Kredit:Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain
Det var den sortens djärva, klimatfokuserade initiativ som Kalifornien har utvecklat ett rykte om – ett effektivt förbud mot försäljning av nya bensindrivna bilar till 2035.
Men förra veckans historiska omröstning av California Air Resources Board följer ett antal omfattande statliga miljöåtgärder som har mött olika grader av framgång.
Nu, när tjänstemän försöker förändra Kaliforniens bilkultur i grunden – och därigenom minska dess största källa till planetvärmande koldioxidutsläpp och luftföroreningar – säger experter att dessa tidigare initiativ kan kasta ljus över huruvida Kaliforniens nationsledande bilplan kan fungera.
Luftkvalitet och smog
I Los Angeles betraktas den täta smog som en gång kvävde staden idag som folklore. När det var som värst, mellan 1950- och 1980-talen, var det kaustiska diset så tjockt att människor bara kunde se så långt som till ett stadskvarter. Det irriterade människors halsar och lungor och gav dem blodsprängda ögon. Då fanns det mer än 200 dagar med ohälsosam luft årligen, enligt Air Resources Board.
Sedan dess har det gjorts enorma framsteg mot att minska smog och luftföroreningar, mycket av det på grund av renare bilar. Mängden smogbildande kväveoxider har minskat med mer än 50 % under de senaste två decennierna, vilket avsevärt förbättrat folkhälsan.
Men Kaliforniens framsteg i kampen mot luftföroreningar har stagnerat under de senaste decennierna, och delstaten är fortfarande hem för de värsta luftföroreningarna i landet. Sydkustens luftbassäng – Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside och en del av San Bernardino counties – har ännu inte uppfyllt några federala hälsostandarder för ozonnivåer, inklusive den äldsta åtgärden som antogs 1979.
"Om du ser tillbaka 70 år så har vi gjort ett fantastiskt jobb", säger Joe Lyou, ordförande för koalitionen för ren luft. "Om du ser tillbaka på det senaste decenniet eller två, inte så bra. Och om du tittar på de juridiska standarderna som kräver att vi ska tillhandahålla hälsosam luft för människor att andas, så går vi inte alls bra."
Den globala uppvärmningen har ytterligare förvärrat problemet genom att ge bränsle till skogsbränder och förhållanden som är mer gynnsamma för smogbildning.
"Dagarna för farliga luftföroreningar är borta från listorna på grund av tillväxten i klimatdrivna skogsbränder", säger Will Barrett, nationell seniordirektör för förespråkande av ren luft för American Lung Association. "Vi vet också att ozon bildas när avgasutsläpp och andra utsläpp blandas i atmosfären under varma, soliga dagar. Vi ser mer värme, mer extrema väderhändelser, skapar bättre förutsättningar för bildandet av ozon och hotar hälsan på marken. Dessa är dubbla kriser. De härrör från samma källor – transportkällor."
Men det var statens förmåga att tackla och lösa en stor smogkris som ger vissa experter hopp om att den också kan förändra transporterna.
"Air Resources Boards största anspråk på berömmelse före klimateran var dess roll i att skapa och genomdriva antagandet av katalysatorer och andra tekniker för att minska utsläppen av smogbildande föroreningar, vilket kvävde de stora storstadscentrumen i både Bay Area och på sydkusten", säger Danny Cullenward, policychef på den ideella klimatforskningsorganisationen CarbonPlan. "Så Air Resources Board som institution skar verkligen tänderna, och var utomordentligt framgångsrika under tidigare decennier, med att ta itu med ett enormt problem som involverade komplicerad teknik, kraftfulla industrier ... och frågor som påverkade människors vardag."
Cap-and-trade
Ett av Kaliforniens landmärke klimatprogram, cap-and-trade lanserades initialt 2006 med syftet att minska delstatens utsläpp av växthusgaser till 1990 års nivåer till 2020. Det överträffade förväntningarna och nådde faktiskt målet fyra år i förväg.
År 2017 godkändes programmet på nytt med ett mycket mer ambitiöst mål:att minska utsläppen av växthusgaser till 40 % av 1990 års nivåer till 2030. För att nå dit använder programmet ett system med föroreningskrediter som i huvudsak låter stora koldioxidutsläppare köpa och sälja oanvända krediter med syftet att hålla alla på eller under en viss summa.
Experter säger att det bara fungerade. Även om programmet har förblivit ett nyckelelement i Kaliforniens klimatstrategi, minskade utsläppen med cirka 11 % 2020 – långt ifrån målet på 40 %. Dessutom står den siffran troligen för utsläppsminskningar kopplade till starten av covid-19-pandemin.
"Beviset är ganska tydligt att vi inte är på rätt spår för det målet, och beroendet av det här programmet är en stor del av anledningen till att vi inte är på rätt spår," sa Cullenward.
Air Resources Boards talesman David Clegern sa via e-post att staten har policyerna på plats för att nå sitt mål, "men att nå dit betyder att samordnade åtgärder måste ske för att implementera policyer för att minska transporter, kortlivade klimatföroreningar, elektricitet och andra utsläpp till uppnå 2030."
"Det faktum att staten uppnådde sitt 2020-mål fyra år tidigare och framgången med program som Low Carbon Fuel Standard och tillägget av nya program betyder att cap-and-trades roll kan vara mindre i framtiden, men det kommer att utvärderas efter släppet av 2020 års scopingplan senare i år", sa han. The scoping plan is a roadmap for achieving carbon neutrality in the state, and is updated every five years.
Cullenward noted that the cap-and-trade program has some clear parallels to the advanced clean cars rule, including its plan to provide credits to auto manufacturers who sell more electric vehicles than they're required to. However, there are also some key differences that made him more optimistic about the gas car ban's prospects of success.
For one, he said, the Air Resources Board has historically had more strength as a regulator of mobile emission sources (such as cars) than of stationary ones such as factories and power plants, as evidenced by its earlier success with catalytic converters and smog reduction. What's more, while the industries regulated by cap-and-trade are "local, powerful and politically organized," the state has little in the way of combustion engine production.
Fossil fuels
Despite California's green reputation, it remains the seventh-highest oil producing state in the nation, extracting about 358,000 barrels per day, according to state data.
However, oil production has been declining for decades, and the California Geologic Energy Management Division, or CalGEM, reported that "more permits have been issued to plug and permanently seal existing wells than to drill new ones since 2019." The agency issued 564 new well permits in 2021, down from 1,917 in 2020 and 2,665 in 2019.
Some experts said that's not aggressive enough.
"This transition can't happen too slowly, because there is a climate crisis, and there are significant public health impacts on frontline communities," said Bahram Fazeli, director of research and policy at Communities for a Better Environment.
Although there are ambitions to phase out California's oil and gas production completely—most recently, Gov. Gavin Newsom set his sights on 2045—there has yet to be an official deadline such as the one for the gas car ban.
But the state has made some efforts to control or reduce oil production, including a proposed ban on new oil and gas wells within 3,200 feet of homes, schools and healthcare facilities. Newsom last summer also ordered a ban on new permits for hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, beginning in 2024.
"As we move to swiftly decarbonize our transportation sector and create a healthier future for our children, I've made it clear I don't see a role for fracking in that future and, similarly, believe that California needs to move beyond oil," the governor said at the time.
Fazeli noted that a recent study out of the University of Massachusetts Amherst found that achieving that transition by 2045 is feasible in California, though it would require a significant investment:About $138 billion per year, according to the study. But the fossil fuel industry is, by nature, opposed to such an existential threat, Fazeli said, and even passing "common sense" legislation such as the 3,200-foot buffer zone has proven challenging.
"California's economy is not different from other economies—the economy is a fossil fuel economy," he said. "So California is going through this growing pain of, how do we become a clean energy economy? How do we transition from a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy economy, and also provide good paying jobs? That's a key part of the puzzle."
Another part of the puzzle is balance, according to Kyle Meng, an associate professor of environmental economics at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
"When it comes to gasoline, you really need policies to deal with both the demand side—like the new car ban and subsidies for EVs—as well as the supply side, which is the production of oil," he said. "One without the other would lead to unexpected, adverse consequences."
For example, reducing demand without supply could mean California ends up exporting its excess oil, Meng said, while reducing supply too quickly could leave communities that rely on the industry in bad shape. In Kern County, one of the state's top producing regions, oil and gas extraction provide as much as 20% of the area's property tax revenue.
As in other sectors, equity remains a major concern, especially when it comes to the communities suffering the worst effects of oil and gas drilling, Meng said. But when considering the state's climate efforts thus far, he said there has been good progress.
"If you were to tell me that California would hit the state's 2020 greenhouse gas goals back in 2005, I wouldn't have believed it. But California did it," he said. "However, looking forward, the task for this decade is even more ambitious. The big open question is not just whether California can meet its 2030 greenhouse gas goals, but whether those goals are met in a way that doesn't exacerbate existing inequities across the state."
Vehicle miles traveled
Although phasing out gas-powered cars is one of the state's greatest priorities, that alone won't be enough. Driving habits must change, too, if the state expects to achieve carbon neutrality.
The state climate plan depends on motorists driving at least 12% fewer miles by 2030, and no fewer than 22% by 2045.
Since the advent of the automobile and the construction of the highway system, large cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco have become car-centric. Today, around 75% of daily commuting trips consist of one person driving with no passengers—a practice that remains the primary mode of transportation in California.
"Highway building and sprawl go hand in hand," said Susan Handy, a researcher at UC Davis who has studied strategies to reduce automobile dependence. "That's true in California, and it's also true everywhere else. When we built highways, it made it possible to develop farther from city centers than ever before. And now we're in a situation where we've got these sprawling development patterns and it makes it very hard to get around by means other than the car."
As the state's population has risen and more cars are on the road, state officials funded highway construction and expansion to ease congestion, which ironically fostered more driving.
The only major significant decreases in miles driven occur during economic downturns and, recently, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 as more people have worked remotely. However, driving has rebounded to pre-pandemic levels.
Public policy strategy to reduce driving has historically included gas tax hikes or tolls, which could serve as a deterrent. But the state could do better at investments and incentivizing other forms of transportation like biking and mass transit, Handy said.
Much of California's plans have depended on providing financial incentives to trade in gas-powered cars for zero-emission vehicles. But some state officials have requested the state look into how driving behaviors might change if the state invests more in mass transit.
"I think it's tough, because we're a car culture, right?" Air Resources Board chair Liane Randolph said at a meeting in June. "We know how to help people buy cars. What we don't know is how to help people change the culture so that they are able to ride public transit in a way that's economical and equitable and efficient for them to get to work and to school and wherever they need to go."
Infrastructure
Infrastructure will play a huge role in California's transition away from gas cars, multiple experts said. Charging stations will be needed to help power electric vehicles, and electricity will be needed to power those charging stations, among myriad considerations.
So far, the state has established many goals to help get there, including plans to construct at least 250,000 public vehicle charging stations by the middle of the decade; 10,000 of which should be fast chargers, according to the California Public Utilities Commission. The state also plans to require landlords of multifamily housing units to provide residents with a means to charge electric cars, though those details are still being worked out.
And it's not only personal vehicles that will need the stations, but also the heavy-duty trucks that transport goods throughout the state every day. The twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have the goal of being serviced exclusively by zero-emission trucks by 2035, but they have a long way to go:Only 35 of the 22,000 trucks that serve the port complex are "electric," "battery electric" or "hydrogen fuel cell," according to data from their clean truck program.
Though the state has made efforts to streamline the permit process for charging stations, mapping tools show huge gaps in their locations, particularly in inland Central California and far Northern California.
"We're nowhere close to where we need to be on infrastructure, especially charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, electric trucks, electric buses, electric off-road equipment," said Lyou, of the Coalition for Clean Air. "And it's emerged as the most challenging thing we have to do."
Another part of the problem is that recharging the batteries of electric cars and trucks could also lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions, depending on where that energy is coming from.
"If you're talking about California trying to move its emissions from gasoline cars into EVs, you're talking about probably doubling the amount of electricity demand on the grid," said Meng, of UC Santa Barbara. "Where's that going to come from? You could imagine large utility-scale solar in places like Kern County, but with the laws as they're written now, it's very hard for Kern County to get property tax benefits from a solar farm than it could from oil drilling." + Utforska vidare
2022 Los Angeles Times.
Distribuerat av Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
