The first Alto EVs have hit the road in Houston. Photo via Alto

Your next Alto ride might be electric. The Dallas-based car service has rolled out electric vehicles in Houston.

Alto, founded in Dallas in 2018 and launched in Houston in 2020, elevates ridesharing with its own fleet of company-owned, clearly branded SUVs driven by its staff of drivers. The company previously announced its plans to evolve its fleet into being completely electric, and the first EVs have hit the road, according to a company email.

"Our EV additions to the Houston fleet mark an important moment in our commitment to significantly reduce Alto's environmental impact," reads the email sent on September 5.

The new cars offer similar features to its existing fleet, including legroom, phone chargers, water bottles for riders, and more. Plus, the new cars — Kia EV9 — boast a quieter ride.

Alto has consistently grown in its Texas markets — which include Houston and Dallas — over the years, including expanding into Houston's suburbs.

Will Coleman, CEO of Alto, previously wrote in a guest column for InnovationMap that his priorities for starting the company included safety — but also sustainability. For years, Alto has been expressing interest in introducing EVs, with plans of having a completely electric fleet.

"This EV vision is one example of how a rideshare company can build a better and more accountable industry, and these steps also give Houstonians a more responsible and sustainable transportation solution," Coleman writes.

The Austin, Texas, company said Tuesday that it sold 443,956 vehicles from April through June, down 4.8 percent from 466,140 sold the same period a year ago. Photo courtesy of Tesla

Tesla sales fall for second straight quarter despite price cuts, but decline not as bad as expected

by the numbers

Tesla's global sales fell for the second straight quarter despite price cuts and low-interest financing offers, another sign of weakening demand for the company's products and electric vehicles overall.

The Austin, Texas, company said Tuesday that it sold 443,956 vehicles from April through June, down 4.8 percent from 466,140 sold the same period a year ago. But the sales were better than the 436,000 that analysts had expected.

The better-than-expected deliveries pushed Tesla's stock up 10 percent Tuesday. The stock is down about 7 percent so far this year, but it has nearly erased larger losses from prior months. Tesla shares had been down more than 40 percent earlier in the year, but are up more than 60 percent since hitting a 52-week low in April.

Demand for EVs worldwide is slowing, but they're still growing for most automakers. Tesla, with an aging model lineup and relatively high average selling prices, has struggled more than other manufacturers. Still it retained the title of the world's top-selling electric vehicle maker.

For the first half of the year, Tesla sold 830,766 electric vehicles worldwide, handily beating China's BYD, which sold 726,153 EVs.

Tesla also sold over 33,000 more vehicles during the second quarter than it produced, which should reduce the company's inventory on hand at its stores.

Tesla's sales decline comes as competition is increasing from legacy and startup automakers, which are trying to nibble away at the company's market share. Most other automakers will report U.S. sales figures later Tuesday.

Tesla gave no explanation for the sales decline, which is a harbinger of what to expect when it posts second-quarter earnings on July 23.

Nearly all of Tesla’s sales came from the smaller and less-expensive Models 3 and Y, with the company selling only 21,551 of its more expensive models that include X and S, as well as the new Cybertruck.

The sales decline came despite Tesla knocking $2,000 off the prices of three of its five models in the United States in April. The company cut the prices of the Model Y, Tesla’s most popular model and the top-selling electric vehicle in the U.S., and also of the Models X and S.

The April cuts reduced the starting price for a Model Y to $42,990 and to $72,990 for a Model S and $77,990 for a Model X. Last week, Tesla lopped $2,340 off the $38,990 base price of some newly revamped Model 3s that were in the inventory shipped to its stores.

In addition, Tesla in May offered 0.99 percent financing for up to six years on the Model Y. In June, it offered interest as low as 1.99 percent for three years on the rear-wheel-drive Model 3. Typical new-vehicle interest rates average just over 7 percent, according to Edmunds.com.

Also during the quarter, Tesla knocked roughly a third off the price of its “Full Self Driving” system — which can’t drive itself and so drivers must remain alert and be ready to intervene — to $8,000 from $12,000, according to the company website.

Jessica Caldwell, head of insights for Edmunds.com, said Tesla is having trouble in a market where most early adopters already have EVs, and mainstream buyers are more skeptical that electric cars can meet their needs.

Tesla's “haphazard” price cuts don't work as well as they once did because consumers now expect them, she said. “We’ve seen the automaker exhaust its bag of tricks by lowering prices and increasing incentives to spur demand without much success in the U.S. market,” Caldwell said.

Also, Tesla's aging model lineup doesn’t look much different than it did years ago she said. And with price cuts, used Tesla prices tumbled. Anyone wanting a Tesla can get a far better deal buying a used one, Caldwell said.

Caldwell doesn’t see any big catalyst this year that would boost Tesla sales unless gasoline prices spike, and she said Musk's shift to the right since taking over Twitter has hurt the brand's image.

Wedbush analyst Dan Ives wrote in a note to investors Tuesday that second-quarter sales were a “huge comeback performance” for Tesla. “In a nutshell, the worst is in the rearview mirror for Tesla,” he wrote. The company, he wrote, cut 10 percent to 15 percent of its workforce to reduce costs and preserve profitability. “It appears better days are now ahead as the growth story returns,” Ives wrote.

In its letter to investors in January, Tesla predicted “notably lower” sales growth this year. The letter said Tesla is between two big growth waves, one from global expansion of the Models 3 and Y, and a second coming from the Model 2, a new, smaller and less expensive vehicle with an unknown release date.

Tesla is scheduled to unveil a purpose built robotaxi at an event on Aug. 8.

Sysco recently took delivery of 10 heavy-duty, electric-powered trucks for its Houston operations. Photo via LinkedIn

Sysco introduces new fleet of electric trucks at Houston operations

ev moves

Houston-based food distributor Sysco is helping fuel the future of electric vehicles.

Sysco recently took delivery of 10 heavy-duty, electric-powered trucks for its Houston operations. With this delivery, Sysco now operates nearly 120 electric vehicles (EVs) around the world.

In 2023, Sysco unveiled its first EV hub, which is in Riverside, California. The hub will eventually feature:

  • 40 electric-powered refrigerated trailers
  • 40 electric-powered semi-trucks
  • 40 charging stations

The hub also will include 4 megawatt-hours of battery storage and 1.4 additional megawatts of solar power generation.

Aside from Houston and Riverside, Sysco uses EVs in Baltimore; Boston; Baltimore; Denver; Long Island, New York; Los Angeles; and Fremont, California. Its EV fleet extends to Canada, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

Sysco announced in 2021 that it planned to operate nearly 800 electric-powered semi-trucks by 2026. Houston Freightliner is a partner in this initiative.

In all, Sysco aims to electrify 35 percent of its U.S. tractor fleet.

Around the world, EVs are contributing to Sysco’s goal of reducing direct emissions by 27.5 percent by 2030.

“We are proud of our progress to scale our electric truck fleet and continue our journey to meet our climate goal,” Neil Russell, chief administrative officer at Sysco, says in a news release. “This work is important to many of our customers who have also set goals to reduce emissions.”

It's the first time the company has used EVs in any of its upstream sites, including the Permian Basin. Photo via exxonmobil.com

ExxonMobil revs up EV pilot in Permian Basin

seeing green

ExxonMobil has upgraded its Permian Basin fleet of trucks with sustainability in mind.

The Houston-headquartered company announced a new pilot program last week, rolling out 10 new all-electric pickup trucks at its Cowboy Central Delivery Point in southeast New Mexico. It's the first time the company has used EVs in any of its upstream sites, including the Permian Basin.

“We expect these EV trucks will require less maintenance, which will help reduce cost, while also contributing to our plan to achieve net zero Scope 1 and 2 emissions in our Permian operations by 2030," Kartik Garg, ExxonMobil's New Mexico production manager, says in a news release.

ExxonMobil has already deployed EV trucks at its facilities in Baytown, Beaumont, and Baton Rouge, but the Permian Basin, which accounts for about half of ExxonMobil's total U.S. oil production, is a larger site. The company reports that "a typical vehicle there can log 30,000 miles a year."

The EV rollout comes after the company announced last year that it plans to be a major supplier of lithium for EV battery technology.

At the end of last year, ExxonMobil increased its financial commitment to implementing more sustainable solutions. The company reported that it is pursuing more than $20 billion of lower-emissions opportunities through 2027.

Cowboys and the EVs of the Permian Basin | ExxonMobilyoutu.be

A new list from EV Charger Reviews puts Texas in the No. 2 position among the worst states for owning an EV. Photo via Getty Images

Texas ranked as among the worst states for EV drivers

yikes

You’d think that producing tens of thousands of Teslas might help drive up Texas’ standing among the best states for owning an electric vehicle. To the contrary, Texas ranks among the worst states to be an EV owner.

A new list from EV Charger Reviews puts Texas in the No. 2 position among the worst states for owning an EV. Washington leads the pack of the worst EV states. Topping the list of the best states for EV owners is Maine, followed by Colorado and Vermont.

The ranking judged each state on these factors:

  • Number of registered EVs
  • Number of EVs per charging port
  • Ratio of one square mile per charging port
  • Cost of electricity
  • Annual cost savings for EV owners
  • Number of EVs per service center
  • EV tax credits

“Texas has cheaper electricity but a bad ratio of EVs registered to charging ports and service centers. The annual savings on gas money is only about $1,000, and there are no tax incentives,” says EV Charger Reviews.

Texas’ ranking stands in contrast to the presence in Austin of Tesla’s headquarters and a Tesla factory. The more than 10 million-square-foot, 25,000-acre factory serves as the U.S. manufacturing hub for Tesla’s electric-powered Model Y car and Cybertruck.

While thousands of Texans are driving Teslas and other EVs, they’re definitely in the minority.

Survey findings released in November 2023 by the University of Houston and Texas Southern University showed that only five percent of Texas motorists who were questioned drove an electric-powered car, truck, or SUV.

Nearly 60 percent of those who didn’t drive EVs said they wouldn’t consider buying one. Almost half (46 percent) cited the lack of charging stations as their chief reason for not wanting to own an EV.

“With such a small percentage of Texans currently owning electric vehicles, it looks like Texans will hold tight to their gas engines for the foreseeable future. Government incentives … have yet to make a difference among the state’s vehicle buyers,” according to a UH news release about the survey.

“But as charging stations grow in number, costs of operation decrease and — most important, the technology allows longer driving ranges — perhaps electric vehicles will start to earn their place in the garages of Texans.”

A Texas law that took effect in 2023 requires an EV owner to pay an extra $200 fee when they renew their vehicle registration or an extra $400 fee for their initial two-year registration.

While Houston isn't known as the coldest of climates, you still might want to review this myth-busting guest column. Photo via Pexels

Guest column: Cold weather and electric vehicles — separating fact from fiction

EVs in winter

Winter range loss is fueling this season’s heated debate around the viability of electric vehicles, but some important context is needed. Gasoline cars, just like their electric counterparts, lose a significant amount of range in cold weather too.

According to the Department of Energy, the average internal combustion engine’s fuel economy is 15 percent lower at 20° Fahrenheit than it would be at 77° Fahrenheit, and can drop as much as 24 percent for short drives.

As the world grapples with the implications of climate change and shifts toward sustainable technologies, it's important to put the pros and cons of EVs and traditional gas vehicles in perspective. And while Houston isn't known as the coldest of climates, you still might want to review this information.

The Semantics of Energy Consumption Hide the Real Issue: Cost

First, let's talk about the language. When discussing gas vehicles in cold climates, the conversation often centers around "fuel efficiency." It sounds less threatening, doesn't it? But in reality, this is just a euphemism for range loss, something for which EVs are frequently criticized.

Why does that matter? Because for most drivers who travel less than 40 miles a day, what range loss really means is higher fueling costs. When a gas vehicle loses range, it costs a lot more than the same range loss in an EV. For example, at $3.50 a gallon, a car that gets 30 MPG in warm weather and costs $46.67 to go 400 miles suddenly costs $8.24 more to drive the same distance. By contrast, an EV plugging in at $0.13 per kWh usually costs $13 to go 400 miles and bumps up to a piddly $16.25 even if it loses 20 percent efficiency when the temperature drops.

Some EV models lose 40 percent in extreme cold. OK, tack on another $3. That still leaves almost $30 in the driver’s pocket. Over the course of a year, those savings pile up.

Let’s Call It What It Is: Fear Mongering

Any seismic shift in technology comes with consumer hesitancy and media skepticism. Remember when everyone was afraid to stand in front of microwaves and thought the waves would make the food unsafe to eat? Or how, just a decade or so back everyone was talking about how cell phones could spontaneously explode?

Fear of new technology is a natural psychological response and to be expected. But it takes the media machine to turn consumer hesitation into a frenzy. Any way you slice it, 2023 was one big platform for expressing fears around EVs. Headline-grabbing tales of EV woes often lacked context or understanding of the technology. In a highly partisan landscape where EVs have been dubbed liberal leftist technology, what should be seen as a miraculous pro-American, pro-clean-air, pro-energy independence, pro-cost saving advancement is getting a beating in the press. In this environment, every bit of “bad EV news” spirals out into an echo-chamber of confirmation bias.

For example, Tesla’s recent software update was hyped as a 2 million vehicle “recall” even though the software was updated over the air without a single car needing to leave the driveway. Hertz's recent decision to reduce its Tesla fleet was seen by many as a referendum on the cars’ quality but was actually a decision based on Hertz’s miscalculations around repair costs and a mismatch in their projections of consumer demand for EV rentals.

While the cost of repairs might be higher, maintenance and fuel costs are still much lower than gas vehicles. EVs are better daily-use cars than rentals because while our country’s public charging infrastructure is still lagging, home charging is a huge benefit of EV ownership. Instead, the Hertz move and the negative coverage are further spooking the public.

The Truth About EVs

Despite the challenges, it's crucial to acknowledge the environmental advantages of EVs. For instance, EVs produce zero direct emissions, which significantly reduces air pollution and greenhouse gasses. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EVs are far more energy efficient than gas-powered cars, converting more than 77 percent of electrical energy from the grid to power, compared to 12-30 percent for gasoline vehicles.

This efficiency translates to a cleaner, more sustainable mode of transportation. And stories of EVs stranded in Chicago aside, generally they perform well in cold weather, as clearly demonstrated in Norway. In Norway, the average temperature hovers a solid 10 degrees lower than in the U.S. Yet 93 percent of new cars sold there are electric. The first-ever drive from the north to the south pole was also completed by an electric vehicle. The success story of EVs in Norway and demonstration projects in harsh winter climates serve as a powerful counterargument to the notion that EVs are ineffective in cold weather.

So where does this leave us? The discourse around EVs and gasoline vehicles in cold weather needs a more balanced and factual approach. The range loss in gasoline vehicles is a significant issue that mirrors the challenges faced by EVs. By acknowledging this and understanding the broader context, we can have a more informed and equitable discussion about the future of automotive technology and its impact on our environment.

---

Kate L. Harrison is the co-founder and head of marketing at MoveEV, an AI-backed EV transition company that helps organizations convert fleet and employee-owned gas vehicles to electric, and reimburse for charging at home.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

What EPA’s carbon capture and storage permitting announcement means for Texas

The View From HETI

Earlier this month, Texas was granted authority by the federal government for permitting carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. This move could help the U.S. cut emissions while staying competitive in the global energy game.

In June, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed approving Texas’ request for permitting authority under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for Class VI underground injection wells for carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the state under a process called “primacy.” The State of Texas already has permitting authority for other injection wells (Classes I-V). In November, the EPA announced final approval of Texas’ primacy request.

Why This Matters for Texas

Texas is the headquarters for virtually every segment of the energy industry. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Texas is the top crude oil- and natural-gas producing state in the nation. The state has more crude oil refineries and refining capacity than any other state in the nation. Texas produces more electricity than any other state, and the demand for electricity will grow with the development of data centers and artificial intelligence (AI). Simply put, Texas is the backbone of the nation’s energy security and competitiveness. For the nation’s economic competitiveness, it is important that Texas continue to produce more energy with less emissions. CCS is widely regarded as necessary to continue to lower the emissions intensity of the U.S. industrial sector for critical products including power generation, refining, chemicals, steel, cement and other products that our country and world demand.

The Greater Houston Partnership’s Houston Energy Transition Initiative (HETI) has supported efforts to bring CCUS to a broader commercial scale since the initiative’s inception.

“Texas is uniquely positioned to deploy CCUS at scale, with world-class geology, a skilled workforce, and strong infrastructure. We applaud the EPA for granting Texas the authority to permit wells for CCUS, which we believe will result in safe and efficient permitting while advancing technologies that strengthen Texas’ leadership in the global energy market,” said Jane Stricker, Executive Director of HETI and Senior Vice President, Energy Transition at the Greater Houston Partnership.

What is Primacy, and Why is it Important?

Primacy grants permitting authority for Class VI wells for CCS to the Texas Railroad Commission instead of the EPA. Texas is required to follow the same strict standards the EPA uses. The EPA has reviewed Texas’ application and determined it meets those requirements.

Research suggests that Texas has strong geological formations for CO2 storage, a world-class, highly skilled workforce, and robust infrastructure primed for the deployment of CCS. However, federal permitting delays are stalling billions of dollars of private sector investment. There are currently 257 applications under review, nearly one-quarter of which are located in Texas, with some applications surpassing the EPA’s target review period of 24 months. This creates uncertainty for developers and investors and keeps thousands of potential jobs out of reach. By transferring permitting to the state, Texas will apply local resources to issue Class VI permits across the states in a timely manner.

Texas joins North Dakota, Wyoming, Louisiana, West Virginia and Arizona with the authority for regulating Class VI wells.

Is CCS safe?

A 2025 study by Texas A&M University reviewed operational history and academic literature on CCS in the United States. The study analyzed common concerns related to CCS efficacy and safety and found that CCS reduces pollutants including carbon dioxide, particulate matter, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides. The research found that the risks of CCS present a low probability of impacting human life and can be effectively managed through existing state and federal regulations and technical monitoring and safety protocols.

What’s Next?

The final rule granting Texas’ primacy will become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Once in effect, the Texas Railroad Commission will be responsible for permitting wells for carbon capture, use and storage and enforcing their safe operation.

———

This article originally ran on the Greater Houston Partnership's Houston Energy Transition Initiative blog. HETI exists to support Houston's future as an energy leader. For more information about the Houston Energy Transition Initiative, EnergyCapitalHTX's presenting sponsor, visit htxenergytransition.org.

Houston energy expert: How the U.S. can turn carbon into growth

Guets Column

For the past 40 years, climate policy has often felt like two steps forward, one step back. Regulations shift with politics, incentives get diluted, and long-term aspirations like net-zero by 2050 seem increasingly out of reach. Yet greenhouse gases continue to rise, and the challenges they pose are not going away.

This matters because the costs are real. Extreme weather is already straining U.S. power grids, damaging homes, and disrupting supply chains. Communities are spending more on recovery while businesses face rising risks to operations and assets. So, how can the U.S. prepare and respond?

The Baker Institute Center for Energy Studies (CES) points to two complementary strategies. First, invest in large-scale public adaptation to protect communities and infrastructure. Second, reframe carbon as a resource, not just a waste stream to be reduced.

Why Focusing on Emissions Alone Falls Short

Peter Hartley argues that decades of global efforts to curb emissions have done little to slow the rise of CO₂. International cooperation is difficult, the costs are felt immediately, and the technologies needed are often expensive. Emissions reduction has been the central policy tool for decades, and it has been neither sufficient nor effective.

One practical response is adaptation, which means preparing for climate impacts we can’t avoid. Some of these measures are private, taken by households or businesses to reduce their own risks, such as farmers shifting crop types, property owners installing fire-resistant materials, or families improving insulation. Others are public goods that require policy action. These include building stronger levees and flood defenses, reinforcing power grids, upgrading water systems, revising building codes, and planning for wildfire risks. Such efforts protect people today while reducing long-term costs, and they work regardless of the source of extreme weather. Adaptation also does not depend on global consensus; each country, state, or city can act in its own interest. Many of these measures even deliver benefits beyond weather resilience, such as stronger infrastructure and improved security against broader threats.

McKinsey research reinforces this logic. Without a rapid scale-up of climate adaptation, the U.S. will face serious socioeconomic risks. These include damage to infrastructure and property from storms, floods, and heat waves, as well as greater stress on vulnerable populations and disrupted supply chains.

Making Carbon Work for Us

While adaptation addresses immediate risks, Ken Medlock points to a longer-term opportunity: turning carbon into value.

Carbon can serve as a building block for advanced materials in construction, transportation, power transmission, and agriculture. Biochar to improve soils, carbon composites for stronger and lighter products, and next-generation fuels are all examples. As Ken points out, carbon-to-value strategies can extend into construction and infrastructure. Beyond creating new markets, carbon conversion could deliver lighter and more resilient materials, helping the U.S. build infrastructure that is stronger, longer-lasting, and better able to withstand climate stress.

A carbon-to-value economy can help the U.S. strengthen its manufacturing base and position itself as a global supplier of advanced materials.

These solutions are not yet economic at scale, but smart policies can change that. Expanding the 45Q tax credit to cover carbon use in materials, funding research at DOE labs and universities, and supporting early markets would help create the conditions for growth.

Conclusion

Instead of choosing between “doing nothing” and “net zero at any cost,” we need a third approach that invests in both climate resilience and carbon conversion.

Public adaptation strengthens and improves the infrastructure we rely on every day, including levees, power grids, water systems, and building standards that protect communities from climate shocks. Carbon-to-value strategies can complement these efforts by creating lighter, more resilient carbon-based infrastructure.

CES suggests this combination is a pragmatic way forward. As Peter emphasizes, adaptation works because it is in each nation’s self-interest. And as Ken reminds us, “The U.S. has a comparative advantage in carbon. Leveraging it to its fullest extent puts the U.S. in a position of strength now and well into the future.”

-----------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn.

UH launches new series on AI’s impact on the energy sector

where to be

The University of Houston's Energy Transition Institute has launched a new Energy in Action Seminar Series that will feature talks focused on the intersection of the energy industry and digitization trends, such as AI.

The first event in the series took place earlier this month, featuring Raiford Smith, global market lead for power & energy for Google Cloud, who presented "AI, Energy, and Data Centers." The talk discussed the benefits of widespread AI adoption for growth in traditional and low-carbon energy resources.

Future events include:

“Through this timely and informative seminar series, ETI will bring together energy professionals, researchers, students, and anyone working in or around digital innovation in energy," Debalina Sengupta, chief operating officer of ETI, said in a news release. "We encourage industry members and students to register now and reap the benefits of participating in both the seminar and the reception, which presents a fantastic opportunity to stay ahead of industry developments and build a strong network in the Greater Houston energy ecosystem.”

The series is slated to continue throughout 2026. Each presentation is followed by a one-hour networking reception. Register for the next event here.