A recent proposal from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will abolish the 2009 discovery that greenhouse gas emissions mark a major U-turn for the nation’s climate advancement. The impact is felt nationwide, but the plan aims directly for California.
In support of the document released in the wake of Tuesday’s proposal, the country’s top environmental agencies outlined the legitimacy of the plan to cancel and roll back the so-called danger findings for greenhouse gas emissions that warm the planet from all vehicles, including cars and trucks.
“As a result of these proposed changes, engine and vehicle manufacturers will no longer have future obligations for measurement, control and reporting. [greenhouse gas] Optional highway engine and vehicle emissions,” the agency wrote in the summary of the regulations.
However, the document, which includes an 80-page notice of proposed rulemaking and a 60-page regulatory impact analysis, contains some nods to California policy.
That’s mostly because for over 50 years, California has been given its own authority by the EPA to set tailpipe emissions stricter than those required by the federal government.
This authority, obtained through exemptions issued by the EPA, was important to the state’s efforts to address its infamous smog and air quality issues. This is driven by California’s unique terrain that traps pollutants in transport emissions and internal basins. The exemption was the basis for California’s nationwide plan to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035 and move to electric vehicles.
The EPA document reiterates that the California exemption has been formally repealed. But as it has been made public, the Trump administration’s unprecedented efforts to do so in June are still caught up in the court system following lawsuits from the state.
In particular, the EPA’s own analysis of the possible outcomes of that proposal shows that without California’s leadership and without the tax credits created under President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, national adoption of electric vehicles would decrease. At the same time, gasoline prices rise due to high demand from more gas-powered vehicles on the road.
“It doesn’t seem to put together a very strong case,” said Chris Bush, the transportation director and senior economist in Energy Innovation Policy and Technology, a nonpartisan think tank who reviewed the analysis. “What this shows is that reducing California has a less favorable net impact. [Advanced Clean Trucks rule]When you take away the California exemption and remove your IRA credits. ”
In a statement this week, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said there is economic benefit for Americans by abolishing danger detection. “If finalized, over $1 trillion in hidden taxes on American businesses and families would end,” Zeldin said, by retracting danger detection and the consequential regulations.
According to the EPA, the $1 trillion savings arise from revoking vehicle regulations built on danger detection. This includes Biden-managed electric vehicle sales targets. This is what agents call “EV mandate.”
The EPA also said by removing risk findings, Americans will save $54 billion in expenses each year through the elimination of greenhouse gas standards.
Bush said it is not easy to see how agents arrived at that figure based on the analysis provided. With California’s rules removed, “eventually there will be fewer EVs, more gas vehicles, more gas demand, and higher gas prices,” he said.
The EPA also claims that electric vehicles are sucking in energy that can be used better elsewhere. “From factories to data center servers and air conditioners.” This refers to the 2022 note from California Independent Systems Operators, which uses California as an example of this perceived power diversion, urging people to reduce energy use, including EV charging, during record heat waves.
The EPA announcement surprised many members of the environmental community and denounced it as a dangerous abdication of the agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment. Among the many institutions’ claims is that there is no technology to reduce greenhouse gases to the point that can be measured to global climate change concerns without risking major harm to public health and welfare, such as rising vehicle prices.
But major US automakers like GM and Ford are already committed to the future of electricity, just like international competitors such as China, which have invested heavily in electric vehicles. According to the California Energy Commission, approximately 22% of new vehicle sales in the state in the second quarter of this year were zero-emission vehicles.
“Despite Trump’s complete attack, Californians have chosen the clean simplicity of ZEV,” read a statement from CEC Commissioner Nancy Skinner. “Undoubtedly: California has not stepped back from its ZEV goals. We continue to invest heavily in accessible and reliable ZEV infrastructure, making the ZEV driving experience even better every day.”
Bush said California has several tools at its disposal to protect itself and maintain clean vehicle progress.
In the sturdy space, the California Air Resources Board already has a clean truck partnership. This is to sign contracts with almost every truck manufacturer in the state to meet advanced emission reduction targets. The state’s heavy vehicle incentive program also offers funding opportunities for fleet owners to replace old, heavy-duty diesel vehicles with zero-emission vehicles.
There is also a legislative possibility, such as Congressional Bill 914. This gives carbohydrates more authority to regulate indirect sources of contamination, such as warehouses. One way these warehouses can meet these rules is to increase the electric truck fleet, Bush said.
Carbohydrates also adopt clean miles standards for transport companies such as Uber and Lyft, which can gradually increase zero emission miles, and similar tactics could be adopted in the freight sector, he said.
“There are still many options in the state,” Bush said. “There’s a lot of momentum.”
In a statement this week, Carbohydrate Chair Leanne Randolph described the EPA proposal as “the latest move from this reckless federal government that chooses polluters fantasyland over proven science.”
“But back to Earth, the planet continues to suffer from unidentified carbon pollution as heat waves, floods and wildfires threaten increasingly uninsurable communities everywhere,” Randolph said. “Unlike this negligent administration, California doesn’t turn away from what’s going on right in front of her eyes. It chooses reality, science, innovation.
Source link
