California Lowers Vehicle Emissions Goals

Regulators Gut Rules Meant To Get Zero-Emissions Cars On The Road, Other States Affected

(AP)  California air regulators have gutted rules seeking to place tens of thousands of zero-emission vehicles on the road, instead ordering automakers to produce a fleet of cleaner-burning hybrids.

Thursday's decision is expected to affect 12 other U.S. states that had adopted California's target for zero-emission vehicles, defined as those powered solely by batteries or hydrogen fuel cells.

The California Air Resources Board voted to lower by 70 percent the number of those vehicles that automakers must sell here and in the states that intended to follow California's get-tough rules for vehicle emissions.

Instead, 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."

In essence, the air board took two steps Thursday: It cut the number of zero-emission vehicles it wants on the road by 2014, while at the same time offering an alternative - the gas-electric hybrids.

Environmentalists and health advocates criticized the lowering of the zero-emission goal for vehicles. They said the threats posed by global warming, combined with rising gasoline prices, lend urgency to greatly reducing vehicle emissions.

"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. "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.

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 nationwide by 2014 at 7,500, a 70 percent reduction from the 2003 target.

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.

Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Utah are considering it, according to the Air Resources Board.

[mac4440]

Zero emmissions? Isn''t most of the electricity, that is required to recharge an electric car, generated by fossil fuels?

[squidly8]

It is feel good environmentalism. My car itself isnt polluting but I dont care if the pollution was just generated someplace else. Not my problem - TAX THEM, THOSE POLLUTING BA$TARDS!

The same people buy their carbon credits from Al Gore. I will feel better by paying someone else, somewhere in the world, to plant a tree which in all likelihood will never be planted. Can you see AG sitting in his private jet, in the deep leather chair, stogey in one hand, glass of whiskey in the other laughing at his latest carbon credit victim while his carbon spewing jet whisks him to his next screening of his lie filled movie.

[stn_sage]

Presumably, the original standards were enacted by the state legislature at the recommendation of various environmental groups and/or consultation.
It doesn''t do much good to come up with these standards if a state board then jettisons or overrules the new standards greatly lessening them!
California needs to get these ''authorities'' together in the same room and then on the ''same page''!

[iknowbest-2009]

Lib Land sets a new high water mark. People''s Democratic Republic of California - land of freedom as long as you do what you''re told.

[missingamerica]

...said Sara Rudy, an emissions regulatory manager at Ford. "It is important at this stage to be nimble."

Truly a shame our automakers didn''t adopt that philosophy of nimbleness and first to market 30 years ago during the first oil crisis - they''d still be the kingpins of the world, Cheney wouldn''t have any power at all, and Iraq would never have happened.

[newsterl]

Theres no such thing as zero emissions, electric cars are NOT a free ride! All this does is transfer the pollution from the tailpipe to the power plant smokestack. Charging batteries is extremely inefficient due to the conversion losses, you have to convert the A/C to D/C and down to low volts and then the process itself produces heat which is waste.

Charging lead-acid type batteries is around a 40%
to 60% efficiency, meaning the rest is wasted in the process.
When california doesnt have enough power as it IS, and has rolling brownouts and all this during the summers when A/C loads overtax the grid, what do these idiots think adding a million BATTERY CHARGERS will do?
The power to bulk charge high capacity batteries has to come from somewhere, if not your gasoline engine then your coal, gas or nuke power plant.

[estabwary]

Looks like a cop-out to me.

[pollroller1]

What would be cool would be to have electric outlets at the parking spaces at the shopping malls. You could place coins in a slot or use your credit card to charge your car while shopping.

[pollroller1]

What would be cool would be to have electric outlets at the parking spaces at the shopping malls. You could place coins in a slot or use your credit card to charge your car while shopping.

[nothappyatall]

Posted by newsterl
--------------------
Today''''s hybrids use NiMH batteries and newer electric cars will probably begin using Li batteries - lead-acid is old technology.

And battery chargers use switching AC/DC and DC/DC converters which are highly efficient. The net result is an overall decrease in energy usage.

Posted by avoice"

That is true, though keep in mind the batteries have to be produced- that takes fossil fuel, and all batteries have a limited life span. As these are made with nickel, you can bet that the price of nickel will skyrocket in response to any big increase in demand. Nickel also takes a LOT of heat to refine and melt or recycle.
The weak part of electric cars has always been the batteries and their limitations, but one also has to consider all the other drains a car would use- wipers, heater, defroster, air conditioner, antilock brakes, radio, lights etc etc.
People want a travelling hotel room on wheels with everything in it but the wet bar. Gone are the VW bug or Yugo days of stripped down cars with no A/C no power steering, power brakes and only an AM radio.

Working people and older people cant afford a $50,000 basic car, especially one that starts falling apart before its even paid off!
The other issue is, no matter how efficient chaging becomes, the electric grids nation-wide are barely able to keep up with the CURRENT demands, especially during the summer heat waves, so again, its all just substituting tail pipe emissions for power plant pollution.

[newsterl]

A number of years ago- maybe 1985 there was an article in the paper I read, it was a new engine developed by a small company in Drain Oregon based on a deuterium pellet, and it used a prism. I dont remember much about it''s details but they had the engine prototype and published the specs, it WAS zero emissions. The deuterium pellet was thought would last 100,000 miles.
The catch was deuterium is radioactive, and that was the last I heard about it... quietly bought out by Gulf or Ford maybe and shelved?

[libsrweak]

there is a thing we can do to speed this thing up...stop buying thier cars

[newsterl]

there is a thing we can do to speed this thing up...stop buying thier cars

Posted by libsrweak"

Buy USED and $ave as well as force the automakers to change, they only make what people BUY.

[jamestowncbs]

Hi Katie, I miss you on the Broadcasts
How come you are not on the Evening News Last few days
Happy Easter CBS News, Radio, Entertainment
all links www.jamestowncalif.com