Lis Sines of Hermosa Beach loves watching her electric meter run backward.When that happens, she knows that the 20 solar panels on her roof are producing more power than she needs to run her 3,800-square-foot home. The excess electricity flows to the electric company's grid, and she gets its full retail value credited to her utility bill.
Sines' electric bill has plunged since she and her husband, William, installed a photovoltaic system on their roof three months ago. In June the bill totaled just $1.26, compared to about $100 a year earlier.But the Sineses' subsidy may not be available to future solar-power users for long.The state's $3.3-billion solar subsidy program has become so popular that the state utilities are approaching the legal limit for how much power they can buy from customers.
The limit could be reached in parts of northern and central California served by Pacific Gas & Electric Co. by the end of this year. The state's other two investor-owned utilities, Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co., are proceeding somewhat more slowly. Eager to keep the program growing, the solar industry is pushing for approval of legislation in Sacramento that would quadruple the amount allowed. The state's for-profit utilities oppose the higher cap in the bill AB 560 by Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley).A key Senate utilities committee vote on the measure is expected this week. Currently, utilities are limited by state law from buying from its customers more than 2.5% of a utility's maximum generating capacity. Skinner's bill would lift the cap to 10%. All three companies oppose Skinner's bill. They do not want lawmakers to raise the limit until next year at the earliest, after the California Public Utilities Commission tallies up the program's costs and benefits.Utilities say they strongly support solar power but want more information about whether it's fair to further increase financial incentives for solar-panel ownership. Such incentives, they point out, would come at the expense of most of the utilities' other customers, who don't want or can't afford to invest in the costly panels."We want to make sure there isn't an unfair level of cost-shifting," said Jennifer Briscoe, a spokeswoman for San Diego Gas & Electric.Fairness issues were also raised in a report on Skinner's bill by the staff of the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee, which will review the bill this week. The report pointed out that California solar-panel owners already benefit from a variety of subsidies approved in recent years -- even without this "net metering" program, which allows people to sell power to the utilities.Solar power users get a state subsidy of about 20% of the purchase and installation cost and a federal income tax credit of 30%. Adding more incentives could be going too far, the committee staff analysis suggested. The staff report also takes issue with the amount of credit that solar users get when they sell power to the utilities. "By compensating the solar or wind customer at the full retail rate" for energy sold to the grid, "the utility is using ratepayer funds to pay the solar or wind customer at a rate well above the value of the generated power, which is about one-third of the total cost of a typical residential customer's bill," it said. The other two-thirds of the bill covers utilities' fixed expenses for building power plants and transmission lines, buying electricity from independent generators and meeting a variety of state mandates, including the cost of subsidizing low-income customers and solar-power system owners.Supporters of solar-power systems say the net metering program and other subsidies are essential. And many would like to see no caps at all. "Without net metering we're not going to see a lot more people" buy expensive solar systems, said Adam Browning, executive director of the Vote Solar Initiative, a San Francisco advocacy group. "If we hit the net metering cap, the California solar industry grinds to a halt."Caps are an impediment to fully developing solar power's potential and its ability to provide clean energy that can be tapped in urban areas, where it is most needed, during peak demand on hot summer afternoons, Browning said. Eighteen states allow net metering without any caps, he noted.The appeal of lower electric bills appears to be persuading more people to go solar. Legislation, approved in 2007 and known as the Million Solar Roofs program, has spurred the production of solar-generated electricity to rise 78%. That's equivalent to the power generated by a modern power plant, the Public Utilities Commission reported last week. Consumer demand continues to grow despite the recession. Applications for state subsidies hit a record high in May, the commission said.The commission's first solar program assessment recommends raising the net metering cap "to prevent a stall in the solar market," and the commission endorses the Skinner bill. One solar booster is Harry Pope, a retired Edison executive who bought a large system for his Long Beach home after the energy crisis of 2000-01. He said he needs the state's incentives to make his investment pay off."I probably put in $30,000 and got half back. Maybe over 15 years I might achieve total payback," he said. Without people like him, Pope said, the state will have to build more power plants. "I'm preventing the utilities from having to build that next-generation power plant . . . the most expensive power plant you ever saw."
Monday, July 6, 2009
Eni Receives Environment Order For Norway Goliat Field
Eni's SpA (E) Norwegian arm has received a notification from the country's Petroleum Safety Authority, or Ptil, relating to collection of environmental data in the area around the Goliat oil-field, which is currently under development.
Goliat field in Norway's Barents Sea is located in an area with poor weather and oceanographic forecasting, Ptil said. "There is a need to improve the quality of the basic data used for weather forecasting in the area," it added.
It has unique meteorological phenomena where some low pressure fronts are created in the air between the ice-covered sea and warmer open sea, "which can create winds which can be compared to cyclones in warmer climates", Ptil said.
Ptil's concerns are centered on the poor observation network in the area, which could create challenges in relation to planning and execution operations of the Goliat project, it said. Eni doesn't currently include collection and real-time reporting of the relevant data in its plan for development and operation of Goliat, Ptil noted, also giving recommendations for improvement.
Eni was not immediately available to comment on the notification.
Goliat is expected to start producing oil and some gas in 2013.
Goliat field in Norway's Barents Sea is located in an area with poor weather and oceanographic forecasting, Ptil said. "There is a need to improve the quality of the basic data used for weather forecasting in the area," it added.
It has unique meteorological phenomena where some low pressure fronts are created in the air between the ice-covered sea and warmer open sea, "which can create winds which can be compared to cyclones in warmer climates", Ptil said.
Ptil's concerns are centered on the poor observation network in the area, which could create challenges in relation to planning and execution operations of the Goliat project, it said. Eni doesn't currently include collection and real-time reporting of the relevant data in its plan for development and operation of Goliat, Ptil noted, also giving recommendations for improvement.
Eni was not immediately available to comment on the notification.
Goliat is expected to start producing oil and some gas in 2013.
German Environment Minister Wants Old Nuclear Plants to Close
German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel wants to amend the country’s nuclear energy phase-out, speeding up closure of old plants after an automatic shutdown at Vattenfall AB’s Kruemmel reactor near Hamburg on July 4.
Gabriel said the remaining operational lifespan of older reactors could be transferred to newer plants in an amendment, extending their life. Speaking on German ARD television today, Gabriel also called for the creation of a federal overseer to close gaps caused by state monitoring of the industry.
“We must pull these older nuclear plants from the grid. That means tightening up the legislation we have,” said Gabriel, a Social Democrat. Gabriel’s SPD in coalition with the Green Party passed legislation in 2002 that will phase out nuclear power by about 2021. Some 17 plants are still in operation.
The SPD’s current coalition partners, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats, seek an extension of nuclear power beyond 2021. Vattenfall said in an e-mailed statement that the plant east of Hamburg automatically shut down at noon the same day, following a disruption in a transformer
Gabriel said the remaining operational lifespan of older reactors could be transferred to newer plants in an amendment, extending their life. Speaking on German ARD television today, Gabriel also called for the creation of a federal overseer to close gaps caused by state monitoring of the industry.
“We must pull these older nuclear plants from the grid. That means tightening up the legislation we have,” said Gabriel, a Social Democrat. Gabriel’s SPD in coalition with the Green Party passed legislation in 2002 that will phase out nuclear power by about 2021. Some 17 plants are still in operation.
The SPD’s current coalition partners, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats, seek an extension of nuclear power beyond 2021. Vattenfall said in an e-mailed statement that the plant east of Hamburg automatically shut down at noon the same day, following a disruption in a transformer
Sunday, July 5, 2009
The Stimulus Package and Green Jobs
If it’s a U.S. industry that has the potential to be cleaner and greener, chances are the Obama administration has already set aside some stimulus money for it. In February 2009, the new president signed the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law. Besides creating jobs, the bill promises to spur American companies to greener heights through investments totaling over $75 billion. According to Environment America, a federation of state-based environmental advocacy groups, the stimulus package includes $32.8 billion for clean energy projects, $26.86 billion for energy efficiency initiatives and $18.95 billion for green transportation. Some of the key green features of the bill include accelerating the deployment of “smart grid” technology (systems of routing power in ways that optimize energy-efficiency), providing energy efficiency funds for schools, offering support for governors and mayors to beef up energy efficiency in private homes and public buildings, and establishing a new loan guarantee program to help renewable energy producers survive in down economic times. With the private capital and credit so tight due to the recession, this influx of federal support is vital to help the still fledgling green energy and transportation sectors stay afloat. And most economists agree that it makes good sense to steer away from finite foreign oil toward homegrown renewable energy. Obama has promised the creation of some 500,000 jobs in the nation’s burgeoning clean energy sector alone. “The central facts here are irrefutable: Spending the same amount of money on building a clean energy economy will create three times more jobs within the U.S. than would spending on our existing fossil fuel infrastructure,” writes University of Massachusetts economist Robert Pollin in The Nation. “The transformation to a clean energy economy can therefore serve as a major long-term engine of job creation.” Wind turbine engineers, insulation installers, recycling sorters and photovoltaic cell salespeople—along with the businesspersons behind them—can all look forward to bright and potentially lucrative futures. This view is shared by the Solar Energy Industries Association, which predicts that the stimulus will help create some 119,000 jobs in the American solar sector alone before the end of 2010. Employers from solar cell manufacturers to green building materials retailers to wind farm maintenance firms to recycling haulers to energy auditors will likewise be looking to swell their ranks of employees with relevant skills. The federal government itself is also in on the recovery effort beyond doling out the money. According to the official Recovery Act website, the General Services Administration’s Public Building Service will invest $5.55 billion in federal building projects, “including $4.5 billion to transform federal facilities into exemplary high-performance green buildings, $750 million to renovate and construct new federal offices and courthouses, and $300 million to construct and renovate border stations.” About $1 billion worth of projects will be undertaken—a boon for everyone in the building industry, including construction workers, electricians, plumbers, air conditioning mechanics, carpenters, architects and engineers.
A green car nation
'Cash for Clunkers" won't single-handedly save the environment, rescue the beleaguered auto industry, or spare consumers from financial distress.
But the new $1 billion federal program promises a little help in all three areas, a bit of political symbiosis that explains why the plan motored through Congress three weeks ago on the back of an Iraq war-funding bill.
Once it gets rolling later this month, the program will offer incentives of $3,500 or $4,500 to those who buy or lease a more energy-efficient new vehicle. The goal is to get people to trade in a qualifying gas-guzzler - car, SUV, or light truck - for a comparable vehicle that gets substantially more miles per gallon.
The program's narrow focus has drawn criticism. Still, lawmakers are hopeful that it will make a small dent in energy use and pollution, as well as jump-start depressed auto sales. Without it, automakers are on pace to sell just 10 million new vehicles in the United States this year - down dramatically from 16 million in 2007 and 13 million in 2008, according to Edmunds.com, which compiles data on the industry.
One limitation is the window of opportunity. Although the rebates theoretically became available Wednesday, they are unlikely to spur sales until final procedures are announced, probably around July 24. Until then, car dealers could be on the hook if they credit buyers with incentives and are unable to collect from the government.
At the other end, the program expires Nov. 1 - or whenever the money runs out. Given that its backers initially proposed spending $4 billion to promote the purchase of a million vehicles, and that a similar program boosted Germany's car sales 40 percent in May, the spigot could run dry before November.
Of course, Congress might relent and extend the program. And meanwhile, the funding cap may help by pushing fence-sitters to act. Area dealers say Cash for Clunkers already has captured buyers' attention and may even be dampening sales as vehicle-shoppers await the help.
"We're having customers come in and ask about it every day, or say that they're waiting for it every day," said Ross Choate, managing partner for the John Kennedy Ford, Mazda, and Subaru dealerships in Philadelphia's suburbs.
After a relatively good May and early June, Choate said, sales slowed as Cash for Clunkers drew headlines.
"I do think it's holding people up," he said.
Here are answers to some key questions about the program, formally called the Car Allowance Rebate System:
Which cars qualify? To be eligible for the incentive, a buyer must bring in an operable car that is less than 25 years old and that gets a combined EPA city-highway average of 18 m.p.g. or less. The buyer must have owned and insured the car for the last year - you cannot buy a clunker just to make the trade.
Economically speaking, the car also must be suitable for scrapping - if it is valued at more than $4,500, it may be worth more as an ordinary trade-in, since any car turned in under the program must be junked.
Kelley Blue Book has a online calculator at http://www.kbb.com/kbb/cash-for-clunkers/default.aspx.
What do I do next? To get any incentive, you must buy a new vehicle that averages at least 22 m.p.g., and also at least 4 m.p.g. more than the "clunker." To get the larger $4,500 incentive, the new car must beat the old one by 10 m.p.g.
One other requirement: The new vehicle's manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) cannot exceed $45,000.
Some new cars obviously qualify - think Toyota Prius, Mini Cooper, or Pontiac Vibe. So do most smaller cars.
But, depending on your current vehicle, so may some midsize or larger sedans, and plenty of non-hybrids, such as Toyota Camrys, Hyundai Sonatas, and four-cylinder versions of the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan. To check models' mileage, go to www.fueleconomy.gov.
Can I junk an SUV or minivan? Yes, and you may be able to use the incentive for a new one, too, which is one of the law's provisions that angers some critics. New SUVs and other vehicles classified as "light-duty trucks" under the law are eligible if they get at least 18 m.p.g.
For the $3,500 incentive, the new light truck must get at least 2 m.p.g. more than the old one. For $4,500, it must get at least 5 m.p.g. more.
Certain larger trucks weighing up to five tons also may qualify. For more information on eligibility and answers to other questions, go to www.cars.gov.
Will this truly help the environment? Yes, but only at the margin.
House backers estimate average savings per vehicle of 250 gallons a year - plausible if you consider that a car averaging 15 m.p.g. needs 1,000 gallons of gas to travel 15,000 miles a year, compared with 600 gallons for a car that gets 25 m.p.g.
At that rate, replacing 250,000 gas-guzzlers should yield an annual savings of 62 million gallons, assuming drivers will not drive more in more efficient vehicles, a premise some critics contest.
But if it is a step in the right direction, it is a small one. According to the Energy Information Administration, U.S. motorists consume 390 million gallons of gasoline each day.
But the new $1 billion federal program promises a little help in all three areas, a bit of political symbiosis that explains why the plan motored through Congress three weeks ago on the back of an Iraq war-funding bill.
Once it gets rolling later this month, the program will offer incentives of $3,500 or $4,500 to those who buy or lease a more energy-efficient new vehicle. The goal is to get people to trade in a qualifying gas-guzzler - car, SUV, or light truck - for a comparable vehicle that gets substantially more miles per gallon.
The program's narrow focus has drawn criticism. Still, lawmakers are hopeful that it will make a small dent in energy use and pollution, as well as jump-start depressed auto sales. Without it, automakers are on pace to sell just 10 million new vehicles in the United States this year - down dramatically from 16 million in 2007 and 13 million in 2008, according to Edmunds.com, which compiles data on the industry.
One limitation is the window of opportunity. Although the rebates theoretically became available Wednesday, they are unlikely to spur sales until final procedures are announced, probably around July 24. Until then, car dealers could be on the hook if they credit buyers with incentives and are unable to collect from the government.
At the other end, the program expires Nov. 1 - or whenever the money runs out. Given that its backers initially proposed spending $4 billion to promote the purchase of a million vehicles, and that a similar program boosted Germany's car sales 40 percent in May, the spigot could run dry before November.
Of course, Congress might relent and extend the program. And meanwhile, the funding cap may help by pushing fence-sitters to act. Area dealers say Cash for Clunkers already has captured buyers' attention and may even be dampening sales as vehicle-shoppers await the help.
"We're having customers come in and ask about it every day, or say that they're waiting for it every day," said Ross Choate, managing partner for the John Kennedy Ford, Mazda, and Subaru dealerships in Philadelphia's suburbs.
After a relatively good May and early June, Choate said, sales slowed as Cash for Clunkers drew headlines.
"I do think it's holding people up," he said.
Here are answers to some key questions about the program, formally called the Car Allowance Rebate System:
Which cars qualify? To be eligible for the incentive, a buyer must bring in an operable car that is less than 25 years old and that gets a combined EPA city-highway average of 18 m.p.g. or less. The buyer must have owned and insured the car for the last year - you cannot buy a clunker just to make the trade.
Economically speaking, the car also must be suitable for scrapping - if it is valued at more than $4,500, it may be worth more as an ordinary trade-in, since any car turned in under the program must be junked.
Kelley Blue Book has a online calculator at http://www.kbb.com/kbb/cash-for-clunkers/default.aspx.
What do I do next? To get any incentive, you must buy a new vehicle that averages at least 22 m.p.g., and also at least 4 m.p.g. more than the "clunker." To get the larger $4,500 incentive, the new car must beat the old one by 10 m.p.g.
One other requirement: The new vehicle's manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) cannot exceed $45,000.
Some new cars obviously qualify - think Toyota Prius, Mini Cooper, or Pontiac Vibe. So do most smaller cars.
But, depending on your current vehicle, so may some midsize or larger sedans, and plenty of non-hybrids, such as Toyota Camrys, Hyundai Sonatas, and four-cylinder versions of the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan. To check models' mileage, go to www.fueleconomy.gov.
Can I junk an SUV or minivan? Yes, and you may be able to use the incentive for a new one, too, which is one of the law's provisions that angers some critics. New SUVs and other vehicles classified as "light-duty trucks" under the law are eligible if they get at least 18 m.p.g.
For the $3,500 incentive, the new light truck must get at least 2 m.p.g. more than the old one. For $4,500, it must get at least 5 m.p.g. more.
Certain larger trucks weighing up to five tons also may qualify. For more information on eligibility and answers to other questions, go to www.cars.gov.
Will this truly help the environment? Yes, but only at the margin.
House backers estimate average savings per vehicle of 250 gallons a year - plausible if you consider that a car averaging 15 m.p.g. needs 1,000 gallons of gas to travel 15,000 miles a year, compared with 600 gallons for a car that gets 25 m.p.g.
At that rate, replacing 250,000 gas-guzzlers should yield an annual savings of 62 million gallons, assuming drivers will not drive more in more efficient vehicles, a premise some critics contest.
But if it is a step in the right direction, it is a small one. According to the Energy Information Administration, U.S. motorists consume 390 million gallons of gasoline each day.
The Next Generation of Fireworks May All Be Green
Despite being a centerpiece of celebrations the world over, fireworks displays often release toxic chemicals into the environment, from heavy metals to perchlorate.tweetmeme_url = 'here’; digg_url = here’; An article published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology in 2009 found that, following a fireworks display, the amount of perchlorate in nearby bodies of water could increase by anywhere from 24 to 1,068 times the amount present before the fireworks, and that it takes 20 to 80 days for the chemical levels to subside. Fireworks: More dangerous than they look. Photo CC-licensed by mugley. In an article published in the Earth Island Journal in 2000, author Gar Smith writes:
In addition to the charges of blackpowder (containing carcinogenic sulfur-coal compounds) that send skyrockets airborne and blast them into patterns of glowing sparks, fireworks contain a number of toxic metals that produce a range of dazzling colors. Strontium produces blazing reds, copper compounds burn blue, magnesium, titanium and aluminum create brilliant white sparks. Sodium chloride produces orange-yellow fire, boric acid burns green, potassium and rubidium compounds produce purples and burning lithium glows red. Glittering greens are produced by radioactive barium.During the Stockholm Water Festival in 1996, air pollutant levels were measured before and after the fireworks display. Levels of airborne arsenic were found to be twice normal, while levels of mercury, cadmium, lead, copper, zinc and chromium were as high as 500 times above normal. But researchers are developing a new generation of fireworks that can shine just as brightly without having the same impact on the environment or human health. In an article in Chemical & Engineering News, a publication of the American Chemical Society, Bethany Halford says these nitrogen-rich formulas also use fewer color-producing chemicals, dramatically cutting down on the amount of heavy metals used and lowering their potentially toxic effects.And new firework formulas can replace perchlorate -- which has been shown to pollute nearby bodies of water [PDF] -- with nitrocellulose or other nitrogen-rich materials, allowing them to produce less smoke and burn cleaner than perchlorate-based fireworks.Although some big events have put them to use, higher cost for lower impacts remains a barrier for wider adoption of these greener fireworks, according to the article.
In addition to the charges of blackpowder (containing carcinogenic sulfur-coal compounds) that send skyrockets airborne and blast them into patterns of glowing sparks, fireworks contain a number of toxic metals that produce a range of dazzling colors. Strontium produces blazing reds, copper compounds burn blue, magnesium, titanium and aluminum create brilliant white sparks. Sodium chloride produces orange-yellow fire, boric acid burns green, potassium and rubidium compounds produce purples and burning lithium glows red. Glittering greens are produced by radioactive barium.During the Stockholm Water Festival in 1996, air pollutant levels were measured before and after the fireworks display. Levels of airborne arsenic were found to be twice normal, while levels of mercury, cadmium, lead, copper, zinc and chromium were as high as 500 times above normal. But researchers are developing a new generation of fireworks that can shine just as brightly without having the same impact on the environment or human health. In an article in Chemical & Engineering News, a publication of the American Chemical Society, Bethany Halford says these nitrogen-rich formulas also use fewer color-producing chemicals, dramatically cutting down on the amount of heavy metals used and lowering their potentially toxic effects.And new firework formulas can replace perchlorate -- which has been shown to pollute nearby bodies of water [PDF] -- with nitrocellulose or other nitrogen-rich materials, allowing them to produce less smoke and burn cleaner than perchlorate-based fireworks.Although some big events have put them to use, higher cost for lower impacts remains a barrier for wider adoption of these greener fireworks, according to the article.
E.P.A. Grants California the Right to Enforce Emissions
The Environmental Protection Agency said Tuesday that it had granted California the right to enforce its first-in-the-nation standards controlling greenhouse-gas emissions from cars and light trucks. The move reverses a 2008 ruling by the Bush administration and effectively ends a seesaw political battle between automakers and environmental regulators that began in Sacramento eight years ago when the California Legislature first took up the issue.
Lisa P. Jackson, the E.P.A. administrator, said in an interview that she had reversed the ruling by her predecessor, Stephen L. Johnson, because the traditional presumption had been that California, with its history of air pollution, had grounds to establish rules that exceed federal requirements.
“The burden is on those that object,” Ms. Jackson said.
The immediate impact of the decision, which had been widely anticipated, is more symbolic than practical. The 2009 fleet of new vehicles is already in compliance with the California rules and the 2010 fleet is also expected to meet the requirements, said Tom Cackette, deputy director of California’s Air Resources Board.
“Auto manufacturers have been making changes to vehicles both because they anticipated they might have to meet California standards and because there was a general interest in public in buying more efficient cars,” Mr. Cackette said.
Nationally, about one-third of the greenhouse-gas emissions contributing to climate change come from the transportation sector, most of it from cars and light trucks.
The rules in California will cut emissions from new vehicles by 14 percent from 2008 levels in 2011. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia have also adopted the California rules in an effort to combat climate change.
California’s emissions rules are also expected to be congruent with new federal fuel economy standards announced in May by the Obama administration. Both standards envision that emissions will be cut by 30 percent in 2016.
The aligning of California’s rules and the federal mileage standards is intended to ensure that automakers comply with a single standard. This “moves us toward a policy that ensures that consumers in all 50 states have access to highly fuel-efficient vehicles at an affordable price,” said Dave McCurdy, president and chief executive of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.
Carmakers have accepted the fuel economy and emission standards that they long opposed, at a time when their industry is in crisis and accepting billions of dollars in federal money.
In the interview, Ms. Jackson of the E.P.A. praised Fran Pavley, the state senator from California who originally crafted the early blueprint for the state standards in 2001.
Ms. Pavley was jubilant Tuesday.
“It took eight years, multiple federal courts, the U.S. Supreme Court, two presidents, two governors and a partridge in a pear tree,” she said in an interview. “What a difference that last presidential election made.”
Lisa P. Jackson, the E.P.A. administrator, said in an interview that she had reversed the ruling by her predecessor, Stephen L. Johnson, because the traditional presumption had been that California, with its history of air pollution, had grounds to establish rules that exceed federal requirements.
“The burden is on those that object,” Ms. Jackson said.
The immediate impact of the decision, which had been widely anticipated, is more symbolic than practical. The 2009 fleet of new vehicles is already in compliance with the California rules and the 2010 fleet is also expected to meet the requirements, said Tom Cackette, deputy director of California’s Air Resources Board.
“Auto manufacturers have been making changes to vehicles both because they anticipated they might have to meet California standards and because there was a general interest in public in buying more efficient cars,” Mr. Cackette said.
Nationally, about one-third of the greenhouse-gas emissions contributing to climate change come from the transportation sector, most of it from cars and light trucks.
The rules in California will cut emissions from new vehicles by 14 percent from 2008 levels in 2011. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia have also adopted the California rules in an effort to combat climate change.
California’s emissions rules are also expected to be congruent with new federal fuel economy standards announced in May by the Obama administration. Both standards envision that emissions will be cut by 30 percent in 2016.
The aligning of California’s rules and the federal mileage standards is intended to ensure that automakers comply with a single standard. This “moves us toward a policy that ensures that consumers in all 50 states have access to highly fuel-efficient vehicles at an affordable price,” said Dave McCurdy, president and chief executive of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.
Carmakers have accepted the fuel economy and emission standards that they long opposed, at a time when their industry is in crisis and accepting billions of dollars in federal money.
In the interview, Ms. Jackson of the E.P.A. praised Fran Pavley, the state senator from California who originally crafted the early blueprint for the state standards in 2001.
Ms. Pavley was jubilant Tuesday.
“It took eight years, multiple federal courts, the U.S. Supreme Court, two presidents, two governors and a partridge in a pear tree,” she said in an interview. “What a difference that last presidential election made.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)