$8 Million E-Buses Frozen Solid
Vermont’s $8 million electric-bus “upgrade” is sitting idle through winter because a post-purchase software restriction won’t let the buses charge below 41°F.
Quick Take
- Green Mountain Transit received five New Flyer SE40 electric buses in spring 2025 under a federally backed push to replace diesel.
- A manufacturer battery recall in late 2025 triggered software limits that block charging below 41°F and cap charging at 75%.
- Burlington’s typical winter temperatures sit well below that threshold, leaving all five buses effectively unusable during the season riders need them most.
- Transit leaders say the limitation was not part of the original purchase specs and are pressing the manufacturer and federal officials for fixes and flexibility.
$8 Million, Five Buses, and a Winter Shutdown
Green Mountain Transit (GMT) brought five New Flyer SE40 electric buses into service in spring 2025 as part of a grant-backed transition away from diesel. By winter 2025–2026, all five buses were pulled from service because they could not reliably operate under the new charging rules tied to a battery recall. The result is a high-profile example of what happens when federal priorities collide with real-world conditions in cold-weather states.
GENIUS: Vermont Spent Millions on Electric Buses That Turned Out to be ‘Unreliable’ in Cold Weather
— Pat (@phowells60) February 18, 2026
https://t.co/Yjl5gTHg9s https://t.co/7xhklTvs5k
GMT’s general manager, Clayton Clark, has argued that early coverage wrongly framed the buses’ problems as a simple snowstorm issue. The operational breaking point, GMT says, was the manufacturer’s recall response, not a routine winter event. That distinction matters for accountability: if the buses were sold with workable charging parameters and later restricted through an update, the central failure shifts toward manufacturer remediation and the oversight structures that allowed a climate-driven procurement to proceed without robust winter contingencies.
The Recall: Fire Risk, Then Software Limits That Don’t Fit Vermont
GMT’s buses were hit by a battery recall tied to fire-hazard concerns, and the follow-on software update changed what the fleet could do day to day. Reports describe two major constraints: charging is capped at 75% and charging is prevented when temperatures fall below 41 degrees Fahrenheit. Burlington’s winter averages run far colder than that—often in the mid-20s—meaning the buses can sit outside unable to take on power at precisely the time demand for reliable transit rises.
Clark has said the 41-degree restriction was not a known design requirement at purchase, adding that the agency would not have bought buses with that limitation for Vermont. That claim is significant because it separates an engineering reality—batteries struggle in cold—from a contractual and regulatory question: what was promised, what changed, and who bears the cost when a “fix” effectively sidelines equipment for months. The research available does not include the full procurement contract language.
Infrastructure Gaps Turned a Restriction Into a Crisis
GMT’s situation also exposed a practical issue that often gets glossed over in glossy grant announcements: where the buses charge and how they are stored. Reporting indicates GMT’s garage lacked adequate fire mitigation equipment to safely store or charge electric buses indoors. With buses kept outdoors, Vermont’s winter temperatures became a hard operational wall once the software restriction took effect. GMT has sought additional improvements through a pending federal grant to address fire mitigation needs.
Cold-weather performance problems are not unique to one city or one manufacturer, and that’s the bigger warning sign for taxpayers. The research cites similar difficulties with electric bus pilots in Western New York and issues in Maine involving buses from a now-bankrupt firm, including a reported brake failure that led to a crash into a snowbank. The available reporting offers only limited detail on those incidents, but the pattern reinforces that procurement and testing must match climate realities.
Riders Pay First: Reduced Capacity and Strain on Diesel Backups
When electric buses go down, the hit is not abstract—it lands on riders waiting at stops. Reports say GMT has had to lean harder on aging diesel buses that were supposed to be phased out, pushing the remaining fleet to cover scheduled service through winter. Officials have warned that additional mechanical failures could force broader service cuts. Riders who depend on public transit, including lower-income passengers with fewer alternatives, are the ones squeezed when experimental or newly mandated systems can’t deliver.
Accountability Questions for Grant-Driven Mandates
At the policy level, the Vermont case highlights the risk of Washington-driven incentives that favor one technology regardless of local conditions. The research describes Federal Transit Administration grant prioritization from 2020–2024 that heavily favored low- or no-emission vehicles, with diesel requests frequently denied. GMT is reportedly working with federal officials to modify later-year grant terms for buses not yet ordered, while simultaneously pressing the manufacturer for compensation and a faster technical solution than the 18–24 month battery replacement timeline mentioned in reporting.
Critics have used Vermont’s experience to argue that the earlier federal approach substituted political signaling for basic reliability standards. Supporters of the purchase respond that the immediate trigger was a recall-driven change, not a pre-existing Vermont-incompatible spec. Both points can be true at once: a manufacturer defect can be the catalyst, while top-down grant pressure can still be the reason agencies felt boxed into a narrow set of options. The facts currently available show a fleet sidelined and a public left holding the bill.
Sources:
Vermont EV Buses Prove Unreliable for Transportation This Winter
Arctic blast fuels scrutiny of Biden’s $8B electric bus push as watchdogs cite oversight failures
What’s behind Vermont’s electric bus reliability problems and how are they affecting riders?