California’s Mobility Climate Policy: Barriers and Strategies.

Arjun Sarkar

UC Berkeley

Arjun Sarkar is graduating from UC Berkeley in May with a degree in environmental economics and policy. He is an emerging sustainability advocate and policy wonk, and his favorite activities include exploring the outdoors and reading.

In many parts of the world public policy makers explore ways how to reduce the emissions of the transportation sector.

In this article Arjun Sarkar takes a closer look at strategies, barriers and topics that are currently debated in California and share his perspectives and opinion on the ideas and concepts.

California’s Emissions Strategy for its 2030 Climate Target.

The success of California’s ambitious climate strategy is tied closely to its progress in clean transportation development. California has made remarkable progress in exceeding the emission reduction targets set by AB 32, Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, but there is much more work to be done to ensure that reductions are met beyond the short-term. SB 32 is the extension of the initial climate target by AB 32, requiring emission reductions to meet the targets set by the Paris Agreement goals by 2030. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan is the state’s integrated climate strategy for how to achieve that SB 32 target. For clean transportation in particular, it establishes a requirement of 5 million ZEVs on the road by 2030 and 250,000 public chargers by 2025 (CARB 2017). This has been laid out by the California Air Resources Board as the optimal condition for both enabling clean transportation, and also ensuring that the state will reach the SB 32 climate target of a 40% reduction below 1990 GHG emission levels by 2030. 

Vehicles play a big part of California’s citizens and mobility system.

Vehicle Emissions and Political Barriers.

Vehicle emissions present an important opportunity for improvement in the state’s integrated climate strategy. Light-duty vehicles in particular account for the majority of vehicle emissions from the transportation sector, which is the single highest contributor to the state’s emissions as seen by the scoping plan. Smog and air pollution from vehicle fossil fuel combustion not only drive climate change and global warming, but also exacerbate pre-existing lung and respiratory health issues. That, coupled with failure to uphold federal air quality standards related to vehicle emissions have only increased in recent years. This year alone, Southern California’s regional ozone pollution had reached 157 days of “non-attainment” for the EPA’s clean air standards, the worst in the state since 1997 (Barboza 2020). They will not meet even the least stringent standards for the region by that metric. This type of issue is compounded by political barriers at the federal level for clean transportation.

With current SAFE standards in place by the Trump administration, federal regulation imposes lax standards on vehicle fuel economies which threaten California’s vision for transportation sustainability. Under a provision of the Clean Air Act, California had received a waiver to preempt CAFE standards from the former Obama administration. Under that waiver, the state could determine if its integrated climate strategy required more stringent regulation on fuel economy standards. With the revocation of that waiver, the state essentially has no authority to preempt federal regulations, which would have undesirable consequences for the long-term emission reduction goals set by SB 32 (Wimberger 2019). The state may have to forgo any expectation of a tightening of the SAFE standards for fuel economy, as well as a reintroduction of the California waiver. The current federal administration in particular makes these outcomes politically difficult for the state to achieve, with its focus on an all-inclusive national program. 

Policy Prescription

California’s emission reduction strategy may benefit from short-term investments in zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and incentives for consumers. Despite the fact that electricity production can contribute to air pollution, all-electric cars fall into the category of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), because they don't produce direct exhaust or tailpipe emissions. California has the necessary circumstances in place for a truly all-electric vehicle fleet. Nearly 50% of ZEVs in the US operate in California alone, and they collectively raise the average fuel economy standards of the vehicle fleet (CARB 2017). Bolstering the market for ZEVs from both a supply and demand will be essential for this transition to occur. That starts with improving supply of electric vehicle equipment at-home and public charging infrastructure, which is essential for the state to meet the expectations of the scoping plan (e.g. EVSE standards); current infrastructure is not meeting future demand for a growing electric vehicle market in California (Hall, Dale, et al., 2019). 

Source: Hall, Dale, et al., 2019

“Figure ES-1 illustrates the deployment of public and workplace charging infrastructure through 2017 as a percentage of what will be needed by 2025 across the 100 most populous U.S. metropolitan areas (the 50 most populous are labeled). Shades of red indicate that less than 50% of the needed charging has been installed through the end of 2017, while blues indicate that more than 50% of charging needed in 2025 was in place by 2017. Of the 100 areas, 88 had less than half of the total needed charging infrastructure in place, based on their expected electric vehicle growth” (refer to fig. 1).

Support may be needed for private entities through public/private funding and knowledge dissemination. ZEVs are still an emerging market; commercial options are not immediately available for consumers. That means the state will bolster financial options for especially low- and middle-income levels in order to a turn a broad range of the state’s population into viable consumers in the electric vehicle market, and consumers will be made more aware of consumer incentive programs available to them, like electric vehicle tax rebates from the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (Department of Energy, “California Laws and Incentives”). ZEVs are still an emerging market, and commercial options are not always readily available. That means improving demand for ZEVs with information-based policy for consumers. A few commercial options for consumers, like Tesla in particular, are at the center of the popular image of ZEVs, but it would be important for state regulators to improve the accessibility and visibility of other ZEV brands for consumers.

California should implement greater policy involving consumer incentives to buy ZEVs, such as greater tax rebates for owning ZEVs, increased funding for public charging infrastructure, and greater accessibility for lower-income individuals to purchase ZEVs. This will help California to reach its emissions reductions goals more quickly. Other states could benefit from following California’s example, particularly with the ZEV program; interstate collaborative efforts between regulatory agencies could help other states develop similar programs. As California looks beyond its 2030 goals, an all-electric fleet will raise emissions standards beyond transportation as other sectors respond to the changes accordingly. 

Arjun Sarkar

✌️ Hope you liked the article!

👋 If you liked the article we would appreciate if you share it with friends and family to raise awareness.