CARB Pushes Forward With Stringent Emissions Standards Through 2025, Will Crank It Up Beyond That

3 months ago by Steven Loveday 50

Emissions

California was the first state to begin selling the Chevrolet Bolt. Due to CARB’s emissions standards, electric vehicle adoption

Just like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set out to do late last year, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has decided to keep its emissions standards locked through 2025. The ZEV program will also remain intact, and eventually accelerate.

California, along with 12 other states that follow suit, will continue with emissions standards that were put in place back in 2012, regardless of what comes of the EPA’s “redo” on its midterm review.

Emissions

BMW i3

CARB has also agreed to push immediately for ZEV expansion, and after 2025, new rules will work to further increase the number of required zer0-emission vehicle sales in California.

This is all part of the Advanced Clean Cars program, which created a stepping stone for the EPA’s 2017-2025 standards.

The EPA’s initial ruling in 2012 followed CARB’s ruling, and at the time, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) lined up its fuel economy standards as well. All organizations involved agreed to a midterm review to revisit the regulations. As we recently reported, the EPA rushed its midterm review months ahead of the deadline, in order to secure regulations prior to the change in administration. CARB completed its midterm review this month.

Board members from all participating states voted to lock in standards for 2022-2025, with no changes. The premise was that the technology required to meet the standards has surpassed previous expectations. CARB Deputy Executive Officer Alberto Ayala shared:

“With the midterm review now in the rearview mirror, we look forward to accelerating our efforts to develop the next set of California vehicle standards. California is also moving forward to accelerate deployment of fuel cell and battery electric cars. That will put us on track to meeting our clean air and climate goals for 2030 and also align California with current advanced vehicle technology research and investment in the global auto marketplace.”

Source: Green Car Congress. CARB

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

50 responses to "CARB Pushes Forward With Stringent Emissions Standards Through 2025, Will Crank It Up Beyond That"

  1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

    Go EV!!!!

    1. SJC says:

      Considering the number of cars and miles driven CARB has kept the air in L.A. relatively clean, it would look worse than Mexico City if they did not.

  2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

    They just couldn’t resist putting fuel cell first, could they?

    1. Dave86 says:

      With Trump set to destroy the EPA, I appreciate the CARB more than ever.

      But this thing CARB has for fuel cells leaves me feeling a bit… challenged.

  3. TM says:

    The 12 states:
    California
    New Jersey
    Connecticut
    Washington
    Vermont
    New York
    Maine
    Rhode Island
    Massachusetts
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Maryland

    Onlyl 38 more to go …

    1. Mister G says:

      No southern states on that list…shameful.

      1. MikeG says:

        While CARB consists of just 12 states, the cost/benefits are not limited to those states only. It increases costs for auto manufacturers to develop 2 configurations of vehicles for CARB and non-CARB states, so they have an incentive to make one model that follows the stricter rules.

        1. wavelet says:

          If I added up the numbers correctly, the CARB states hold just over a third of the overall US population (34.5%)… I suspect that’s not really enough to make it uneconomical for carmakers to split the models (remember the days of 49-state models in the 1970s and 1980s).
          It probably needs 1-2 additional populous states at least the size of PA to make a difference.

      2. TM says:

        Mostly Northeast and Pacific bordering states: (California, Oregon, Washington).
        Still more N.E. states can join, but I’m not hopeful about states west of the Mississippi River.

    2. Dave86 says:

      Don’t laugh: I’ve wondered if Trump is going to cause more states to consider becoming CARB states. Non-CARB states will have a decision to make: possibly no regulations or CARB regulations.

      It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next 4 years.

      1. TomArt says:

        Agreed. This election cycle finally appears to be the last straw of insanity (and I thought Dubya’s tenure was the worst!). It’s definitely getting everyone off of their complacent asses (myself included). Now we know what we believe in, and I think the momentum is against trump and the lunatics that plague his administration and Congress. It surfaced a bit with Obama’s election, but now we have the last gasp of all that is wayward and backward with USA culture. IN other words, I still have faith in my fellow human beings…how, I don’t know…maybe I’m the crazy one… 😀

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Well if you’re building castles in the sky to live in, I’m your next-door neighbor!

          The massive Indivisible/Resist movement that arose immediately after El Trumpo’s election, a movement which has already caused the GOP’s attempt to gut Obamacare to go down in flames, will hopefully result in a strong mid-term “correction” in which the GOP will lose control of both the House and the Senate.

          Sadly, even if El Trumpo is impeached and thrown out of office, or tires of the farce and resigns, that will still leave a hard-right Republican in control of the White House. Of course that would still be a vast improvement; the White House, and the USA in general, would no longer be the laughingstock of the entire world.

          And I, just like you, am gobsmacked that Americans actually elected a worse President than Bush Jr. Until very recently, I was quite certain he would remain the worst President in my lifetime, if not the worst ever. But he suddenly looks quite good by comparison to El Trumpo!

          1. Terawatt says:

            What are you smoking?

            The repeal of Obamacare wasn’t stopped by the Resist lefties. It failed because hard-line conservatives rooted in the tea party movement made a pact not to support the bill without first discussing it internally, even if POTUS called them personally and asked them to do so. They didn’t think the bill went far enough, and the “great dealmaker”, by setting a short deadline, failed to get their support thanks to his “clever” ultimatum…

            As for the mid-terms, who knows? If the election taught anything it should be that the electorate has a very skewed perspective on many things. And there’s much to indicate it’s getting worse rather than better. 37% of Republican voters now poll as having a positive view of Vladimir Putin!! Trump openly admires this man, who’s poisoned his political opponents with polonium, but so far at least Trump just lies but is powerless to shut up critics. But it is nothing short of astonishing that nearly four out of ten republicans harbour warm feelings for such a ruthless crook as the Russian President.

            I hope you’re right and the democrats regain both houses in the midterms, but I’m far from convinced this mess won’t get worse still before it gets any better.

    3. TomArt says:

      Thanks! Glad to see my native state on there! Shame that another Commonwealth – my current home state of Virginia – is not on the list.

  4. Dav8or says:

    Used car prices are going to stay high for sure and we’ll be seeing 20+ years on cars as the norm. The middle and lower classes really can’t afford new cars now, that’s why more and more people are falling prey to goofy leasing schemes and taking out 8 year loans on cars.

    As new cars are required to have more fancy new tech in them, more people will be forced to the used market that they can actually afford and less new cars will be sold. If the automakers want to keep their income up, they need to start investing in parts support for the cars they built 10+ years ago.

    We won’t see less cars on the road, just less cars going to the scrapyard. Time to invest in aftermarket parts supply companies.

    1. SJC says:

      U.S. and worldwide show no massive declines in new car sales.

      1. ffbj says:

        Used car sales are also down. It’s a bad time for the legacy auto-makers.

        1. Dav8or says:

          Do you have a source on that? First I’ve heard of it. I have no clue what you mean by “also down” because new car sales are quite good now. We’re in record breaking boom times. 17.5 million new cars last year. Check this out-

          http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/04/news/companies/car-sales-2016/

          If there is a slump now in used car sales, it’s due to such strong new car sales.

      2. Raymond Ramirez says:

        We in Puerto Rico are in a financial crisis and few new cars are sold. I see plenty of used and unsold new car ads on TV and in the local press. Those dealers are losing income and cutting profit margins to sell out and lose less.

        1. Windbourne says:

          PR really needs to get lower energy and water costs. Basically, we need to put several nuclear reactors there, along with desalinated water from the waste heat.

          Once the electricity is dirt cheap, then it will be easier for PR to advance. At this time, I really feal for you guys.

          1. Dav8or says:

            Great idea and I like it, but last I checked nuclear power plants and desalinization plants are nowhere near “dirt cheap”. This plan would require both power and water rates to be sky high to pay for the investment.

      3. Windbourne says:

        today, they do not. That will change in less than 2 years.

      4. Dav8or says:

        Ummm… we’re talking about the future with new regulations, not today.

    2. jelloslug says:

      Lower middle class and below could never really afford new cars. It’s no different now.

      1. TomArt says:

        True.

      2. Dav8or says:

        So we should make it so that the middle class and perhaps even the upper middle class can’t afford them either? I know, I know, save the planet…

        1. Terawatt says:

          The planet is big enough to look after itself and will be fine. It’s whether humans and other large animals can go on living on it that is in question.

  5. Raymond Ramirez says:

    Many laypersons don’t like regulations, but thanks to the CARB and EPA regulations, many cities have cleaner air to breathe. Even if Trump wants to reduce those regulations, he cannot unless it is done by a State or Congress act, and no lawperson in either group will turn back those regulations. And only hybrids and electrics can qualify to drive under those regulations.

    1. Mister G says:

      Money talks in Congress if fossil fuel industry wants a reversal they will buy votes in Congress with campaign contributions.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Ramirez said:

      “Even if Trump wants to reduce those regulations, he cannot unless it is done by a State or Congress act…”

      This is completely untrue. Many regulations have the force of law even though they are decisions made by bureaucrats who decide how laws are to be implemented. In fact, this is one of the major complaints of Libertarians and other small-government advocates; that unelected bureaucrats are given the power to create regulations which have the force of law; regulations which were not voted on by either the general public or by elected representatives.

      Such regulations can be changed by a new administration every bit as quickly and easily as they were created in the first place. If you have any doubt that this is true, just watch what happens with the EPA over the next several months.

      1. DonC says:

        Well it took over three years to put the current regulations in place. Will take at least that long to replace them, especially since new regulations will have to overcome the boatloads of science standing in the way. So yeah, almost “as easy” as it was to put the regulations into place. Meaning not so easy.

        The CARB waiver is an entirely different issue. No statutory authority to revoke the waiver once granted, and no ability to challenge it in court (that time for that expired in 2009).

  6. georgeS says:

    After the big flop on the health plan will Trump still go after CARB?

    With Tesla in the picture EV’s could almost happen now without CARB.

    Out today on WSJ Trump still planning to reverse Obama’s Clean Power Plan. However another article states that elimination of Clean Power Plan has not changed most utilities plans to switch away from coal.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/despite-trump-move-utilities-shift-from-coal-is-set-to-continue-1490693406

    Thursday SpaceX first launch of a commercial rocket launch with a reusable Booster.

    Stay tuned!!

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/spacex-aims-for-historic-rocket-launch-with-reused-booster-1490693401

    Things look good IMO despite T.

    1. Assaf says:

      The Obama clean power plan has been stuck in court, and all signs indicate that Drumpf’s reversal will also be stuck at court.

      Unless the courts actually throw his reversal out right away, for lack of preparation, coherence, professionalism minimal diligence. Won’t be the first time nor the last, and can’t happen to a nicer guy 🙂

      1. ffbj says:

        The courts are about all that’s left to oppose him. Thankfully, we at least have them. For the time being.

    2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Well, the key element of the Clean Power Plan is reducing carbon emissions. It’s other pollution control that limits coal.

      What removing the plan will do is allow new “Clean Coal” plants to be built without CCS so it will allow replacement of some old plants with new ones, but probably won’t lead to many new ones being built.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Nobody in the USA is going to build a new coal-fired plant so long as natural gas remains so cheap. That decision is driven by economics, not by regulations. So El Trumpo’s executive orders on the subject aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. He’s going to pretend to take steps to save the coal industry, then will pretend to be shocked, SHOCKED when they have almost no effect whatsoever, just as he was shocked, SHOCKED that health care legislation turned out to be complex. El Trumpo will grandstand and make another wide-eyed statement starting with “Who knew…”

        It’s all sound and fury, signifying nothing, just like most of what El Trumpo says and does.

        1. Windbourne says:

          BINGO,
          you have it 100% correct.
          Trump’s work on this will not cause any new coal plants to come on-line. Nor, will it cause old ones to be restarted (they do not want to be hit by mercury lawsuits).

          But, I think that CARB screwed up here. There stuff is NOT stringent at all.
          Instead, they should simply require a 10% increase each year in fleet sales to be ZEV. In less than 10 years, they would be at zev.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            You are of course entitled to your opinion, but government regulation cannot mandate what consumers prefer to buy, nor can regulations create the technological breakthroughs needed to make PEVs fully competitive with gasmobiles.

            Trying to push forward the ZEV requirements as fast as you suggest would, I submit, create the same situation that occurred when CARB got excited by GM putting the EV1 into production, and circa 1999-2000 put in ZEV mandates which were unrealistic given the technology of the time. Then as now, trying to push the standards forward too fast will be counterproductive, causing the auto industry to balk and push back against the regulations, sidelining their own R&D into improved PEV tech to support their own claims that there is no market for PEVs.

            The government mandates leading us to a nationwide fleet of zero emission vehicles should be a gentle but firm push; gentle enough to encourage auto makers to invest more into developing compelling PEVs.

            Let us never forget that we generally get better results by dangling the carrot rather than beating with the stick. If you load the mule down with too heavy a load, it’s going to balk regardless of how liberally you apply the stick.

        2. DonC says:

          It could prolong the life of some plants otherwise scheduled to be closed. But coal jobs, like most blue collar jobs, are likely to continue disappearing due to automation.

  7. leafowner says:

    Unfortunately – the Old Gassers will not go away quietly….

    1. Damocles Axe says:

      Some people still drive horse and buggy…
      That doesn’t mean that MOST will go all electric eventually.

      1. TomArt says:

        Nice handle! 😀

    2. Windbourne says:

      No, but all we really need to do, is stop NEW ones from being sold. That is the real problem.

  8. Jake Brake says:

    Cant believe in cheering for CARB today.

  9. Assaf says:

    Way to go, the Not-Dirty-Dozen of states!

    Kick the oil economy where it hurts.

    If Drumpf wants, he can try drag them to court where he currently bats .000 🙂 Good luck with Dat.

  10. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    Go CARB go!

    Illegitimi non carborundum.

  11. Windbourne says:

    CARB is now ran by gutless fools.
    The best thing they could have done was to increase ZEV requirements every year until it is gone.

    THe simple way would have been to increase it by 10% each year. That would stop it by no later than 2027, but, more importantly, it would signal all car makers that they HAVE to do something now, or exit the CA market.

    1. Terawatt says:

      Then the gutless did the best thing they could have done!

      ZEV requirements do increase year by year. They simply didn’t require them to increase faster (or slower) than the current plan. And given that the plan suffices to reach the official targets, as they say it does, there’s not much rationale for requiring a faster ramp.

      EVs are going to happen. If they were only eco friendly they might not, but it’s simply superior technology in every way. Before production capacity gets near that of ICE it will already be economic folly to get an ICE, so it will take care of itself…

      I care about politics and I think regulators have a huge responsibility. We need to tweak capitalism to ensure the “invisible hand” really does guide individual market actors to do what is best for society as a whole.

      But at the same time I often wonder how much politics really matters. It seems to me history is technology-driven, not policy-driven. Consider how technology has changed our lives in the past fifty years… and then take a look at what policy has done over the same period:

      http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/03/daily-chart-18

  12. DonC says:

    One of the ironies here is that CARB owes much to Republicans. It was created by Ronald Reagan and the push for the waiver was lead by Schwarzenegger.

Leave a Reply