This report estimates the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts and cost-effectiveness of California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project over the life of the program.

Fuel-cycle GHG emission reductions are analyzed using an evolving methodology that is increasingly case-specific relative to prior work. For example, the CVRP survey data on detailed counterfactual behaviors, as introduced in the 2022 purchases/leases report, is updated and employed over the life of the program. Additionally, this analysis is made increasingly time-variant by modeling each year of driving with temporal information as available, whereas previous reporting modeled first-year emissions and scaled those up to estimate the lifetime period.

Compared to new gasoline vehicles, we estimate GHG reductions from nearly 600,000 rebated EVs total 15.5M metric tons of carbon-dioxide-equivalent emissions over 100,000-miles of driving. In total, approximately 50% of the reductions are associated with “Rebate-Essential” participants, who were the most highly influenced by the rebate to purchase/lease. Approximately 65% of reductions from recipients of CVRP’s Increased Rebate for Low-/Moderate-Income households were Rebate Essential. Cost-effectiveness of Rebate-Essential reductions average $166 and $299 per metric ton of GHGs abated for Standard and Increased Rebates, respectively.

To improve evaluation of the impact and cost-effectiveness of the program specifically, the emission reductions that are directly attributable to CVRP can be estimated using self-reported data detailing a variety of counterfactual behaviors that enable nuanced assessment of the vehicle types participants would have driven in absence of the rebate. Compared to the fleet likely to exist in the program’s absence (rather than a new gasoline vehicle baseline), the GHG abatement costs of BEVs and PHEVs over a 100,000-mile quantification period are estimated to average $386 per metric ton. Using comparison vehicles based on these detailed counterfactual survey data thus increases the costs of GHG reductions, because many participants state that, in absence of the rebate, they would have alternatively been driving cleaner vehicles than those represented by a new gasoline baseline vehicle.