ARB Tightens California Auto Emission Rules
The California Air Resources Board on Thursday established a stringent new automobile emissions standard that would reduce nitrogen oxides by an estimated 144 tons a day, or a statewide reduction of nearly 15%.
The action was vehemently opposed by the auto industry and supported by environmental groups. Car manufacturers said they may not be able to meet the new nitrogen oxides standard by the final 1994 deadline if other types of emissions standards are imposed, as is planned.
Timetable Adopted
The ARB action, by a 7-1 vote with one abstention, could drive up the cost of new cars by an average of $37 to $50, according to the regulatory body. About half the new cars sold in California already meet the just-adopted standard of four-tenths of a gram of nitrogen oxide per mile, down from seven-tenths.
The new standard requires of an auto maker that at least half its cars meet the new standard by 1989 and another 40% by 1993, and the remaining 10% by 1994.
Enforcement would start two years after the new standards take effect, giving both manufacturers and regulators time to develop sufficient data on which to base enforcement action.
Thursday’s vote was a part of a three-step regulatory effort designed to improve overall air quality in the state and signals a shift in strategy.
Historically, regulators have focused more on controlling hydrocarbons, which are mostly vapors from solvents, paints and unburned fossil fuels such as gasoline, than on nitrogen oxides, which are almost entirely the byproducts of combustion and come from emissions of cars and power plants.
As early as 1981, the ARB had wanted to establish the stringent standard of four-tenths of a gram per mile of nitrogen oxide in order to combat growing nitrogen oxide pollution, an especially serious problem in the Los Angeles Basin.
But the auto industry fought successfully for a lesser standard. It argued at the time, and still does, that stricter controls on nitrogen oxides could actually worsen smog. The car makers’ rationale is that nitrogen oxides, when first released into the atmosphere, actually break down ozone, another component of smog; therefore, they say, any reduction in nitrogen oxides would increase air pollution.
But proponents of a stricter nitrogen oxides standard cite a recent ARB study that said the beneficial effect of nitric oxide--the major ingredient in nitrogen oxides--is far less pronounced than believed. Eventually, however, nitric oxide converts to nitrogen dioxide, which then generates ozone.
The second smog-fighting step being considered by the ARB at its two-day meeting in Los Angeles is a proposal that would, for the first time, impose standards for soot emissions on diesel buses and diesel trucks that would greatly reduce such pollution.
The third proposal, which also is expected to be voted on today, would “align” the state’s hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide and nitrogen emission standards for heavy-duty, gasoline-powered trucks and buses with those set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last year. This would mean that somewhat greater nitrogen oxide emissions would be allowed for this class of vehicles because EPA standards are less stringent, according to ARB spokesman William Sessa.
The three-part ARB proposal is critical, according to Thomas F. Heinsheimer, vice chairman of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Without the new standards, air quality would again begin to deteriorate, he said.
The new auto emission standard is expected to reduce 73 tons of nitrogen oxide emissions in the Los Angeles Basin and another 85 tons of hydrocarbons by the year 2000.
Currently, new cars in California may emit no more than seven-tenths of a gram per mile for 75,000 miles. As an alternative, auto makers may opt for the more stringent four-tenths standard for 50,000 miles. According to ARB staff members, 53% of cars now meet the more stringent standard. Car manufacturers testified Thursday that the tightening of nitrogen oxide standards is ill-timed and poorly thought out.
“California has little need to adopt this four-tenth standard,” said Fred W. Bowditch, vice president for technical affairs for the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assn. He said the new regulations would upset the existing mix of standards.
Bowditch, joined by spokesmen from General Motors, Ford Motors and other auto makers, asked the ARB to postpone a vote on the new nitrogen oxide standard until such action could be balanced against the need for new standards for hydrocarbons and benzine. They admitted that such a process could take four to five years.
The ARB has already indicated that it plans in the near future to order a 25% reduction in hydrocarbon emissions. This worries car makers because they must then make engines more fuel efficient--a process that would increase nitrogen oxide emissions. Nitrogen oxides are what make the air look brown and cause acid rain and human health problems.
Environmental groups hailed the ARB vote. But Gladys Meade, environmental health expert for the California Lung Assn., as well as representatives of the Sierra Club, took issue with the ARB’s time schedule. Meade said the auto makers should meet the more stringent standards in 1989 and that enforcement should begin immediately thereafter.
