Autoblog

Margo Oge, EPA director-office of transportation and air quality, has made a plea to the auto industry to end the current horsepower wars that have produced such vehicles as the 620-hp Corvette ZR1. Instead, she hopes the industry, specifically domestic automakers, will start a new war, a green war, to create the "most affordable and desirable, low carbon-vehicle each year." Such a challenge, she claims, could help spark economic growth and see the transportation sector "reclaim the mantle of the country's economic growth over the next decade."

Her arguments, which can be read in more detail at Ward's Auto, are well reasoned, and while automakers can hardly deny their part in an arms race for more horsepower, many are also on the front lines of a battle to make green vehicles that are more desirable than their competitors. One need only look at the squabbling that goes back and forth between GM and Toyota over which is better, a series hybrid like the Volt or a parallel hybrid like the Prius. The latter two automakers, being the largest full-line automakers in the world, are forced to deal with the dissonance of producing desirable, high-horsepower sports cars and full-size trucks while at the same time being on the cutting edge of new green technology. It's not hypocrisy, it's the reality of offering many different types of vehicles to the widest range of customers.

And despite Oge's plea, automakers are keenly aware of what needs to be done in order to meet new, stricter CAFE standards by 2020. GM has already cancelled plans for a new V8 and Ford has practically committed itself to replacing eight-cylinder engines with more efficient turbocharged, direct-inject V6 powerplants. The rub is that any progress made by an automaker to make its vehicles more green cannot happen at the expense of performance, reliability and comfort. We want our new cars to be as good as they were last year in every way, with better fuel economy and cleaner emissions. It's a tall order, but don't worry Margo. Both federal regulations and consumer pressure guarantee they're working hard on it.

[Source: Ward's Auto]

Senator Barbara Boxer said regarding the EPA's denial of California's waiver request: "Administrator Johnson's decision to deny the waiver was not supported by the facts, by the law, by the science, or by precedent. I will use every available tool to ensure that California and the nation are able to reduce the pollution that causes global warming. One of those tools is legislation that essentially overturns Mr. Johnson's actions."

The bill is in response to the discovery that the EPA's own documents that say that California has "compelling and extraordinary conditions" that would satisfy reasons for granting a waiver. In spite of those internal findings, Steven Johnson, EPA chief, denied the waiver, saying "it is my view that California does not have a need for these greenhouse gas standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions."

The internal EPA briefings also conclude that if the auto industry sued the EPA to overturn its new regulations, that the EPA would win. However, if California were to sue for its own standards, that California would win. So Boxer and seventeen senatorial colleagues (15 D, 2 R) have introduced a bill that would compel the EPA to grant the Golden State its wishes. And if California gets what it wants, then 18 states are in line right behind it to adhere to the higher standards.

[Source: Green Car Congress]

Admittedly, we're a little late to the party on this one, but thankfully, our greener sibling site was on top of things when the Supreme Court made an important ruling yesterday regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's enforcement of the Clean Air Act.

The ruling revolves around the regulation of carbon dioxide, classifying it as a pollutant and, more specifically, a greenhouse gas. Considering that this is the first case involving global warming, the 5-4 ruling was a major blow to the current administration's opposition of mandatory controls on emissions.

Some of the quotes from the court are worth a read (click here for AutoblogGreen's post), but in the end, it's not the court's place to make regulations, only uphold them. As such, the EPA has to make changes to the existing law and/or uphold current regulations. However, don't expect anything to change until later this decade, if and when the Executive Branch has a shift in its policy towards global climate change.

[Source: Reuters via AutoblogGreen]

The Environmental Protection Agency is considering a variety of rules that it might apply to urea injection for diesel engines, and is said to ready to issue rules for such emission-control devices in upcoming weeks. The regulations are expected to address potential issues arising with urea injection, such as the availability of the substance, making sure that the system and its low-fluid-level warning system are tamperproof, and dealing with urea's freezing point of 11F. One of the largest areas of contention between the EPA and automakers involves a proposed interlock between the urea level-monitoring system and the engine that would perhaps disable the starter or lock the vehicle's fuel cap if urea levels drop too low to ensure proper function.

Starting in 2010, all diesel vehicles sold in the US must meet or exceed "Bin 5" classification of the Tier II clean air standards, which would effectively make oilburners as clean as gasoline engines. Urea injection helps reduce the level of oxides of nitrogen when injected into the tailpipe, and does so at a cost perhaps 10% lower than the competing NOx trap technology. Bosch sees the combination of urea and selective catalyst reduction as the path toward diesel cleanliness, and GM has shown off the technology on a diesel light-truck prototype. VW's emission certification problems with the diesel Touareg last year elevated the profile of urea injection - and the problems surrounding it - here in the United States, and prompted the EPA to start moving.

[Source: Autoweek/Automotive News]

The Supreme Court announced Monday that it has agreed to hear an appeal filed by a number of states, cities and environmental groups hoping to force the federal government to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maintains that it cannot regulate CO2 emissions because the Clean Air Act does not give it the authority to do so. An appeals court ruling last year upheld the EPA position.

The appeal involves Baltimore, New York City and Washington, D.C., along with California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. The group's request for a Supreme Court ruling was opposed by the Bush administration, ten other states and a group representing electricity generating companies.

The case will be heard later this year.

[Source: Reuters]

Earlier this week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency honored singer Willie Nelson for his work in promoting biodiesel. Nelson, who first heard of the blended vegetable and petroleum diesel from his wife two years ago, has since traveled across the U.S. to become arguably the alternative fuel's highest profile advocate. The country great has even gotten into the Biodiesel business, creating Willie Nelson Biodiesel, and has his own brand, "BioWillie".

We're happy to see that Mr. Nelson is again in the good graces of the U.S. government, and all it took was an alternative fuel to do so.

[Source: The Soy Daily]

Environmental groups will no doubt be disappointed to hear that the new clean air regulations imposed upon automakers by the Environmental Protection Agency will cost companies less than $1 per vehicle. The new regulations mostly address pollutants that come from exhaust tail pipes, predominantly on a cold startup.

Most of the new regulations hit gasoline itself, including a requirement that petroleum refiners spend about $500 million to reduce benzene (a carcinogen) in fuel.  

Automakers haven't responded yet, but environmental groups already have. Groups like Clean Air Watch are criticizing the EPA for doing little to lessen pollutants in diesel exhaust.

[Source: AutoWeek]