Green Car Reports: Far more Chevy Bolt EVs likely to be sold than compliance requires

[roundpeg]

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107780_far-more-chevy-bolt-evs-to-be-sold-than-needed-for-compliance

Another way of looking at the "compliance car" argument. I'm not sure I totally buy their reasoning, since as they say, excess credits can be sold. But it is interesting to know that GM will likely accumulate credits far in excess of their internal needs, in large part due to Bolt sales.

 

[oilerlord]

The Bolt was taking shape years ago, when credits were more lucrative than they are today. That said, they still need them, so it is one of the reasons why the car exists. If CARB and CAFE regulations become stricter, then GM well positioned. Having excess credits is a good thing.

Let's hope we see GM moves 30,000 - 50,000 of these by the end of 2017.

 

[roundpeg]

The CARB and CAFE regulations are more likely to go away than get stricter. That writing is spray-painted all over the wall.

 

[SparkE]

The CARB and CAFE regulations are more likely to go away than get stricter. That writing is spray-painted all over the wall.

Based on the above statement, I think I must have mistaken CARB for something else (acronyms are a bitch). For me, CARB stands for "California Air Resource Board", the body that regulates air pollution levels in CA, and mandates new rules to reduce air pollutants. Some other states in the US have adopted the some of the CARB regulations, but the Feds haven't (in general, there may be some specifics). What do YOU all mean by the term CARB?

There is no way in hell that the California Air Resource Board regulations are going away (in California). The goals/levels are already on the books to get more strict (increasing thru 2035 for EVs/car manufacturers, I think. but I'm probably wrong).

 

[roundpeg]

Based on the above statement, I think I must have mistaken CARB for something else (acronyms are a bitch). For me, CARB stands for "California Air Resource Board", the body that regulates air pollution levels in CA, and mandates new rules to reduce air pollutants. Some other states in the US have adopted the some of the CARB regulations, but the Feds haven't (in general, there may be some specifics). What do YOU all mean by the term CARB?

There is no way in hell that the California Air Resource Board regulations are going away (in California). The goals/levels are already on the books to get more strict (increasing thru 2035 for EVs/car manufacturers, I think. but I'm probably wrong).

I could post any number of links to related news stories, but let's start with this one from just today:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-rick-perry-energy-secretary-california-20161214-story.html

The bottom line is the Feds have allowed California to go its own way and consequently take the lead on air quality standards, but they don't have to continue to do so, and in fact they can punish California for trying to go its own way and leading. I fully expect that to happen. And so apparently do a lot of folks in Sacramento who are arming up for the fight to come.

 

[SparkE]

You didn't answer my question. What do YOU all mean by the term CARB?


At any rate, that article said noting about CARB or even air quality. Yes, the Feb can *pressure* states to change their laws (such as withholding federal financing in unrelated areas) but they can't legally force CA to stop regulating the air quality in their state. There is this pesky thing called the Constitution that doesn't allow it.

 

[WetEV]

You didn't answer my question. What do YOU all mean by the term CARB?


At any rate, that article said noting about CARB or even air quality. Yes, the Feb can *pressure* states to change their laws (such as withholding federal financing in unrelated areas) but they can't legally force CA to stop regulating the air quality in their state. There is this pesky thing called the Constitution that doesn't allow it.

Trump doesn't care about the Constitution. But in this case it is no bar.

Selling cars is (usually) interstate commerce, which the Constitution give the Federal government the right to do. Congress passed a law allowing California the right to set standards for California, and to allow other states to follow California's standards.

I'd be amazed if the Congress would repeal/change this law. Might happen, but I'd guess is very unlikely. And California could pass different rules that don't involve interstate commerce.

 

[roundpeg]

You didn't answer my question. What do YOU all mean by the term CARB?


At any rate, that article said noting about CARB or even air quality. Yes, the Feb can *pressure* states to change their laws (such as withholding federal financing in unrelated areas) but they can't legally force CA to stop regulating the air quality in their state. There is this pesky thing called the Constitution that doesn't allow it.

I thought it was meant as a rhetorical question, since the actual statement I made is: the CARB credits are more likely to go away than be increased, That was the full thought, which you sort of ignored to make whatever point you were making (what that was is still not clear to me).

In any event, no, they probably can't "force" California to regulate air quality as the federal government wishes, but they can make it a damn sight more difficult to go it alone. For one, the cap-and-trade system that supports the credits is under legal attack. It was financially wobbly already so it won't take a whole lot more push to make it unworkable. And as I said, and I take it you agree, the state can also be punished for running an aggressive air quality programs in unrelated ways. All I am hearing as a counter to that argument is "but they wouldn't dare do that."

Of course they would dare do that. The fossil fuel industry won the trifecta. They may not get 100% of what they want, but they will probably get most of what they want, and one of the things they want (especially Rick Perry) is for California to be humiliated for showing leadership on air quality and climate change. Whether California's aggressive program of regulation survives the next few years of the oil industry control of energy and environmental policy is an entirely legitimate question.

 

[devbolt]

The CARB and CAFE regulations are more likely to go away than get stricter. That writing is spray-painted all over the wall.

They might get relaxed, but they won't certainly won't go away in their entirety, and it won't happen overnight. Once regulations are in place, they are just as hard to undo as it was to create and pass them. Automakers have spent considerable amounts of money meeting the current standards, and have efforts underway to meet the new standards that were just approved. Industries like consistency in their regulations. They don't like things necessarily being changed willy-nilly, at least not without input and discussion.

CARB has been allowed to set air quality and car emissions standards for California for nearly 50 years due to the Federal Air Quality Act that was passed in 1967. Additional regulations have been passed subsequent to that that have cemented California's ability to regulate vehicle emissions. It will take a massive court challenge or lots of political capital to overturn CARB's ability to set standards, or the standards themselves.

 

[devbolt]

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107780_far-more-chevy-bolt-evs-to-be-sold-than-needed-for-compliance

Another way of looking at the "compliance car" argument. I'm not sure I totally buy their reasoning, since as they say, excess credits can be sold. But it is interesting to know that GM will likely accumulate credits far in excess of their internal needs, in large part due to Bolt sales.

Excess credits have a limited shelf life, and there's no set price for them. Supposedly the maximum amount an automaker could get is $5000 per credit since that's equal to the penalty they have to pay for each credit they don't have or manage to generate. In reality, the credits probably go for less, how much less nobody knows. You might be able to find it in a quarterly or yearly statement for a manufactgurer, but I'm gonna guess only a full audit of their books would be able to dig up the specifics.

 

[roundpeg]

They might get relaxed, but they won't certainly won't go away in their entirety, and it won't happen overnight. Once regulations are in place, they are just as hard to undo as it was to create and pass them. Automakers have spent considerable amounts of money meeting the current standards, and have efforts underway to meet the new standards that were just approved. Industries like consistency in their regulations. They don't like things necessarily being changed willy-nilly, at least not without input and discussion.

CARB has been allowed to set air quality and car emissions standards for California for nearly 50 years due to the Federal Air Quality Act that was passed in 1967. Additional regulations have been passed subsequent to that that have cemented California's ability to regulate vehicle emissions. It will take a massive court challenge or lots of political capital to overturn CARB's ability to set standards, or the standards themselves.

Perhaps the likelihood of them going away entirely is not great, but the chances that they get strengthened seems smaller yet, so that is why I said what I said initially. Gov. Brown made a very combative speech just the other day suggesting that under his leadership at least California is prepared to fight the federal government tooth and nail on issues that are important to the state, environment being one of them. That's a political position for now, the practicality of which will be tested. Given how this administration is taking shape I am not optimistic. They even managed to find a climate change skeptic to run the Department of the Interior.