The legality of the ban is being challenged in court by the Trump administration, as part of the ongoing battle over California's authority to regulate tailpipe emissions.Their current authority was established by the 1970 Clean Air Act, which the administration is trying to strip from them in order to enforce more lenient rules to cover the entire nation. The fate of the gas-powered vehicles ban likely hangs in the balance of what the court decides regarding that authority, and its revocation could mean that the ban would be gone as well.
The ban has been criticized on the grounds of being a distraction from real issues, with a spokesman for the Institute for Energy Research arguing that "Driving cars is not what causes forest fires or makes them worse," and that "Electric cars might not have emissions at a tailpipe, but they do have emissions at the power plant." Regardless, only time will tell whether the ban lives to see its enforcement in 2035, and if it does, whether it will have its intended effect on California emissions.
Source 1: NPR
Source 2: WSJ
Source 3: Executive Order
5 comments:
I believe that the majority of cars in California will be electric vehicles sooner than we know it. Even though the Trump administration is challenging this executive order made by Newsom, there are other companies that are likely to create more eco-friendly electric vehicles that will help the big step towards total zero-emission vehicles in CA. For example, Elon Musk announced on Tesla's Battery Day this past week that he will be creating an electric vehicle that is cheaper than the average gas vehicle within the next 3 years. This new car will be revolutionary to the nation as its approximate price will be around $25k, a price that's very appealing not only because it's an all-electric vehicle but as a car in general. So regardless of the Trump administration's challenge, it is likely that California alone will be made up of a majority of electric vehicles by the year 2045.
Check out the Battery Day official recap for more specific details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6T9xIeZTds
I feel like the ban is a step in the right direction but also unreasonable at the same time. Ban in theory would be help reduced the amount of fires within california but at the large scale affect Newsom hopes it will. The overall level of CO2 in california will decrease do to the ban. The real struggle will be getting californians to replace their gas powered cars. I personally think it will not work because electric cars are too expansive compared to gas power cars. Also electric cars have less variety compared to gas cars.
As a starting point, I think local action at the municipal level is extremely important. For example, advocating for cities to have all-electric reach codes, specific climate ordinances, or possibly natural gas bans (like the city of Berkeley decided to implement) may be the catalyst for an overall easier transition into state government goals for climate action. Like Liam mentioned, electric cars are often highly expensive, and th. While it is optimal to have a majority of electric cars in California, I still think the state should (and continue if they are already doing it) invest into renewable energies, creating policies and conditions that would promote bike-riding and walking, and take the recent fires seriously. Many of our local counties have begun writing their own climate plans, ordinances, and other proposals because other counties/cities have set the precedent (putting some pressure onto counties/cities who haven’t implemented plans). Hopefully, other states will support and join in the spirit of Governor Newsom’s executive order.
To start, I believe that this ban is poorly thought out and unrealistic. On paper it seems great; lower emissions, a positive impact on climate change, but in reality banning gas powered cars would be difficult and wasteful. The ban fails to acknowledge the millions of low income families that can't afford the luxuries of a new car, let alone an electric car which tends to be more expensive. Also, the mass amounts of waste that would occur as a result of a car ban would be detrimental to our environment. Adding onto Howard's comment, I think that California should focus their efforts more-so on the inclusion of renewable energy sources and the creation of lasting climate plans as a model for the rest of the country.
In my opinion, I believe that ban on sales of gas-powered vehicles by 2035 is more symbolic, than a "power-misuse" or "great idea" (depending on your view of the order). Stopping the sale of new gas-powered vehicles in 2035 is not going to stop or reverse the effects of climate change and global warming, but is nonetheless a more eco-conscious "motivator" for the auto industry. It appears that every year, car companies seem to be producing new hybrid or electric vehicles beyond the prius or Tesla that most identify as "standard/already" hybrid/electric vehicles. I believe other factors will contribute to more auto manufacturers switching towards electric and alternative-power methods beyond gasoline by 2035, not just this executive order. While I understand and respect opposing arguments against this ban, the idea of cost and "wastefulness" is lacking. Sure, manufacturers are not going to produce more (traditionally cheaper) gas cars in 2035, but many will be available on the used market. Additionally, if auto manufacturers make the shift,they can only due so with the support of the consumer. Electric vehicles will need to become less expensive, if they hope to outperform sales of the now, more popular, gas-powered vehicles. I bet that in the next 10 years, new production methods will drastically decrease the price of electric vehicles and easier charging accessibility will follow. By 2035, I strongly believe this won't seem to be as "drastic" of a measure as it seems to be today.
Post a Comment