California Lowers Auto Emissions Rule

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California regulators have drastically cut the number of zero-emission vehicles required to be sold in the state by the year 2014, a decision that frustrated environmentalists but came as a relief to auto manufacturers.

The rules adopted Thursday put the number of electric and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles that automakers sell in California at 7,500 by 2014 _ a 70 percent reduction from the 2003 target.

"We are disappointed. We think this proposal doesn't take us on the road to meeting the state's long-term global warming goals," said Spencer Quong, a senior vehicles analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Auto manufacturers said they could not meet the California standard and needed more time to make affordable hydrogen and battery-powered cars.

"Pushing this technology into the market before they are commercially viable ties up resources that could be better utilized by advancing core technologies," said Sara Rudy, an emissions regulatory manager at Ford Motor Co. "It is important at this stage to be nimble."

The other manufacturers that must comply with the rules are General Motors Corp., Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co., Chrysler LLC and Nissan Motor Co.

The decision is expected to affect 12 other states that had adopted California's target for zero-emission vehicles.

In essence, the air board took two steps: It cut the number of zero-emission vehicles it wants on state's roads, while at the same time offering an alternative: the gas-electric hybrids.

Story continues below

advertisement

The air board said the six largest automakers must sell nearly 60,000 plug-in hybrid vehicles in California while they develop the more advanced technology that will allow mass production of pure zero-emission vehicles.

Board chairwoman Mary Nichols described the move as a major step toward putting cleaner cars on the road. The plug-in hybrids envisioned by the air board have yet to be produced but are in development by several automakers.

"We're introducing a whole new category of vehicles to the public," Nichols said. "I don't think it's a step backwards in the real world."

General Motors is developing a rechargeable vehicle it hopes to have on the market in 2010. The Chevy Volt would run on a battery for 40 miles, and then fuel would power the on-board generator, GM spokesman Dave Barthmuss said.

California adopted its zero-emission vehicle mandate in 1990 as part of an attempt to reduce smog-forming emissions such as nitrogen oxide.

The rule required that 10 percent of new cars sold in the state by the country's six leading auto manufacturers be completely nonpolluting by 2003.

The rules have been modified four times since they were introduced. The biggest change came in 2003, when the Air Resources Board significantly scaled back the mandate and ruled that hydrogen cars, hybrids and cleaner-burning gasoline vehicles could meet the state's goals.

The regulators were concerned that battery-powered cars could not be mass-produced and favored hydrogen cars. They also faced a lawsuit from the auto industry.

Although some lower-emission vehicles _ especially hybrids _ have begun making an impression in the marketplace, the main automakers still do not have a commercial zero-emission vehicle.

The revised 2003 rules set a goal of putting at least 25,000 zero-emission cars on the road in California by 2014, far below the original 10 percent mandate. The rules adopted Thursday put the number of zero-emission vehicles required by 2014 even lower.

The changes adopted by the air board will affect just a fraction of the overall fleet in California. About 1.5 million new vehicles are sold in the state each year.

The 12 other states that adopted the California standard are Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Automakers are required to sell 120,000 of the new plug-in-hybrids in those states by 2014, said Tom Cackette, the air board's chief deputy executive officer.

Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Utah are considering California's standard, according to the Air Resources Board.

___

On The Net:

California Air Resources Board: http://www.arb.ca.gov

Comments

[willo]

What in the hell are they thinking? You want to know who killed the electric car? Idiot's who do stuff like this.

[ImmanuelGoldstein]

The concept of electric and hydrogen cars being 'zero emissions' is simpleminded. The emissions are simply not coming out of a tailpipe on the car. The simple truth is the whole concept of a 'green car' is Big Lie and must be recognized as such if we are going to make real progress on energy and GW issues.

[Thurber]

On the contrary, your argument is simpleminded . Even with an almost exclusively coal generated grid, electric vehicles pollute less per mile than internal combustion vehicles. Fuel cell vehicles are a different story as it takes almost 4 times as much electricity per mile to run one if your hydrogen is generated with electricity. If it's generated with natural gas, you are much better off just buying a natural gas fueled vehicle (you'll also be saving yourself about a million bucks, fuel cell vehicles are enormously expensive to build).

Their are three other major issues you are ignoring.

1. There is a HUGE benefit to the "long tailpipe argument” you used. Even if there wasn't a significant difference in total pollution from electric vehicles (There is!), there's a tremendous health benefit of removing pollution from population centers.

2. Electricity can and is generated globally pollution free (geothermal, hydro-electric, wind, solar, tidal, etc). The car pictured (since I happen to know the guy) is powered by solar photovoltaic panels on the roof of his house. Where exactly is the pollution now? Here's his website: http://evnut.com/

3.Electric­ity is a domestic product. We don't import a single electron from the middle east. We don't spend a single military dollar defending our grid in the middle east. No soldiers die to make sure your power company continues to supply your house. Ask yourselves if the same applies next time you sell your soul at the gas pump to fill up.

[ranchomerced]

They had to do it because the projected TAX REVENUE for the state highways have dropped off... Hybrids, zero emmision vehicles dont bring in the gas tax revenue. When will you liberals learn that people cant just suddenly dispose of or destroy their gasoline/ diesel powered vehicle and run out and buy a Honda Prissyius. Trading the SUV/ Guzzler in to the dealer will not reduce their carbon buttprint.

[mmckinl]

Thee board should have zeroed out hydrogen cars and had the automakers concentrate on plugin battery vehicles.

All posted speed limits should be reduced by 20% to allow for integration of plugin electric vehicles. This would also reduce emissions from internal combustion engines. Americans are going to have to learn to slow down.

[sheila]

This decision needs to be viewed in context of the larger AB 32 "global warming" bill that has been repeatedly gutted by Schwarzenegger except when his Big Energy and Corporate cronies can use it as a gravy train.

While cars, which emit a very large proportion of GHGs in CA are now apparently welcome to continue melting us down without and restrictions, millions of humans, plants and animals are under seige in the sunnier and windier parts of our state from the massive "solar farms" and "wind farms" that are so incredibly URGENT to install, that they claim not to have time to beef up solar and wind programs on residences and businesses.

So, Schwarzenegger panders to Big Auto by saying - don't worry about Global Warming, it's not urgent, keep your profitable deadly businesses rolling along, while simultaneously pandering to Big Energy by saying "we'll keep pretending global warming is super urgent so you can destroy hundreds of thousands of acres of wilderness, exercise massive eminent domain over neighborhoods, and prevent local, non-destructive wind and solar from taking root to maintain a chokehold over energy even now that ubiquitous wind and sun are being used for fuel."

Which is it Arnie? If global warming is urgent, then ALL industries and residents must pitch in, and if it's not, then none of us need to lose our homes, open spaces and vital ecosystems so that Big Corporate can keep robbing us blind. Can't have it both ways.

[BlackbirdHighway]

"the main automakers still do not have a commercial zero-emission vehicle"

Well, more accurately, they already had them, but CARB allowed the automakers to take the cars back and crush them. Now the automakers claim they can't make them.

Everybody just nod your heads and repeat "I believe whatever big corporations tell me".

I thought it was very interesting to watch the video of the rally outside the CARB meeting. One women said she has been driving an electric car that was made by Toyota, and hasn't bought ANY gasoline in 6 years.

[Tom95134]

As a Prius owner I hate to see this happen but the battery and hydrogen technology is just not coming along as fast and originally estimated. I have a 2nd car and would be happy to buy electric but frankly they're priced out of reach right now.

Li-On batteries are part of the answer but they still tend to burn up when subject to hard duty-cycles.