Automotive Groups Attempt To Block California’s ZEV Policy. Again.

5 years ago by Jay Cole 10

Under California Air Resources Board's Directive, The ZEV (Zero Emission Vehicle) Segment Would Increase As Illustrated

Under California Air Resources Board’s Directive, The ZEV (Zero Emission Vehicle) Segment Would Increase As Illustrated

Three months ago, California got the official approval to enact their ZEV (zero emission vehicle) program from the Federal government.  A program which requires automakers who want to do business in that state, and the 9 other CARB (California Air Resources Board) compliant states, to produce plug-in hybrids, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and/or electric vehicles, or face some hefty fines.

Even Those Who Would Have No Issue Complying With CARB's Mandate Are Involved In Its Opposition

Even Those Who Would Have No Issue Complying With CARB’s Mandate Are Involved In Its Opposition

Now two automotive groups, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of Global Automakers are attempting (again) to block that program from going into effect.

According to a report by the Automotive News, if CARB’s ZEV policy goes ahead as planned, by 2025 auto makers will have had to build almost 2 million qualifying vehicles to remain compliant with the program.

The end result of California’s ZEV policy is that after 2025, automakers will be required to have 15.4 percent of all the vehicles they sell be ZEV-compliant.  About 66% of these vehicles are projected to be plug-in hybrids, while 33.999% will be fully electric vehicles…with the remaining four being hydrogen fuel-cell cars* (probably driven by government employees).

The group’s petition to lawmakers explains the logic behind opposing the legislation:

“It is impossible to predict today whether infrastructural developments, oil  prices, consumer confidence and other factors will converge such that automakers  will be able to persuade buyers to choose sufficient numbers of electric  vehicles and plug-in hybrids. Current data and trends  suggest that it is highly unlikely that the industry will be able to meet that  mandate.”

All ZEV Qualifying Credits Are Not Equal.  A Base PZEV Gets .2 Of A Credit, While the Smart ForTwo ED Gets 2 Full Credits

All ZEV Qualifying Credits Are Not Equal. A Base PZEV Gets .2 Of A Credit, While the Smart ForTwo ED Gets 2 Full Credits

Then the petition goes ‘off the rails’, and likens the current CARB resolution with some made-up, alternate universe, bizarro scenario:

“If California were to require that one-half of an auto manufacturer’s sales in  the state consist of two-door subcompact hatchbacks with 4-speed manual  transmissions by 2018,” the petition says, “that standard would not be feasible  because the motoring public will not purchase that many vehicles with those  characteristics.”

And who are these two obscure groups trying to block this legislation?  And why do they exist?

As far as we can tell, they basically are a front for just about every major automaker to lobby (and litigate/manipulate) state and federal governments to make their own existences easier…that is, without actually putting their individual names on these actions.

Just for fun, lets list out their membership roles.  Word of warning:  If you have a ‘favorite’ automaker, they probably have their hand in this action just like everyone else.

Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers

  • BMW Group
  • Chrysler Group LLC
  • Ford Motor Company
  • General Motors Corporation
  • Jaguar Land Rover
  • Mazda
  • Mercedes-Benz USA
  • Mitsubishi Motors
  • Porsche
  • Toyota
  • Volkswagen Group of America
  • Volvo Cars North America

Association of Global Automakers

  • Aston Martin
  • Ferrari
  • Honda
  • Hyundai
  • Isuzu
  • Kia
  • Maserati
  • McLaren
  • Nissan
  • Peugeot
  • Subaru
  • Suzuki
  • Toyota

*maybe less

Automotive News (sub req’d)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

10 responses to "Automotive Groups Attempt To Block California’s ZEV Policy. Again."

  1. MrEnergyCzar says:

    Money can legally influence lawmaker’s decisions in the country so I won’t be surprised if it gets knocked down again. It will take more money this time though….

    MrEnergyCzar

  2. Cavaron says:

    Worst case: It will go down, every big automaker will stop doing E-Cars. But Tesla, China ans India won’t stop and will soar.

  3. Anton Wahlman says:

    One would think the American way is to allow people to buy and sell whatever they want. As far as the government dictating what must be bought and sold, that would be the way of the Soviet Union, lest my memory fails me. The government dictating what is bought and sold has typically been detrimental to both economic efficiency and fundamental freedom. If the government were to legislate that houses must be painted yellow, people who like yellow houses would cheer. Little do they consider that they might be unhappy if the government turns around and mandates all houses be painted red. If you give the government this power, you can’t complain when the government eventually uses this power to do something you don’t like.

    1. BlindGuy says:

      Red houses; yellow houses; that sounds like my Homeowners assoc. 😉

      1. Herm says:

        bonus-malus system would help.. put a fee on ICE cars progressively higher the more gas they consume (otherwise known as CO2 emissions), then subsidize the cost of cars with low emissions, including small ICE powered car.. the manufacturers would then be happy because the demand would then materialize. A nice fat $10k check from CARB when you buy a Leaf would do wonders.

  4. BlindGuy says:

    I think there should be a similar national policy. If these ZEV goals were part of a national energy plan it would help the auto manufacturers and have a downhill snowball effect. The time is right to push for a cleaner safer future. It is time to start building what the future needs to be. If we can put men on the Moon, then we can build the future of Energy. JMHO

  5. Funny stuff on the 4 (maybe) hydrogen cars driven by government employees. Don’t forget the millions of California dollars to build hydrogen plants for those “up to” 4 cars.

  6. Josh says:

    My favorite automaker, unsurprisingly, isn’t on the list of lobby supporters…[cough]Tesla[cough]

  7. Peter Gorrie says:

    Put the true cost of carbon on to carbon (not a token fee) and let the market decide. We’d have fewer useless compliance cars and many more EV sales.

  8. Jeff says:

    The auto makers forget that consumers can’t buy something that does not exist. CARB makes sure that enough vehicles exist that consumers will have a choice. They need to spend more time making sure they are putting out quality vehicles and not spending so much in litigation.