not know EVs existed

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

32% 44% 21%

3%

The majority of participants indicated they had a strong interest in an EV when they began shopping for a vehicle.


Vehicles Replaced by Model Year

In year two, 74 percent of vehicles purchased or leased replaced an older vehicle while 26 percent were additional vehicles. More than 40 percent of the vehicles replaced in year two were 2008 models or older. Independent of whether the EV is a replacement or additional vehicle, for 82 percent of participants, this is the first EV they have ever purchased or leased.

Num

ber o

f veh

icle

s

1993

or ol

der

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

Year 1 (June 2014 - April 2015) Year 2 (May 2015 - June 2016)

0

20

40

60

80

100In year two, 74 percent of vehicles purchased or leased replaced an older vehicle while 26 percent were additional vehicles.


Rebate Availability

How Participants Learned About MOR-EV Rebate

When asked to select all of the sources that informed them of the MOR-EV rebate, more than 60 percent of respondents said they learned about the rebate from the dealer and 24 percent learned about the rebate from the MOR-EV website. Online blogs informed 27 percent of respondents about the rebate, and of those respondents, 30 percent rated blogs as an extremely or very important source in their decision to acquire an EV.

When asked to rate how important the manufacturer’s website was in their decision to acquire an EV, more than 50 percent of respondents said that it was either extremely or very important. Compared with program year one, consumers more commonly found the information they needed to purchase/lease their EV online instead of by visiting a dealership or retail store. In support of this feedback, the MOR-EV website includes the manufacturer’s website next to each vehicle on the program’s eligible vehicle webpage. In year two outreach, CSE expanded the program’s web presence to over 22,000 Facebook and Twitter users and promoted the program via digital media channels to reach more consumers who gather information online.

0

100

200

300

400

500

Dealer Blog MOR-EVwebsite

Word ofmouth

Other Consumerevent

Sur

vey

resp

onde

nts

More than 60 percent of respondents said they learned about the rebate from the dealer and 24 percent learned about the rebate from the MOR-EV website.


Purchase and Lease Motivation

Importance of Factors in Decision to Acquire EV in Year Two

When asked to gauge the importance of factors in their decision to acquire an EV, respondents indicated that reducing environmental impacts was the most important factor. This result was consistent with year one survey results.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Reducing environmentalimpacts

Increased energyindependence

Supporting EVtechnology

Vehicleperformance

Desire fornewest technology

Saving moneyon fuel

Extremely important

Very important


54%

42%

41% 31% 19% 6%

38% 33% 22% 5%

33%

29% 26% 26% 14%

27% 23% 10%

31% 17% 6%

28% 14%



3%


The most significant change between year one and year two is the change in saving money on fuel both as an important decision factor for respondents and as a primary motivator for acquiring an EV. Of the options respondents had to choose from, saving money on fuel was selected as the least important factor in the decision to acquire an EV in year two (see page 37). It was the fourth most important factor in the applicant’s decision to acquire an EV in year one. Concurrently, the average price of regular conventional gasoline in the New England region was $3.00/gallon in year one and $2.31/gallon in year two.13

13 U.S. Energy Information Administration. Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update. Release Date: 8/29/2016 from http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/.

Extremely important

Very important


Sav

ing

mon

ey o

n fu

el

Year 1

Year 2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

42%

29% 26% 26% 14%

24% 23% 8%



Of the options respondents had to choose from, saving money on fuel was selected as the least important factor in the decision to acquire an EV in year two.

Importance of Factors in Decision to Acquire EV: Saving Money on Fuel

http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/


Primary Motivations for Purchase/Lease Over Time

EV adopters chose reducing environmental impacts as their top purchase or lease motivator in both year one and year two of the program. Saving money on fuel decreased as a primary motivator by almost half from year one to year two. Two other motivators were chosen much more frequently in the second year: vehicle performance more than doubled and a desire for newest technology almost doubled. Those who stated vehicle performance was their primary motivation have a notably higher income than respondents who chose a different primary motivator.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Reducing environmental impacts

Saving money on fuel

Vehicle performance

Desire for newest technology

Supporting EV technology

Increased energy independence

Other

Year 1 (June 2014 - April 2015) Year 2 (May 2015 - June 2016)

EV adopters chose reducing environmental impacts as their top purchase or lease motivator in both year one and year two of the program.


Valued Dealership ServicesTable 9 lists the three most valued dealership services as ranked by respondents and the percent of dealerships currently offering them. Respondents ranked “preparation of rebate/tax applications” as the most valuable dealership service. In addition, 70 percent of participants ranked “assistance setting up and explaining EV related smartphone ‘apps’” as a valuable dealership service.

Table 9. Valued Dealership Services

Most Valuable Dealership ServicesPercentage of

Dealerships that Offered this Service

#1 Preparation of rebate/tax applications 31%

#2 Assistance setting up and explaining EV related smartphone “apps” 78%

#3 An EV specialist to answer EV questions 26%

While the top three most valuable dealership services have remained the same from year one to year two, their ranking order has changed. In year one, “an EV specialist to answer EV questions” was the most valuable dealership service, while the “preparation of rebate/tax applications” was the second most valuable service. With only 30 percent of dealerships offering two of the top three most valuable services in year two and given high dealership staff turnover rates, MOR-EV staff intend to continue to provide dealership training and targeted dealership outreach to educate sales staff on program requirements, program eligibility and the rebate application process.

MOR-EV staff intend to continue to provide dealership training and targeted dealership outreach to educate sales staff on program requirements, program eligibility and the rebate application process.


Workplace Charging Availability

Do You Have Access to Charging at Your Workplace?

No, but I would use if available

Yes

I don’t work or I work from home

No, and I would NOT use if available

I’m not sure

41%

1%4%

34%

20%

While a third of survey respondents currently have access to workplace charging, more than 40 percent indicated that they would use workplace charging if it were available. Separately, 27 percent of participants said that access to workplace charging was an extremely or very important factor in making it possible for them to acquire an EV. To help facilitate increased workplace charging, MOR-EV program staff collaborated with the MassEVIP: Workplace Charging program to distribute workplace charging incentive information to MOR-EV rebate recipients. This information was distributed to 1,217 recipients in year two, a significant increase from the 724 rebate recipients that were notified in year one.

27 percent of participants said that access to workplace charging was an extremely or very important factor in making it possible for them to acquire an EV.


Utility Time-of-Use Rate Availability

Does Your Electric Utility Offer Special Rates for Residential Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging?

Yes

No

I’m unsure38%

3%

59%

The majority of respondents were unsure if their electrical utility offered a special rate for charging; however, of the 38 percent who indicated that their electric utility did not, nearly all said that they would take advantage of charging rates even if it meant charging their EV at special times during the day or night. This substantial response of interested EV drivers indicates a potentially high demand for time-of-use rates.

Of the 38 percent who indicated that their electric utility did not offer a special rate for charging, nearly all said that they would take advantage of charging rates even if it meant charging their EV at special times during the day or night.


If a Special Rate for Charging Your EV Were Available, Would You Take Advantage of It Even if It Meant Charging Your Vehicle at Special Times of Day or Night?

Yes

No

96%

4%

MOR-EV program staff are currently supporting Eversource Energy on the PlugMyRide@HOME (now known as Plug My Ride) program, a pilot program to collect residential charging information in order to design an effective time-of-use rate for customers. Using MOR-EV program data, MOR-EV program staff distributed PlugMyRide@HOME information to 520 rebate recipients in year two, which is nearly double the number of recipients that were notified in year one.


ConclusionMOR-EV has helped put 2,242 new ZEVs on the road in Massachusetts since the program launched in June 2014. In addition to helping the state work toward its goal of 300,000 ZEVs by 2025, the incentivized vehicles have directly saved 6,285 short tons of GHGs — which helps achieve other program goals of reducing GHG emissions and other air pollutants.

Program year two saw a wider variety of eligible vehicle models, highlighting the growth of ZEV availability in Massachusetts. And as a result of increased program data and consumer survey responses, the state and ZEV market stakeholders have a much better understanding of ZEV adoption rates, the driver population and their motivations to adopt cleaner vehicles.

DOER and EEA were successful in funding the MOR-EV program for a third year. Program year three will include increased outreach to central and western Massachusetts as well as a focus on extending dealer education. Program staff will apply lessons learned to strengthen consumer and dealer program awareness and outreach efforts. Several year two activities, including consumer surveys and project data transparency tools, will remain in effect. These efforts, along with steady rebate reservation rates, indicate that MOR-EV will continue to successfully support ZEV adoption in Massachusetts.

MOR-EV has helped put 2,242 new ZEVs on the road in Massachusetts since the program launched in June 2014.


Appendix 1: Program Website Interactive Data ToolsProgram Statistics

Note: Appendix 1 information was retrieved on July 18, 2016 from www.mor-ev.org. As a result, displayed totals may be different from year two program report totals.

2015 2016

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Num

ber o

f Reb

ates

7572

80

100105

109

98

121

94

106103

90

102

167

Applicant: CountyAll

Zip CodeAll

Filter by:

BEV

PHEV+

PHEV

ZEM

Grand Total $5,162,250

$5,250

$562,500

$1,273,500

$3,321,000

MOR-EV Rebates by Month

BEV

PHEV+

PHEVZEM

Grand Total 2,3457

382

5101,446

Application Received DateMay 2015 to June 2016

Vehicle Category: BEV PHEV+ PHEV ZEM

TESLAGMNISSANFORDBMWSMARTVOLKSWAGENMERCEDES-BENZAUDITOYOTAHYUNDAIPORSCHEVOLVOMITSUBISHIZEROHONDA 3

77888

121333

116129149333355503661

PHEV+

PHEVBEV

Rebates by Vehicle Category

Drivers Who Have or Plan to Install a Level 2 Charger

Dealer or Store CityTesla Motors Inc. Multiple

Quirk Chevrolet Braintree

Smart Center Boston Somerville

Marcotte Ford Holyoke

Herb Connolly Chevrolet Framingham

Marlboro Nissan Marlborough

Watertown Ford Watertown

Herb Chambers BMW Boston

Flagship Motorcars Lynnfield

Colonial Chevrolet Acton

Herb Chambers Chevrolet Danvers

Acton Ford Acton

Clay Nissan of Newton Newton

Country Nissan Hadley

Mirak Chevrolet Arlington

661

128

89

70

48

48

43

41

40

38

36

32

32

32

29

Rebates Reserved & Issued

Rebate Dollars Reserved &Issued

No Charger37.2%

Have or Plan to Install62.8%

Rebates by Vehicle Make

Top EV Retailers by Rebates

Data is updated semi-monthly. Last updated: July 18, 2016

BEV Battery Electric Vehicle (all electric)PHEV+ Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle with battery capacity > 10kWh (powered by electricity and gasoline)PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle with battery capacity < 10kWh (powered by electricity and gasoline)FCEV Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (hydrogen fuel cell)ZEM Zero Emission Motorcycle



Vehicle CategoryAll

Hampshire

Barnstable

WorcesterMiddlesex

Nantucket

Hampden

Berkshire

Plymouth

Franklin

Norfolk

Suffolk

Dukes

Essex

Bristol

CountyAll

ManufacturerAll

Rebates<= 10

11-25

26-50

51-100

101-200

> 200

To pan: Click and hold the left mouse button until a hand icon appears to move your view of the map; or hold down the “Shift” key.

Rebate Distribution Map by County


Vehicle CategoryAll


ManufacturerAll

Zip CodeAll

Rebates

1-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

> 20

To pan: Click and hold the left mouse button until a hand icon appears to move your view of the map; or hold down the “Shift” key.

Rebate Distribution Map by ZIP Code


Estimated Cumulative GHG Reductions

2015 2016

May

June

July

Augu

st

Sept

embe

r

Oct

ober

Nov

embe

r

Dec

embe

r

Janu

ary

Febr

uary

Mar

ch

April

May

June

500

10001500

200025003000

35004000

450050005500

60006500

7000

Cum

ulat

ive

GH

G S

avin

gs (s

hort

tons

)

0

50

100

150

200

Num

ber o

f Reb

ates

216

426

642

919

1,204

1,514

1,797

2,154

2,425

2,716

2,996

3,237

3,953

3,503

Note:GHG reduction totals are calculated as the difference in annual emissions for a BEV, PHEV or PHEV+ versus emissions from a typical internalcombustion gasoline passenger car using the Alternative Fuel Life-Cycle Environmental and Economic Transportation (AFLEET) Tool 2013 underthe following assumptions: 1. Annual vehicle miles traveled for MA: Federal Highway Administration, 2015 2. NEWE subregion resource mix: EPA eGRID, 2010 3. Vehicle use: 6 days/week*Please note, ZEM data is not included

Vehicle CategoryMultiple values

Applicant: CountyAll

Filter by:


Cumulative GHG Savings Number of Rebates

Data is updated semi-monthly. Last updated: July 18, 2016

ManufacturerAll

GHG Reductions


Appendix 2: Year Two Final Report Data


Appendix 3: Program Participation by City

City Total Registrations

Percent Rebated

Abington 3 33%

Acton 20 95%Acushnet 1 0%Adams 0 0%Agawam 12 58%Alford 0 0%Amesbury 5 100%Amherst 21 62%Andover 31 87%Aquinnah 0 0%Arlington 61 61%Ashburnham 4 50%Ashby 0 0%Ashfield 1 100%Ashland 15 80%Athol 0 0%Attleboro 9 89%Auburn 3 67%Avon 2 50%Ayer 5 40%Barnstable 28 39%Barre 1 0%Becket 0 0%Bedford 19 63%Belchertown 14 79%Bellingham 0 0%Belmont 31 100%Berkley 0 0%Berlin 6 83%Bernardston 0 0%Beverly 26 38%Billerica 14 100%Blackstone 1 100%Blandford 0 0%Bolton 2 100%Boston 161 50%Bourne 7 57%

Boxborough 5 80%Boxford 9 78%Boylston 3 33%Braintree 17 53%Brewster 3 100%Bridgewater 10 70%Brimfield 2 100%Brockton 6 67%Brookfield 1 0%Brookline 60 53%Buckland 1 0%Burlington 12 50%Cambridge 72 63%Canton 7 71%Carlisle 8 75%Carver 0 0%Charlemont 1 100%Charlton 4 100%Chatham 2 100%Chelmsford 17 76%Chelsea 3 0%Cheshire 1 100%Chester 0 0%Chesterfield 2 50%Chicopee 12 67%Chilmark 3 100%Clarksburg 0 0%Clinton 2 50%Cohasset 6 50%Colrain 0 0%Concord 47 72%Conway 0 0%Cummington 0 0%Dalton 1 100%Danvers 12 75%Dartmouth 9 33%Dedham 16 50%Deerfield 4 75%Dennis 0 0%


Devens 0 0%Dighton 1 0%Douglas 0 0%Dover 15 73%Dracut 6 83%Dudley 1 100%Dunstable 4 75%Duxbury 11 73%East Bridgewater 0 0%East Brookfield 0 0%East Longmeadow 2 100%Eastham 0 0%Easthampton 9 100%Easton 5 80%Edgartown 11 73%Egremont 2 50%Erving 1 0%Essex 2 100%Everett 4 100%Fairhaven 1 0%Fall River 8 63%Falmouth 19 47%Fitchburg 5 100%Florida 0 0%Foxborough 4 50%Framingham 33 64%Franklin 6 100%Freetown 4 75%Gardner 1 100%Georgetown 5 60%Gill 1 100%Gloucester 12 58%Goshen 0 0%Gosnold 0 0%Grafton 7 100%Granby 3 100%Granville 1 100%Great Barrington 2 50%Greenfield 5 60%Groton 6 67%Groveland 3 100%Hadley 2 100%Halifax 3 100%

Hamilton 8 75%Hampden 1 100%Hancock 0 0%Hanover 2 50%Hanson 2 50%Hardwick 0 0%Harvard 21 81%Harwich 1 100%Hatfield 1 100%Haverhill 13 77%Hawley 0 0%Heath 1 100%Hingham 19 47%Hinsdale 0 0%Holbrook 2 0%Holden 5 60%Holland 1 0%Holliston 7 71%Holyoke 12 83%Hopedale 2 100%Hopkinton 20 80%Hubbardston 0 0%Hudson 8 100%Hull 1 100%Huntington 0 0%Ipswich 15 53%Kingston 6 50%Lakeville 1 100%Lancaster 4 50%Lanesborough 0 0%Lawrence 3 67%Lee 1 0%Leicester 4 100%Lenox 2 50%Leominster 8 63%Leverett 1 100%Lexington 78 77%Leyden 0 0%Lincoln 19 58%Littleton 7 100%Longmeadow 16 63%Lowell 11 100%Ludlow 7 86%


Lunenburg 3 100%Lynn 7 57%Lynnfield 9 11%Malden 12 42%Manchester 7 43%Mansfield 11 91%Marblehead 14 86%Marion 7 29%Marlborough 8 38%Marshfield 5 60%Mashpee 4 50%Mattapoisett 4 75%Maynard 8 100%Medfield 8 50%Medford 23 100%Medway 6 100%Melrose 14 36%Mendon 4 50%Merrimac 2 100%Methuen 7 71%Middleborough 7 29%Middlefield 1 100%Middleton 5 100%Milford 13 54%Millbury 0 0%Millis 2 100%Millville 0 0%Milton 14 50%Monroe 0 0%Monson 4 100%Montague 2 100%Monterey 0 0%Montgomery 0 0%Mount Washington 0 0%Nahant 11 82%Nantucket 6 50%Natick 22 82%Needham 28 82%New Ashford 0 0%New Bedford 21 5%New Braintree 0 0%New Marlborough 0 0%New Salem 1 0%

Newbury 3 100%Newburyport 11 73%Newton 143 72%Norfolk 5 80%North Adams 1 100%North Andover 18 61%North Attleborough 6 67%North Brookfield 2 100%North Reading 11 100%Northampton 23 74%Northborough 3 100%Northbridge 9 67%Northfield 2 50%Norton 1 100%Norwell 6 50%Norwood 7 57%Oak Bluffs 4 75%Oakham 0 0%Orange 2 100%Orleans 4 0%Otis 0 0%Oxford 2 50%Palmer 1 100%Paxton 4 50%Peabody 14 64%Pelham 2 100%Pembroke 4 75%Pepperell 3 33%Peru 0 0%Petersham 0 0%Phillipston 0 0%Pittsfield 7 71%Plainfield 0 0%Plainville 3 33%Plymouth 25 76%Plympton 2 100%Princeton 1 100%Provincetown 3 67%Quincy 32 53%Randolph 4 100%Raynham 2 50%Reading 12 58%Rehoboth 4 25%


Revere 10 30%Richmond 0 0%Rochester 1 0%Rockland 3 0%Rockport 5 80%Rowe 0 0%Rowley 5 20%Royalston 0 0%Russell 0 0%Rutland 1 100%Salem 11 82%Salisbury 2 100%Sandisfield 0 0%Sandwich 5 100%Saugus 4 50%Savoy 0 0%Scituate 16 50%Seekonk 2 100%Sharon 18 72%Sheffield 0 0%Shelburne 0 0%Sherborn 10 60%Shirley 1 100%Shrewsbury 18 78%Shutesbury 2 100%Somerset 3 100%Somerville 35 63%South Hadley 11 100%Southampton 6 67%Southborough 13 85%Southbridge 2 50%Southwick 4 75%Spencer 2 50%Springfield 14 64%Sterling 3 100%Stockbridge 2 0%Stoneham 20 10%Stoughton 6 83%Stow 8 75%Sturbridge 3 33%Sudbury 37 73%Sunderland 2 100%Sutton 5 100%

Swampscott 12 100%Swansea 3 67%Taunton 9 33%Templeton 3 100%Tewksbury 10 70%Tisbury 11 45%Tolland 0 0%Topsfield 5 100%Townsend 1 100%Truro 0 0%Tyngsborough 4 100%Tyringham 0 0%Upton 5 100%Uxbridge 3 33%Wakefield 10 70%Wales 0 0%Walpole 10 80%Waltham 30 57%Ware 1 100%Wareham 6 83%Warren 1 0%Warwick 0 0%Washington 0 0%Watertown 28 50%Wayland 25 76%Webster 1 100%Wellesley 51 59%Wellfleet 2 50%Wendell 0 0%Wenham 8 38%West Boylston 1 100%West Bridgewater 1 100%West Brookfield 1 100%West Newbury 7 100%West Springfield 9 56%West Stockbridge 1 100%West Tisbury 5 100%Westborough 10 100%Westfield 9 56%Westford 16 88%Westhampton 0 0%Westminster 2 100%Weston 31 77%


Westport 3 0%Westwood 18 72%Weymouth 13 69%Whately 1 100%Whitman 2 0%Wilbraham 5 60%Williamsburg 2 50%Williamstown 5 80%Wilmington 8 100%Winchendon 3 0%Winchester 26 65%Windsor 0 0%Winthrop 3 67%Woburn 15 33%Worcester 22 50%Worthington 0 0%Wrentham 6 100%Yarmouth 4 50%

HEADQUARTERS9325 Sky Park Court, Suite 100 • San Diego, CA 92123 • 858.244.1177 • www.energycenter.org

As a mission-driven nonprofit organization, CSE works with energy policymakers,

regulators, public agencies and businesses as an expert implementation partner and trusted

information resource. Together, we are the catalysts for sustainable energy

market development and transformation.

SAN DIEGO, CA | LOS ANGELES, CA | OAKLAND, CA | BOSTON, MA

Year Two Final Report - MOR-EV€¦ · Year Two Final Report (May 2015 – June 2016) ... Toyota...

Documents

Transcript of Year Two Final Report - MOR-EV€¦ · Year Two Final Report (May 2015 – June 2016) ... Toyota...