You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Insurance often leaves homeowners with a devastating choice — to stay in the place where they lost so much, or to give up everything.

More people were displaced by wildfires between the start of this year and the end of July than in all of 2024. Globally, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre puts the number around 496,000 wildfire displacements — more than half of which occurred in Los Angeles County during the Eaton and Palisades fires in January.
“Displacement,” of course, can mean many things, and often in the case of wildfires, “most people can return quickly” once the danger has passed, the IDMC writes. But many in Los Angeles County are now entering their 10th month of displacement — and still more may choose, or have chosen, never to return.
Though the former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan called this kind of internal displacement “the great tragedy of our time,” voluntarily deciding to move away after a wildfire in the United States is something of a luxury. There are only three states in the U.S. in which insured homeowners have the legal right to replace a wildfire-destroyed home by buying a new property instead of rebuilding; for many, mortgages anchor them to properties that are covered in rubble and toxic ash. Three-quarters of homeowners who believe they have adequate insurance discover only after a fire that they’re actually underinsured, meaning that their policies cover less than 75% of the cost of rebuilding.
While there is limited data about how people disperse after a wildfire, recent tragedies have shed light on those who’ve either cashed out, cut their losses, or remain displaced in what was intended to be temporary housing. In 2018, for example, the Camp Fire burned down almost the entire town of Paradise, California, and as of 2021, 80% of the local population still had not moved back. Nearby Chico became “the epicenter for Paradise’s long-term relocation,” Abrahm Lustgarten writes in his book about climate migration, On the Move: The Overheating Earth and the Uprooting of America, though “smaller numbers of people moved farther,” with survivors ultimately resettling across all 50 states. Cheryl Maynard, a Camp Fire survivor I spoke to for this piece, even told me she’d heard about Paradise residents making it as far as Ukraine.
In some cases, though, this dispersal can lead to a stigma against those who either chose to leave or decide against returning. In Lahaina, the fact that native Hawaiians are being forced to find housing elsewhere is viewed as a form of “climate gentrification.” Even in Los Angeles, “many survivors have been quietly selling due to the many obstacles they face,” Joy Chen, the co-founder and CEO of the Eaton Fire Survivors Network, told me in an email. “Nearly all are reluctant to speak publicly. Locally, there’s been a lot of backlash to those who sell, and the folks I’ve spoken with just want to move on without drawing attention.”
Every story is different and personal, however — from being forced into temporary housing turned permanent to the reluctance of starting over. In an effort to better understand why people move away after a fire, I spoke to four California wildfire victims about their relocations and what they plan to do next. Their stories have been condensed and edited below.
Pasadena, California — Eaton Fire, 2025
I grew up in Pasadena. It was a nice community where you could ride your bike outside and there were other kids on the street — you could all get together, hang out, and get up to no good. It was an all-American town. I stayed, and I built my family there.
This was the third house I’d owned in Pasadena. I got married at 27, and when I was 30, we upgraded to a bigger house because we wanted to have kids. We bought a 1,700-square-foot house and we were really happy there, but at some point, we decided we needed something a little bigger. So we bought a house in 1990 that abuts the Eaton Canyon, about 300 yards from the Edison Tower where the January fire started. There is a wrought-iron fence in our backyard, and it goes straight down into the national forest. My husband and I were young and stupid, and we didn’t have any money, so we bought the worst house on a nice street. It was a real fixer-upper.
In 1993, a fire came through and burned right up to our backyard. We had only minutes to get out. When we came back and the house was still standing, we couldn’t believe our luck. So we moved back in; we got out our mops and brooms, and we cleaned it up. Five years later, my husband was dead of cancer. I don’t know if the toxins caused my husband’s death, but I don’t know that they didn’t. And I was left with a 6-year-old and a 12-year-old to raise by myself.
On the day of the Eaton Fire, my [second] husband and I were sitting and eating dinner when, at about 6:15 p.m., the TV went out. I said, “It must be Spectrum again.” We didn’t think much of it. Then we heard a loudspeaker, but we live right above the Eaton Canyon Nature Center, and they’re always rousing people at dark, saying, “The park is closed.” So that’s what I thought it was. But then there was a loud pounding on the front door, and it was my neighbor who’d just pulled into his driveway from work and saw a small fire directly underneath the tower across the canyon. The wind was blowing 70 or 80 miles an hour at the time, and he apparently rushed into his house and screamed for his wife to call 911 and to get the kids and the dog. And then he ran over and started knocking on doors.
We walked outside and there was the fire. I go, “Oh no, I know this drill.” Just then, a whole bunch of fire trucks pulled in, and I think that’s the only reason [the house] survived — because we were the first place burning, and the infrastructure wasn’t stressed yet. There are about eight to 10 houses in our cul-de-sac, and we had four huge fire trucks and probably 40 firefighters. I went back into the house, and I had a list from the last fire of the things I should take; I’d printed it up and taped it inside a closet door, but there was not going to be any time for that. We grabbed our hard drive, laptop, and three dogs, and got into our cars.
By then, it was black outside, with golf ball-sized embers flying by your head. It was like the videos of the fall of Saigon; it was the same damn way. Once I got out of the cul-de-sac, it was complete chaos. Nobody was obeying traffic lights or signs. My son had called — he lives in Monrovia, which is about 20 minutes away — and he was saying, “I saw the fire, I’m gonna come.” And I said, “There’s no time, forget it.” I finally made it to his house, and my husband was already there. And we have been there for seven months now.
The house in Pasadena is absolutely in the same condition as it was on January 7, when we left. It hasn’t been touched; it’s just full of all this toxic stuff that you can’t really see. State Farm’s adjuster came by with a little Kleenex box, and he wiped my hallway and said, “Oh, it’s not that bad. You just need a cleaning lady.” But we spent $6,400 to find out it’s full of lead, arsenic, and nickel. Seven months later, we still don’t have enough money to even start the cleanup. The original estimate, before we knew about the heavy metal contamination, was for $120,000. When we found out about the contamination, we got another estimate, and it’s up to $350,000 because everything has to be trashed. All the upholstered goods have to go. The hardwood floor has to go, because it’s grooved and distressed, and you can’t get the lead out of that. The carpets have to go. The window treatments have to go.
Fortunately, I get along with my son and daughter-in-law, but they’re a young couple and they’re relatively newly married, and they just bought that house in October. Then we move in with our three dogs, and it’s only a 1,000-square-foot house. I said, “We need to find someplace to rent. We can’t stay here.”
I talked to my financial planner, and he said, “We worked with people in Paradise after the Camp Fire, and people identical to you, with no fire damage but just smoke damage, they weren’t back in their house for one or two years.” And I said, “You’ve got to be out of your mind.” But it’s true, because you’re fighting with insurance the whole time. State Farm is still only okaying month-to-month rentals, and try to find a place to rent month-to-month with three dogs. So I asked my financial planner, “Is there any way we can buy another house right now?” And he crunched the numbers and said, “Everything’s got to be financed, but we can get a conventional loan and finance a mortgage, and then we can borrow against your portfolio for the down payment. You can survive for about two years that way before it gets financially untenable.”
So we put in an offer. We bought a house. We aren’t officially living there yet because it’s really dirty. We’re here every day, cleaning everything. But we’ll be in Monrovia, about seven or eight blocks from my son’s house, and the house wasn’t in the plume of the fire.
I worry that [the insurance company is] not going to give us enough money to clean up our house appropriately. I’m just not going to feel safe there anymore. My kids are, of course, advocating that we not go back. As my son says — because he’s so charming — he says, “Mom, you’re old now. You got out of two fires. Your luck has run out. The first one, you had a 10-minute warning. The second one, you had a six-minute warning. I don’t think you should push it.”
But it’s home, right? My whole life is there. Neighbors I’ve known for 35 years. I had saved up my nickels and dimes for about three decades to make it my Barbie’s dream house. I don’t know how much money we’re going to have to put into the house to get it into shape where we can either go back or sell it. But how could I sell it without making sure it’s clean? Somebody else is going to live there. What if they have little kids?
Kenwood, California — Tubbs Fire, 2017
Larry: Kenwood is beautiful wine country. We had been looking for a home where we could spend time with our family on weekends and in the summertime, and that’s why we bought the house. We lived there for about 12 years before we started renting it as an Airbnb on weekends, or sometimes for a week at a time. On the night of the fire, the last tenant had just moved out. Though the Kenwood house was our primary residence, we were luckily not living there at the time, so our most valuable possessions weren’t there, either.
We were awakened at 3:30 in the morning by a friend who had heard there was a fire up near Kenwood. We went to the TV, turned it on, and watched it. Coverage focused on the area around the Kaiser hospital, but we knew it was in our area because we’d heard from a neighbor who was running for his life and who said our house was on fire and there was no way there’d be anything left.
We didn’t get up there until two and a half weeks later. They’d completely closed the area off to get rid of all the dangerous brush. It was hard going back.
Jackie: In the beginning, we thought about rebuilding. It felt like we were fighting back. Like, “Just put the house right back where it was!”
Larry: We immediately got in touch with a contractor who could clean up the place. He went through the bureaucracy to get the okay to clean it all up. We got an architect. We were ready to rebuild.
Jackie: Then I looked at our lives and said, “Do I really want to start picking out doorknobs again? To go through two years of hassle trying to rebuild?”
Larry: At that time, we were in our late 70s. We just figured, This is just ridiculous. This is going to be such a heartache.
We were really careful and diligent, though. There are people out there who will deal with the insurance process for you, but they take 30% of the proceeds. You don’t want to do that, but some people don’t think they have the time or the intelligence to go through it all. We went through the whole thing, start to finish, and it took us two years and eight months before we were done. We had this house here in Marin County that we were renting, so we didn't have to worry about moving anywhere, and so we were able to go through the process slowly. It’s very emotional, but a few days after the fire, you’ve got to sit down and do your homework.
After we received the money for the trees and shrubs and the loss of the house, we still had the land, so we put it up for sale. A young couple — speculators — bought it, and they built a home in their style, and then they put it up for sale.
Jackie: The real problem is — like the new people who bought the house — they don’t know what Kenwood was like before. We were surrounded by the Trione-Annadel State Park, and when we looked out, we could see miles of trees. Now, when you look out, you see trees, but they’re all burnt. Every time we go up there, it just looks burnt to me.
Paradise, California — Camp Fire, 2018
I lived in the Paradise area for eight years. I’d lived in Magalia, which is just a few miles to the north of Paradise, but it was very cold — much colder than I was used to. So I sold my three-bedroom home and moved down to what they called the Banana Belt. We actually received some sunlight through the trees.
On the day of the fire, I had a friend visiting me from out of town. The day before, I had received a phone call from PG&E — a live person, not a recording! — saying that if there were high winds, they would be turning off the power. That morning, I got up and it looked kind of cloudy, but there was no smoke. My friend needed a prescription from CVS, and I told her, “You probably should call them.” But she was stubborn and looked at me like, I’ll do it when I want to. So we hung around for a little bit, and then I heard her calling CVS on her own terms. The guy there told her, “Lady, what are you doing here? The whole town is leaving. I’m locking up and I’m getting out of here.”
We thought, “Okay, we’d better leave.” I’d helped out in the condos there; I was on the safety committee, and we could evacuate 40 people in about 35 minutes. But they’d canceled the committee, so we didn’t have it on the day of the fire. I didn’t know if people were going to make it out or not. We had one person with no legs, married to a deaf lady, and I worried about them so much.
So I’m starting to panic. I took a quilt on the floor that I was trying to make for my son that had taken me forever — just a tie quilt, a $10 value. I took a picture of him in a frame that he and his girlfriend had given me. I took two salt and pepper shakers, one from each grandma. I left my china and my silver. I left a 100-year-old quilt, because it wasn’t in my line of sight. I left my mom’s wedding dress and my wedding dress.
Outside, the trees were burning behind the garages. One lady was in her garage next door, and I thought, “Oh my gosh, these people are inside there.” We stopped and asked if they needed help, and they said no, they had people coming. I should have made them get in my car. The condo manager drove around the parking lot a few times, honking his horn, but you couldn’t hear it because of the wind.
My friend said she was going to drive. I was holding onto my dog, who’s terrified of fire and things exploding. I told my friend, “Don’t go along the canyon because I don’t like it; it’s a drop off.” Well, the fire jumped over my car — like a rainbow — and went into the other median. I said to her, “Man, that was cool!” My dad raised me that way.
What my friend did then was, she went over into the wrong lane, and she went down against the upcoming traffic. At that point, they’d cut it off and made it that way. I was very blessed that we did not get trapped. She was doing about 70 going down that road and following a police officer. I said, “You’re going to get pulled over.” She said, “I don’t think he’s worried about me right now.”
At the bottom of the hill, another police officer directed us into a grocery store parking lot. It was packed with cars and people and dogs and animals, and we all got out and turned around and stared up at the mountain. There was just smoke and people coming down, people crying.
I went to my son’s in-laws with my friend, and on the third day, I found out that my condo was gone. So I booked a flight to where my family lived, and I’ve never been back. I went back to Chico a year later to pick up some things — I had a friend meet me there and we had lunch — but I never went back up the hill. There were so many people in the Facebook group [for fire victims] that were struggling mentally and emotionally because they were living in the burn scar, and there was no way I wanted to go up and see it. I’d talked to a tow truck driver before I left — I ran into one going into a store, and he was working up there hauling all the cars away — and I said, “How is it?” He said, “It’s bad. It’s bad.”
Recovery has been really complicated. A lady started the Facebook group after reading PG&E’s 2019 bankruptcy court documents, and she told people to vote against the plan. The $13.5 billion Fire Victims Trust was going to pay the 70,000 survivors of the Butte, North Bay, and Camp Fires — all sparked by PG&E — half in cash, half in the company’s stock. But it was approved by more than 85% of survivors. How do you get 70,000 people to agree on anything?
The day they signed the deal, PG&E’s stock was only worth $9 a share — so it was only worth $11 billion — and we had to wait for it to get to, like, $14 a share for us to break even at $13 billion. And we couldn’t sell until after shareholders were able to sell, which knocked the value of the stock down. All this was so complicated, and Wall Street manipulated the whole thing. We have been fighting to get the remaining 30% of the recovery settlement that we still have not received from PG&E. We got some preliminary payments, but most people can’t afford to stay in Paradise. Many people have a distaste because of being victimized, politicized, and not treated fairly.
There’s no hospital anymore; there’s not the medical facilities like they used to be. What are you going to do if you’re 75 and used to [a Kaiser Permanente hospital] down the street? You have to end up going to the Bay Area. Other people left because there is fire after fire in the state, and we couldn’t handle it for health reasons — the smoke, the PTSD. I’ve talked to many people who said, “There’s a fire outside my house, three miles away, and I can see smoke! Oh my gosh, I’m going to die!” Every once in a while, when the power goes out, I freak out. And imagine living in Paradise, where they have all those fires around them.
It’s been hard. Financially, I had been set up. My highest payment in Paradise was my [home owner’s association] fee — they’d just raised it to $320, and we were really complaining about that. Now I’m paying rent of $1,500-something a month, and with utilities, it’s like $1,900.
I worry about my future. I shouldn’t — I know God’s going to take care of me — but some days I do.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Tales from a day of “thoughtful dialogues on energy, climate change, and human lives” on Day 3 of New York Climate Week.
“I’m here because I love thoughtful dialogues on energy, climate change, and human lives,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright told my colleague Robinson Meyer this afternoon. “That’s been a passion my whole life, and nothing will change that.”
It’s our passion too — and was a defining theme of Heatmap House on Wednesday at New York Climate Week, with 27 sessions across topics including clean energy development, U.S. climate policy, the future of mobility, climate tech, and reindustrialization. From Wright backpedaling on President Trump’s embrace of a diesel export ban to former Vice President Al Gore asserting that 2026 might mark “the positive tipping point on climate,” it was a full day of news, contrarian opinions, juicy predictions, and lots and lots of coffee (consumed by yours truly).
Early in the day, Carlos Araque, the CEO and co-founder of Quaise, an advanced geothermal company, started things off by addressing the elephant in the room: potentially imminent movement on permitting reform. “It’s always easy to be picky and want for more,” he acknowledged, although he added that “my ask has always been — as far back as 2018 — if you can do for geothermal what you do for oil as in terms of regulatory permitting exclusions, then you’re moving 90% of the way to the goal. So that’s happening — that’s slowly and surely happening.”
Get Heatmap in your inbox daily.
New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill also spoke about permitting reform at a local scale. “You cannot simply say to people, ‘Sorry, your bills are just going to keep skyrocketing,’” she stressed. “That is not the answer, which is why we’ve acted so aggressively. I approved 18 solar and battery storage projects in the first six months [of my term]. We knew the federal credits were going to run out if we did not get that done, so that’s why we had to take on permitting reform right away to make sure we were growing that.”
And while Jane Flegal, the principal at Flegal Energy Advisors, didn’t have any secret insight into the potential deal, she broke down her predictions into three buckets: reforms to conventional environmental statutes such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act; transmission, “which, no one knows what’s in there, but we all know what was in the Manchin deal, and I think we can and should expect something at least that ambitious;” and permitting certainty, which would constrain executive power to cancel permits after they’ve been issued.
Chris Hayes, the host of All In with Chris Hayes on MS NOW and a former climate reporter, took the stage just after Gore, who marked the 20-year anniversary of his Academy Award-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth. Like Gore, Hayes was in a reflective mood. “I think to some degree, we’re kind of moving forward in this understanding that all of us are implicated in the system that’s going to change very slowly over time,” he said, calling it one of the lessons of the past 20 years. “But I think there was a high-water mark of consumer activism that is sort of gone.”
Then, of course, there was Wright. The energy secretary — whom climate insiders have described to us as the biggest climate villain in the Trump administration after Trump himself — talked to Rob about as many fuels as they could cover. Wind: “There have been very spirited dialogues in the administration about this. I do believe a successful permitting reform thing changes the playing field for anything you want to build in this country, including wind.” Nuclear: “Our thing is just to try to get it back on its feet and get out of the way.” Natural gas: “Gas in my lifetime is going to be the American energy superpower for sure, but you never want all your eggs in one basket.” Batteries: “I’m all in.” And EVs: “Should we have the broader America subsidizing, you know, the habits of wealthy people? I don’t think we should.”
Electric vehicles also came up in our mobility session, of course, along with other forms of mobility including ferries, subways, and rail. “It’s not something we talk about very much in the U.S.,” Laura Fox, the co-founder and managing partner of Streetlife Ventures, told me, adding that “we have a really great rail freight network that is underutilized and that typically saves shippers 30% to 40% when they’re shipping goods in the current environment.” (Representative Mike Levin of California also shared that if he could only connect two places in his proposed giant high-performance rail system, “I’d like to see the line between Los Angeles and San Diego solidified.”)
The evening wrapped with a focus on reindustrialization. Tom Steyer, the co-executive chair of Galvanize Solutions, told us he’s doing fine after his unsuccessful bid for California governor. (Nothing a trip to Tahoe with the family couldn’t cure.) He also shared that the climate movement may have lessons for the modern movement opposing AI and data centers. The world’s richest companies can’t just “come in and take people’s water, especially at a time when people are so water insecure,” he stressed. “How could that possibly be right?”
AI — and water — also came up in conversation with Emilio Tenuta, the senior vice president and chief sustainability officer of Ecolab, which provides industrial and commercial water and hygiene solutions. (Ecolab also sponsored our reindustrialization section.) He argued that “what we really need to focus on is the Water Efficiency Index” when evaluating, for example, semiconductor fabrication plants, because it contextualizes water use in more absolute terms than traditional metrics.
Page Crahan, general manager of Tapestry, an Alphabet X moonshot project that uses AI to develop a model of the grid’s electricity network, zeroed in on how best to use artificial intelligence. “We had 10 years to build what it took us 110 years to build globally” in order to meet anticipated energy demand, she told my colleague Jael Holzman. “And that was in 2023, before data centers.” For “computationally intensive challenges, data-heavy challenges, and certainly running simulations and insights for a system this size,” AI is a good use case, she said.
Tapestry is using its models in partnership with PJM Interconnection (as we’ve covered here at Heatmap) — and speaking of PJM, its executive director of strategic policy and external affairs, Asim Haque, spoke to my colleague Matthew Zeitlin next. “If you do not bring your own new capacity, we are going to curtail you before we curtail your average residential consumer for sure,” he said, adding, “this is a concept that is pending in front of the FERC right now. We can talk about carrots. We can talk about sticks. I don’t know which one this is. I think from the data center perspective, it’s likely a stick.”
Josh Parker, the head of sustainability at Nvidia, rounded the day out on a positive note. “The good news is, we are very quickly unlocking new capacity with clean energy,” he said, including developing new clean energy technologies like advanced fission and geothermal. “All of these technologies are benefiting from AI, and so that, coupled with the fact that data center operators with AI factories generally are some of the largest consumers of clean energy and are still are looking for all the clean energy they can, leads me to believe — and I think this is the most credible forecast — that very soon we’re going to see all of that convert over to clean as soon as we can get through the supply constraints that we’re currently in.”
If you were with us in person, thank you again. You’re what made our event one to remember. And if you weren’t able to join us this year — we hope to see you in 2027.
But wait! Before I send you on your way, you can find all of our coverage of the day below along with some additional quotes from some of my favorite conversations:
The Commonwealth Fusion Systems CEO made his case at Heatmap House.
Without billions in new federal investment the United States may lose its pole position in the global race to be the first nuclear fusion superpower, Commonwealth Fusion Systems CEO Bob Mumgaard told attendees at Heatmap House in New York City.
When asked onstage whether Commonwealth Fusion could still develop its fusion aspirations at scale without U.S. government financing, Mumgaard said: “I think so – it’s a question of the timing and the place.” Then he suggested that the company — and the industry — might go elsewhere if the country doesn’t put more capital into the growing sector. “There are offers on the table to build nuclear fission power plants not in the United States, so we can do that.”
You’d be forgiven if you thought Commonwealth and nuclear fusion was already doing well. The Massachusetts-based pioneer in fusion technologies raised $1 billion in new investment just a couple months ago. Generally speaking, innovation in nuclear power is incredibly popular in Congress, which has an influential bipartisan Fusion Energy Caucus. Commonwealth has received public support from the Trump administration’s Energy Department, as has one of the Heatmap House sponsors, Inertia.
But we’re talking about nuclear fusion, a still-futuristic form of energy generation seeking to harness the power of stars exploding in contained environments. It’s an insanely promising tech moonshot.
Mumgaard said the company is aiming for its tech to provide electrons onto the grid by the 2030s. He also said a Fusion Industry Association request to Congress and the Trump administration for $10 billion of investment might be what’s needed for that power to be American first.
“We debated that [amount] with the industry association, and you have to say what gets the job done. It’s a disservice to lowball what’s needed,” he told my colleague Katie Brigham. “This is a very important thing. It’s an entirely new industry. Let’s treat it as such.”
He added his view that U.S. fusion development is essentially an energy security maneuver, and that competition with China on fusion should be seen as parallel to the race for dominance in artificial intelligence.
“Think about what it means in a technological race. Power is the thing that powers the next economy, right?” Mumgaard said. “All the geostrategic strife we have right now is about power in the form of natural resources. Who has them? What are they? What boats are they on through what body of water? Fusion takes all of that off the table.”
Representative Mike Levin, It’s Electric, Rivian, and more showed up for the mobility session at Heatmap House.
On the surface, the climate case for electric vehicles is simple: Battery-powered cars can eliminate our need to burn dirty gasoline and diesel, and as more renewables come onto the grid, they’ll only run more and more cleanly. But the benefits that can be gained from electrifying the vehicle fleet run far deeper, a case that a variety of speakers made at Heatmap House on Wednesday as part of New York Climate Week.
Andrew Peterman, director of advanced energy solutions at the EV maker Rivian, explained how electric vehicles are becoming a multi-tiered grid solution. Rivian itself is cooperating with drivers and utilities to create automatic smart charging so that EVs can charge when energy is abundant and inexpensive, saving the user money — in some cases as much as $1,000 per year — and easing strain on the grid. Doing so helps to keep electricity prices down, which is good for the country and for the bottom line of an electric vehicle maker.
“Our ability to sell and give people value out of an electric vehicle can only be enabled if we transform the grid to be able to be affordable, reliable, and cleaner for everyone,” Peterman told Heatmap deputy editor Jillian Goodman. “We need to use our role in the energy system to enable customers to get more value out of the grid. So everything we do is about grid transformation to enable electric vehicles to have an even stronger and stronger value proposition. When we bring down electricity costs, that brings down the total cost of ownership for our vehicle owners.”
Of course, energy can go in the other direction, too. Now that millions of EVs are on the road, the multitude of kilowatt-hours stored in EV batteries can be a grid asset. That goes for vehicle-to-grid integration, where EVs can discharge energy to help balance the grid when they’re not driving. But it’s an especially compelling proposition when those batteries get older and are no longer optimal for powering vehicles. Rivian is working with partners such as Redwood Materials to recycle old EV batteries and to repurpose some as grid storage. The same is true at Waymo, whose fleet of autonomous, only-electric rideshare vehicles have racked up hundreds of thousands of miles in some cases.
“Our fleets are sometimes outlasting our batteries where they still work, but they’re just not optimal for the ride-hailing fleet,” Waymo head of environment and sustainability Adam Lenz told Nico Lauricella, Heatmap’s CEO and editor in chief. “So we’re taking those batteries out, refreshing them, and then there’s still a lot of life left on this battery. We’re working with a partner that’s based out of L.A. County where we provide service and they’re deploying those batteries to support front of the meter grid storage.” (Waymo is also a sponsor of Heatmap House.)
It’s clear that the rideshare economy will be dominated by electric vehicles, and Lenz argued that this fact helps extend the climate benefits of electrification and autonomy to people who don’t want to drive or have been priced out by the upfront costs of an EV. The promise that self-driving cars will ultimately be much safer compared to those driven by fallible humans makes it safer to walk or bike, the most sustainable transportation methods. Waymo recently introduced a partnership with Visa to give San Francisco Bay Area riders a $2.85 Waymo account credit (the price of a bus ride in S.F.) when they combine a rideshare trip with a train or bus linkup to create a mulit-modal journey — a roundabout way to create “free” buses.
Across the country, EV charging could help give New York City not only cleaner skies but also improved grid management. The city’s Green Ride Initiative is meant to have New York’s taxi and rideshare trips be majority-electric by 2030, yet NYC has been a charging desert compared to other dense cities like London. Tiya Gordon, co-founder and COO of charging company it’s electric, came to Heatmap House to discuss her company’s recent win of a contract to install 700 new street chargers in New York, which has only 88 today.
It’s not just how many chargers are going in, she said, but where — the majority will go into neighborhoods in Brooklyn and Queens where rideshare drivers live and park their cars overnight. Albert Gore, executive director of the Zero Emission Transportation Association, added: “It makes a lot of sense also when you think about the impact to the grid. If you are directing a lot of that charging at night, particularly for these high mileage use cases, that actually puts downward pressure on electricity rates. EVs are a very, very flexible load.”