By Steve Goreham
Originally published in Master Resource.
Earlier this year, California passed regulations that would turn the trucking industry upside down. New mandates for zero emissions trucks would disrupt the industry, raise shipping costs, and put trucking companies out of business. A group including 19 states and several trucking organizations recently filed suit to block the California regulation.
California’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) Regulation goes into effect on January 1, 2024. The ACF requires that truck operators buy only Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) trucks for medium-duty and heavy-duty trucking operations as early as January 2024. The ACF also requires that trucking companies transition their fleets to 100 percent ZEV trucks by 2035 to 2042, depending upon class of truck.
On November 3, 19 state attorneys general and several trucking organizations filed a brief in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to block ACF. The suit argues that the ACF regulation is unconstitutional and highlights the negative consequences of forced electrification of the heavy truck fleet.
ZEV trucks are plug-in battery electric trucks and hydrogen fuel-cell trucks. The goal of ACF is to remove all trucks with internal combustion engines from California roads by as early as 2035.
According to the regulation, new trucks for drayage, high priority truck fleets, and public fleets must be ZEV trucks as of January. Drayage trucks operate at California ports or transport containerized freight to and from intermodal rail yards. High-priority fleets belong to private companies with more than 50 trucks or over $50 million in annual revenue. Public fleets are owned by state and local governments.
For practical purposes, ACF will require half of all new heavy-duty truck sales to be electric trucks, instead of diesel trucks. Few new trucks would be hydrogen fuel-cell trucks, which are not competitive at this time.
Under the Clean Air Act of 1967, Congress preempted states from adopting emissions standards for motor vehicles. But in Section 209 of the Act, California was permitted to seek a waiver from this preemption. In March of 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency granted a waiver to allow California to establish the ACF emissions standard for heavy trucks. If this waiver stands, the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation may allow California to try to force a national transition to electric trucks.
The suit filed against Advanced Clean Fleets regulation argues that the EPA should not have granted the waiver. It argues that the ACF crosses state lines, and that California should not be allowed to regulate trucking for the nation.
Eight other states, Colorado, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, have already adopted California’s ACF rules. Another six states are expected to join. But can electric trucks do the job?
Electric trucks suffer major disadvantages when compared to diesel trucks. Diesel trucks can travel about 1200 miles after filling the tank in 15 minutes. The range of electric trucks is about 150-330 miles and recharging may take hours, even on a high-speed charger.
Electric truck cabs cost two to three times as much as diesel cabs, an incremental cost of as much as $300,000 per truck. Electric cabs also weigh about 10,000 pounds more than comparable diesel versions. This can reduce net freight carried by as much as 20 percent.
Few heavy truck charging stations exist, and the power requirements are huge. The new heavy-duty truck charging station in South El Monte, California can charge up to 32 trucks in about 90 minutes. The South El Monte site was funded through the Joint Electric Truck Scaling Initiative, funded by California state and local agencies. But six megawatts of electricity will be needed to simultaneously charge these trucks, more than the power consumed by 200,000 homes or used in a small California city, such as San Bernardino or Huntington Beach.
But the South El Monte site is one of very few heavy truck charging sites. The California Energy Commission estimates that 157,000 medium- and heavy-duty chargers will be required by 2030. If these are built, the peak electricity draw could be as much as an additional 5,000 cities the size of San Bernardino. It’s very unlikely that the California grid could deliver this much power. Heavy duty charging sites would also need to be built all over the nation.
The California Air Resources Board, which established the ACF, claims that the regulation is needed to “protect the public health and welfare of Californians.” But ACF benefits to Californians will be negligible. Particulate air pollution in California has been reduced to such low levels that a single large wildfire exhausts more particulate pollution in a few days than all California vehicles exhaust in an entire year. China emits more greenhouse gases in a day than California trucks emit in a year.
California’s Advanced Clean Fleets regulation, if adopted, will be a disaster for trucking and consumers. The jump in truck costs will put small truckers out of business. Freight delivery times will increase because of long charging times. Longer delivery times and smaller loads will require 20 to 50 percent more trucks to move the same amount of freight.
In 2022, trucks moved 73 percent of US domestic freight. Forced adoption of electric trucks will boost the cost of food, medicines, clothing, and materials for consumers and businesses, put upward pressure on inflation, and provide negligible pollution control benefits. The US Court of Appeals and other states should reject California’s ACF regulation.
Steve Goreham is a speaker on energy, the environment, and public policy and the author of the new bestselling book Green Breakdown: The Coming Renewable Energy Failure.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I say let California proceed with their rules and the trucking industry responds by boycotting California. It would not take long for ship cargo to move to other ports and for delivery of anything to California just drop right off, Or there might be a niche market of picking up cargo from the ports and then transporting it to hubs built just outside of the state line (using net zero trucks) and transferring cargo to diesel trucks for delivery (and vice versa) – it would be very expensive for California, but since the residents seem to like to pay huge bills for everyday items, let them.
Further thought – if I was a trucking company I would spend just enough to buy a small fleet of net zero trucks to facilitate movement of goods from California to hubs outside of the state line (given the range of most EVs I suspect it would take one charge for any EV truck to get from the port of LA to the state line – again it would be expensive. It could be a win, win.
Or am I missing something?
Another thought: this is a racist regulation because diesel trucks from Mexicali would also have to be banned, unless there is a loophole allowing Mexican trucks to cross the border. I can see a bootleg operation setting in where all interstate goods would first go south from Arizona to Mexico, then north into California. California would have to send all out-of-state shipments to Mexico.
I can see all shipping through the ports of LA and Long Beach ceasing.
Makes sense to me!
Have you ever driven from Long Beach (At sea level) up I15 through Cajon pass to the HIGH desert of Barstow (at 2200 ft)? About 130 miles, but uphill for a lot of it. AND some ups then downs.
Long Beach to Jean Nevada is 251 miles total. That would be where you could switch to reasonable tractors.
Yep, you are missing something.
Now going back DOWN the pass, they may be able to do it without a recharge with regenerative breaking BUT would Cajon pass grade burn up the batteries by overcharging them? Would the motors overheat when acting as generators? Would they need to insure that the batteries were sufficiently discharged before they start down? When trains get to a grade they add locomotives to carry the weight up. You can’t do that with trucks. Would they need to use different tractors for long steep grades?
Everything just gets more complicated.
Diesel-electric locomotives have what they call dynamic brakes, which dump power generated by the motors going downhill into huge resistors, with fans to push the heat out.
If 8 states have already done it, I’m not seeing much hope for the 19 states getting relief. Or for sane people wanting effectiveness and efficiency.. This should, at a minimum, double the cost of goods.while making them hard to come by.
Why not just let the idiocy run its course? Per next january suddenly the trucking fleet required to supply LA and SF will not be available anymore. Would be interesting to watch what happens next.
Either rational thought and common sense reverse this nonsense or several US states continue on the road to economic and social collapse, just as intended by America’s enemies and the entrenched globalist elites that are making all the undemocratic rules.
Part of me wants to see this law enacted and enforced – at least for some period of time. I suspect that if it is enforced, it will cause a lot of pain. If that pain was felt only by those promoting this nonsense, I would frankly be all for it. Unfortunately, it will be felt by all, but may be one way to get people to wake up and pay attention.
Question – can California regulate international trade? If not, how can they stop diesel trucks coming south from Canada, and there’s a lot of them?
Hybrids still outselling BEVs (largely Tesla but BYD challenging) in Oz and that spells Toyota with long waits-
Hybrids, not electric cars, are the next big thing according to Toyota Australia – Car News | CarsGuide
The California Air Resources Board is driven to “protect the public health and welfare of Californians” at any cost !
Imagine the emission reductions in California that CARB could implement, if CARB closed all 9 international airports in the State !!!!