'Why haven't we done something already?': California mulling ban on fossil-fuel vehicles

From The National Post

China will also likely order an end to sales of all polluting vehicles by 2030, the chairman of electric-carmaker BYD Co. said Thursday

The internal combustion engine’s days may be numbered in California, where officials are mulling whether a ban on sales of polluting autos is needed to achieve long-term targets for cleaner air.

Governor Jerry Brown has expressed an interest in barring the sale of vehicles powered by internal-combustion engines, Mary Nichols, chairman of the California Air Resources Board, said in an interview Friday at Bloomberg headquarters in New York. The earliest such a ban is at least a decade away, she said.

Brown, one of the most outspoken elected official in the U.S. about the need for policies to combat climate change, would be replicating similar moves by China, France and the U.K.

Governor Jerry Brown of California discusses climate action at ‘We The Future’ at Ted Theater on Thursday, Sept. 21, 2017 in New York. Stuart Ramson/AP Images for UN Foundation

“I’ve gotten messages from the governor asking, ‘Why haven’t we done something already?’” Nichols said, referring to China’s planned phase-out of fossil-fuel vehicle sales. “The governor has certainly indicated an interest in why China can do this and not California.”

Embracing such a policy would send shockwaves through the global car industry due to the heft of California’s auto market. More than 2 million new passenger vehicles were registered in the state last year, topping France, Italy or Spain. If a ban were implemented, automakers from General Motors Co. to Toyota Motor Corp. would be under new pressure to make electric vehicles the standard for personal transportation in the most populous U.S. state, casting fresh doubts on the future of gasoline- and diesel-powered autos elsewhere.

The Association of Global Automakers said consumers must be able to afford the cleaner cars that California says are needed to meet its climate goals. The trade association represents Toyota, Honda Motor Co. and other overseas carmakers in the U.S.

“We have been working with California on intelligent, market-based approaches to emissions reductions beyond 2025, and we hope that this doesn’t signal an abandonment of that position,” Global Automakers Chief Executive Officer John Bozzella said in a statement.

California has set a goal to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 80 per cent from 1990 levels by 2050. Rising emissions from on-road transportation has undercut the state’s efforts to reduce pollution, according to Next 10, San Francisco-based non-profit.

“To reach the ambitious levels of reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, we have to pretty much replace all combustion with some form of renewable energy by 2040 or 2050,” Nichols said. “We’re looking at that as a method of moving this discussion forward.”

California has the authority to write its own pollution rules, which dates back to the 1970 Clean Air Act. Those rules are underpinned by waivers granted by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Nichols said the state would likely take a different legal route to enable a possible ban rather than use an EPA waiver, since the Trump administration would be unlikely to approve one. For example, California could use vehicle registration rules or control the vehicles that can access state highways, she said.

Read the rest of the story here.

HT | Earthling2

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

294 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 28, 2017 7:27 pm

I wonder what are the authorities are planning on doing if mum, dad and the kids travel over the border in their classic gas guzzling 67 Chevy on the way to enjoy a day at the beach.

The Reverend Badger
Reply to  AnitaJH
September 28, 2017 11:08 pm

No beach. Sea level rise wiped it out.

Griff
Reply to  The Reverend Badger
September 29, 2017 3:08 am

no, no… the beach is still there… but it moved a long ways inland…

MarkW
Reply to  The Reverend Badger
September 29, 2017 6:49 am

At 1 foot per century, that beach isn’t going to be moving far or fast.

MarkW
Reply to  AnitaJH
September 29, 2017 6:49 am

They better bring enough gas cans to get the car back to the border. Won’t be any filling stations left in CA.

Alex
September 28, 2017 7:35 pm

BYD make EVs in China. Asking them what the future of the ICE is like asking Tesla what the future of ICE would be.
In the NE of China the temperature goes below -20 C regularly. Some places are below -40C. On occasion, I have seen trucks pulled over to the side of a road with the driver building a fire under the sump of the truck.
99% of the people, in my city of 8 million, live in apartments. Overnight parking is in no parking areas and bike lanes. Over 90% of car owners do this
There are over 700 NEW car registrations every day.
I’m not saying it is impossible that new ICEs will be banned in China. I’m just thinking of the logistical infrastructure nightmare of charging points.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Alex
September 28, 2017 9:21 pm

Alex, please, don’t confuse the children with facts.

Griff
Reply to  Alex
September 29, 2017 3:08 am

Well, note China just announced that it is requiring all auto manufacturers in China to produce at least 12% of output as EVs or low emissions vehicles…

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
September 29, 2017 6:50 am

And if the people refuse to buy them, will just shoot a few of them to motivate the rest.

Don K
Reply to  Alex
September 29, 2017 3:32 am

I have no idea what China will do, but my guess is that they might end up eventually banning (most) pure ICE vehicles, but allowing hybrids which seem a lot more appropriate to frigid interior areas than pure EVs. What will California do? God alone knows. But I have to point out that large areas of Eastern and far Northern California are VERY thinly populated and seem quite unsuited to pure EVs using current or near future technology

wouldrathernotsay
September 28, 2017 7:35 pm

I think whenever someone generates this kind of insanity (or like the iron dusting the ocean article) we ought to ask, “When did you decide to hate all humans?” Because underneath it all, that’s what they are saying.

Joey
September 28, 2017 7:37 pm

What China SAYS it’s going to do and what it really does are two different things entirely.

Clay Sanborn
September 28, 2017 7:38 pm

Nothing works out as well as having gov’t dictate what the free market only should determine. What could go wrong? Ans: Everything.

September 28, 2017 7:50 pm

So they don’t want visitors to drive there then? Theyre prepared to give up Twinkies, wheat, lumber, sugar, apples, steel,… This foolishness will end long before 2030 anyway.
Papers are coming out admitting temps have been over hyped in models. They say 3fold but that doesn’t include another fold or two added by rigging data. The greening of the planet is going to get too obvious to avoid updating the already startling rate that makes It the most exciting a CO2 story of them all . It is exponential and endothermic (hmmm… coincided with the Pause).

Reply to  Gary Pearse
September 28, 2017 8:27 pm

Fads typically last 10 years.

feliksch
Reply to  Donald Kasper
September 29, 2017 8:05 am

In the 70’s they closed highways on sundays or let you drive only every other day. In the 80’s that was all a thing of the distant past.

EW3
Reply to  Gary Pearse
September 28, 2017 8:52 pm

Don’t forget all the CO2 created by aircraft traveling to/from CA.
And the USN will be disturbed a bit when they can’t use GAS to power their ships and aircraft,
Not to mention the USCG, USA and USMC.
No wonder businesses can’t wait to leave CA.

MarkW
Reply to  EW3
September 29, 2017 6:52 am

Or the cargo ships that dock at one of CA’s ports.

EW3
Reply to  EW3
September 29, 2017 8:48 am

MarkW – Shipping into CA is already dying.
With the widening of the Panama Canal, super size vessels can go to Texas and avoid the high costs of unloading in CA. Ports in Texas have been dredging and widening in anticipation of this already.

John F. Hultquist
September 28, 2017 8:02 pm

If CA starts now to build a dozen or so nuclear stations the power to move an all electric fleet would be coming on-line about the time the number of EVs started to escalate.
Take the amount of gasoline and diesel now used and plan on replacing it. likewise with off-street parking and charging stations. I currently drive an auto that will go 500 miles on its tank of gasoline. EVs may get there in 10 years, about the time the first new nuclear power comes. I doubt there will be a lot of extra power from nearby states because OR and WA are likely to go the same route.
So CA, go for it.
[Full disclosure: a: I visited CA once; b; I won’t be there to see what happens.]

Reply to  John F. Hultquist
September 28, 2017 8:26 pm

EV’s won’t get there in any years. We have mountains like the Sierras where EV’s will get dumped by the side of the road after 10 miles.

September 28, 2017 8:02 pm

His hesitation on IC engines shows somebody in that government has done the math and doesn’t want to talk about it.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Gary Pearse
September 28, 2017 9:28 pm

The’re not stupid, the’re ideologues. We’re beginning to see the different revolutionary factions savaging each other. Always happens to true believers; orthodoxy must be enforced, even at the expense of the overall revolution.

michael hart
September 28, 2017 8:05 pm

“Oh, Lord, make me pure. But not yet”….There have been previous Californian laws about zero-emission vehicles, which also foundered on the rocks of reality.
In any case, the real issue is about traffic congestion, not CO2 emissions.

David Oliver Smith
September 28, 2017 8:18 pm

This is interesting. My final exam in Constitutional Law at Duke University School of Law in 1969 (yes, 47 years ago) had the question posed whether California could constitutionally ban gasoline powered vehicles. I’m pretty sure it would be a burden on interstate commerce and therefore unconstitutional under the US Constitution. In any case it wouldn’t apply to the federal government under the concept of federal preemption of state law.

David Oliver Smith
Reply to  David Oliver Smith
September 28, 2017 8:20 pm

Well, actually 48, but whose counting?

Ridiculous
Reply to  David Oliver Smith
September 28, 2017 9:56 pm

Certainly NOT the lawyers… They are NO COUNT.
Only advanced degree with absolutely NO math requirement !!!

Nigel S
Reply to  David Oliver Smith
September 29, 2017 3:55 am

Apart from working out the fees.

MarkW
Reply to  David Oliver Smith
September 29, 2017 6:53 am

That’s what secretaries are for.

Dave Fair
Reply to  David Oliver Smith
September 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Federal vehicles are not registered in the various States.

Alan D McIntire
Reply to  David Oliver Smith
September 29, 2017 6:47 am

If such a ban DID go into effect, auto sales along the Oregon border, Nevada border, and Arizona border of California would jump drastically.
I saw something similar in British Columbia a little over 20 years ago. There were long lines of BC cars crossing the border into Washington to buy gasoline. It was cheaper to spend time driving across the border to buy gas than it was to pay the exorbitant B.C. gas tax.

September 28, 2017 8:25 pm

Governor stupid at it again.

September 28, 2017 8:26 pm

Living in an upper middle class urban area, I’m fascinated by how much SUV’s outnumber electric cars. The enviros have a big hill to climb to ban the combustion engine, from culture and from flat economics. Show us the way California. I will enjoy watching you try to make your poverty stricken state realize the dreams of the rich greens. At least weather is on your side.

September 28, 2017 8:30 pm

We’ll just all buy stickers that says “EV” and put dummy batteries in our trunks, gas for “backup”.

The Reverend Badger
Reply to  Donald Kasper
September 28, 2017 11:12 pm

My ICE is already carbon NEGATIVE, it must be, I had to decoke the bores 3 years ago. Masses of carbon in it. , all buried it in the garden to be ecologically sound.

September 28, 2017 8:57 pm

California has over 18,000 diesel busses who’s going to pay the $9B to replace them?

Griff
Reply to  Bob Bumala
September 29, 2017 3:10 am

https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/07/31/electric-bus-makers-poised-for-an-l-a-gold-rush/
“L.A.’s transit agency, Metro, has a goal of converting its bus fleet to 100 percent electric by 2030. The agency says it will spend around $100 million a year in contracts.
There are at least 10 companies in Southern California making and selling battery electric buses. The biggest is the Chinese company BYD, which has a factory in Lancaster employing over 500 people, and Ebus in Downey. The Silicon Valley startup Proterra, with a new assembly plant in City of Industry, likens itself to the Tesla of electric buses.”

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
September 29, 2017 6:56 am

In other words, they are going to increase taxes tremendously.
They are going to have to increase the size of the lot where they park those buses over night as they are going to have to buy a lot of extra buses so that they can have enough on the road, even when half of them are in the garage being charged.

paqyfelyc
Reply to  Bob Bumala
September 29, 2017 5:31 am

lol. who ever pay for political lunacy ?
More debts.
BAU

September 28, 2017 8:57 pm

Governor Brown has publicly admitted to ignorance of the scientific method of investigation On several occasions I have offered to tutor him in the scientific method at his office in Sacramento, free of charge. Thus far Brown has spurned my offer. Brown’s thinking about political issues seems to have been molded by his experience as a seminarian for the priesthood of the Catholic church. Rather than being trained in logic, seminarians are trained in the dogma of the Church.

NoBS
Reply to  Terry Oldberg
September 28, 2017 10:49 pm

That’s interesting, I am only now beginning to notice how many of the leading and most feverous alarmists have a religious (and legal) background.

LdB
September 28, 2017 9:05 pm

Are Cali considering banning internal combustion engines or only allowing registering electric cars. Those are very different things one excludes the possibility of alternatives to electric cars. My future fortune might depend on it, I am considering working on a large windup rubber band car for them. Imagine the pitch only human energy required to use and if you run flat in an emergency you just get out and wind it up.

Reply to  LdB
September 29, 2017 2:58 am

You’re just winding us all up, aren’t you.
🙂

Earthling2
September 28, 2017 9:05 pm

A real problem for the longer term future of California , and how this policy might be implemented is Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom. He will be be running for Governor when Moonbeam retires, and it may be that he is the brains behind this foolhardy legislation and is already the second most powerful politician in the state. Which means if he wins and becomes Governor then it will be be business as usual for how many more terms of leftist loony bin politics. Just look at his track record in San Francisco as mayor.
Of course, he is probably already the ‘brains’ behind much of the direction California has taken the last several years, and Californian politics is probably a lot more screwy than most other states or the federal government. This may just be the start of some very nasty leftist agenda, and if this ICE ban idea is implemented, then what else might he and his comrades want to implement. California is a very nice place to visit, but I don’t think I would want to live there. Especially in the future.

JBom
September 28, 2017 9:08 pm

“Banning Engines” whether diesel or gasoline is just a proxy for killing humans, Governor Brown’s most favored group for killing. I would encourage Jerry Babe to just cut loose and declare the beautiful killing of Californians for the purpose of Saving The State Government. Then, Jerry Babe can tell us the income class of those to be killed. Should be great fun! Hahahahahahah

Patrick MJD
September 28, 2017 9:28 pm

I discovered a Tesla dealership here in Sydney, Australia, while out for a walk one lunch time this week. I saw possibly 30, maybe more, Teslas of various models, some charging, most not. I guess it’s not easy where there is only 3 charging points. Quite a nice looking car inside and out and quite large, which surprised me. What was common about all of them was they were not on the roads being driven. Not a single one.

Archie
September 28, 2017 9:38 pm

Here’s a quote from Live Science:
“Large wildfires in the western United States can pump as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in just a few weeks as cars do in those areas in an entire year, a new study suggests. Oct 31, 2007”
Brown is a lunatic.

September 28, 2017 9:54 pm

Hmm. From the way this story reads, CA would only ban the SALES of ICE vehicles. They can’t simply ban ICEs without running into problems with federal laws, and driving (no pun intended) away millions in tourist dollars spent by car-travelling out-of-staters.
Anyone out there who is still relatively young should look into buying a car dealership in Nevada, close to the state line with CA. Also open up a business that sells private p.o. boxes, so car buyers can register their cars in Nevada. Business would be very, very good.
And the real losers would be the CA car dealerships, and the state and local governments (Nevada gets all the sales taxes!).
In all truth, the sane thing to do would be to first pass a law saying all state and local governments, and all who hold elected positions, must only use EVs, to show the public that it can be done. I suspect the experiment would end there (Governor, “What do you mean my car is being charged? I have to go to a fund raiser. Ride in the staff’s Prius? Are you nuts?).

Dave Fair
Reply to  Charles Rotter
September 29, 2017 10:40 am

And, CTM, anyone relocating into CA would face an extra $80K to $100K in per vehicle costs, including CA’s outrageous registration fees and sales taxes.

Reply to  Charles Rotter
September 29, 2017 4:27 pm

Most states require registering any vehicle that is in the state continuously for more than ninety days, or so. Many college kids register their car in the state of their college, not their home state. The location of the car, not the residency of the owner, is (theoretically) the deciding factor. The car’s registration does not need to match your driver’s license registration, either. As long as you had a valid Nevada plate, it would be up to the state of CA to prove that the car was in the state long enough to be registered. A few trips to Las Vegas each year would not only be fun, but thwart any CA efforts to demand registration. CA could try changing the law, but there is really no good solution – people can own cars registered in other states without being a full-time resident, and CA can not change that.
Many people (and I won’t give names) have property in multiple states. We, er, they, register their cars in the state with the most favorable taxes. That’s the way it goes.

MarkW
Reply to  Jtom
September 29, 2017 6:59 am

If they do succeed in making most of the cars in state electric, gas stations are going to start becoming few and far between.

September 28, 2017 10:17 pm

They’re smoking too much CO2 over there.

Patrick MJD
September 28, 2017 10:23 pm
The Reverend Badger
Reply to  Patrick MJD
September 28, 2017 11:13 pm

Will it be fused properly ? Or is that a fail-dangerous mode.

AndyG55
September 28, 2017 11:30 pm

Where’s the San Andreas fault when you most need it !!!

MarkW
Reply to  AndyG55
September 29, 2017 6:59 am

Still building up stress.

drednicolson
Reply to  AndyG55
September 30, 2017 11:16 am

Probably waiting for when Moonbeam Brown’s toy train set is done, just in time to twist it in knots.

Gerry Cooper
September 28, 2017 11:43 pm

We won’t need plug in charging stations per se. There will be a coil under the vehicle and everywhere you park will have similar embedded coils – doesn’t matter where you park the batteries will be charging – problem solved. (except possibly the cost and weight of putting copper coils everywhere but a minor detail)