|
As one-third of all carbon
dioxide emissions come from tailpipe exhaust, it is the leading
source of air pollution. Known as the most prevalent of the greenhouse
gases (GHG), pollutants from automobiles are considered to be a
key contributor to global warming. And with California making up
10 percent of the automotive market in the United States, the state
has quite a bit to be concerned about.
According to California’s Air Resources Board (ARB), the state has already
begun to see the effects of climate change from global warming. The sea level
along the west coast has risen between three to eight inches over the last century.
The effects of this have ARB worried, as a rise in sea level can cause storm
surge flooding, threatening the coastal population and wetlands. Additionally,
beach and cliff erosion are concerns as is saltwater contaminating the drinking
water supply.
And if this weren’t enough cause for concern, over the last hundred years,
the annual runoff from the Sierra Nevada Mountains has shown a 10 percent decrease.
This, ARB believes, is a direct result of a smaller snow pack in the mountain
range. At the current rate, California expects to see a 10-degree temperature
increase over the next 100 years, according to a National Academy of Sciences
study.
Enter Assembly Bill 1493, or the Pavley Law, named for the bill’s main
author, Fran Pavley. This bill, which passed in 2002 and was signed by then-Gov.
Gray Davis, gives ARB the authority to reduce GHG emissions in the state. As
a result, ARB has put forth regulations requiring the auto industry to cut exhaust
from cars and light trucks by 25 percent, and large trucks and sport utility
vehicles by 18 percent.
The automotive industry will have until 2009 to begin
introducing technology for exhaust reduction, and must be in full compliance
by 2016.
Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is in full agreement. “We know the
science, we see the threat, and the time for action is now,” Schwarzenegger
said in a June 2005 executive order. In addition to his unwavering support, Schwarzenegger
has pledged to fight any of the lawsuits threatened by the automotive industry.
The Domino Effect
Unlike other states, California has the right to call for stricter regulations
in an effort to curb pollution under the federal Clean Air Act. Other states
can then opt to follow either federal regulations, or the stricter California
regulations. This right has been exercised before: In 1970, California pioneered
the use of catalytic converters on automobiles to control emissions. The catalytic
converter is now standard equipment on all automobiles.
California understands the importance of being a leader on environmental issues. “If
it weren’t for California, the environment would be much worse in this
country,” said Roland Hwang of the Natural Resources Defense Council. “It
puts pressure on the auto industry and Washington to come up with a solution.”
As with the catalytic converter, California is hoping other states will follow
its lead. Currently, the West Coast neighboring states of Washington and Oregon
are set to adopt the stricter California standards. This would mean that all
cars sold along the West Coast’s three states would have to emit 30 percent
less carbon dioxide, 20 percent fewer toxic pollutants, and up to 20 percent
fewer smog-causing pollutants by 2016. On the East Coast, Vermont is leading
the charge under Gov. James Douglas (D) citing that, “Vermont is a leader
in air quality.” Maine, too, is joining Vermont’s lead, as Gov. John
Elias Baldacci (D) is moving toward California regulations as well. And not all
are merely following California’s lead. New Jersey has called for air quality
rules that classify carbon dioxide emissions as a pollutant, a step the federal
government has refused to take.
But it is not only the Democrats who are siding with Schwarzenegger. Many fellow
Republicans are joining the fight as well. The governors of Connecticut and Rhode
Island, both Republicans, are also following Vermont’s lead to adopt California’s
emissions regulations. Sen. John McCain from Arizona and Conn. Sen. Joseph Liebermann,
a moderate Democrat, proposed the Climate Stewardship Act back in 2003. The Act
calls for “tailpipe trading,” under which manufacturers are given
credits that can be banked should a future fleet of automobiles fall short of
regulations. In this case, any saved credits can be used to prevent financial
losses.
So far, Schwarzenegger’s strongest GOP ally seems to be Gov. George Pataki
of New York. Not only has Pataki called for New York to reduce GHG emissions
by adopting California’s standards, but the state will adopt an early reduction
credit program so that fleets in model years up to 2008 that meet or surpass
2012 regulations can bank credit for any future compliance deficit. Pataki’s
Department of Environmental Conversation believes that this will help to reduce
the GHG emissions from carbon dioxide by 14,855,500 equivalent tons by the year
2020, and 26,280,000 equivalent tons by the year 2030 in the state of New York
alone. He believes so much in these standards that he co-authored a letter to
Congress with Schwarzenegger asking it to uphold
California’s right to
create stricter air quality standards in hopes that this may help California
in any future legal battles with the automotive industry.
Opposition Remains
But not all Republicans are embracing these beliefs. Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney recently
announced that he would pull his state out of a compact of Northeastern states,
led by Pataki, which would work to combat GHG emissions. In 2003, Sen. Christopher
Bond (R) of Missouri sought to use a federal spending bill to prevent California
from setting tougher air pollution standards. In 2004, Bond instructed the National
Research Council to study the technical aspects of California’s motor-vehicle
emission standards, citing that these standards could cause lawnmower-engine
and outdoor-equipment manufacturers to move their plants overseas. The Bush administration
does not endorse the California plan, either. A major talking point of his administration
is that capping carbon dioxide would cost America many jobs.
The automotive industry has offered quite a few points against these standards
as well. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers has estimated that the cost
to meet new emission standards will add about $3,000 to each new car. Pundits
argue that the cost is more around $1,000, and would be offset by lower fuel
costs. Not only are dollars and cents the argument. According to AAM spokeswoman
Gloria Bergquist, introducing the technology to meet these standards would be “almost
as complicated as developing the first automobile.” She went on to further
state that the reduction in worldwide GHG emissions would only equate to “one-tenth
of 1 percent.” Further arguments state that carbon dioxide is emitted by
humans each time we breathe and is necessary in the photosynthetic process of
plants. And although Schwarzenegger has sworn that there would be no taxes associated
with this plan, his top advisers announced in early December that a 2.5-cent-per-gallon “public
goods charge” may be needed to help pay for this endeavor.
With the first wave of regulations from the Pavley Law going into effect in the
early part of 2006, Schwarzenegger and his allies seem determined to put up a
fight. And as mid-term elections approach, support for California’s right
to set higher air quality standards—and the need to reduce the estimated
6.2 billion metric tons of GHGs the United States is expected to emit in the
year 2010—promise to be fodder for the upcoming debates.
Jeff Orloff is the associate editor for Green@Work magazine. He can be reached
at jeff.orloff@gmail.com. |
