January 26, 2023

Volume XIII, Number 26

Advertisement

January 26, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

January 25, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

January 24, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Charging Ahead: California to Require All New Cars Sold to Be Zero Emissions in 2035

On August 25, 2022, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved the Advanced Clean Cars II rule (Rule), requiring all new vehicles sold in California to be zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) by 2035. Governor Gavin Newsom laid the foundation for the Rule with his September 23, 2020, Executive Order N-79-20. The Rule accelerates the increased sales percentages of passenger ZEVs, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) automakers are required to meet starting in 2026. This Rule is an important component of the State’s plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2045.

Background

Clean Air Act Section 209 authorizes California to set stricter vehicle emission standards than the federal standards. To date, 14 states have adopted California’s prior ZEV program, which requires car manufacturers to produce and deliver for sale an increasing number of low-emitting and zero-emitting vehicles through model year 2025. Should these states adopt the Rule, it would affect a significant segment of the country’s passenger vehicles. Some states, including Washington and Massachusetts, have already supported the Rule.

Because automakers already follow California’s standards for their passenger vehicles, this Rule has significant implications for vehicle manufacturers. The Rule will substantially increase energy demands and thus will also affect utilities, electrical infrastructure development projects and firms, and of course, vehicle purchasers.

Vehicle Manufacturers

The Rule accelerates ZEV and PHEV vehicle sales requirements but also imposes stringent requirements on vehicles’ minimum range, battery durability, and manufacturer in-use testing and reporting. These requirements may disadvantage smaller automakers, given the cost of researching and developing newer, more efficient, and more durable batteries and electric vehicles. The Rule’s data standardization reporting requirements, which differ from current electric vehicle communication protocols, also raise concerns for automakers and could require significant investments of time and money relating to developing compliant digital infrastructure. Because the Rule also standardizes charging requirements, certain vehicle manufacturers have expressed concerns that they will either have to alter their current charging inlets or provide adapters to every customer.

Utilities and Electrical Infrastructure

California’s transition to ZEVs will bring increased demands on the state’s power grid. Researchers at the University of California Irvine have raised concerns over the power grid’s capacity, stating that “the grid does not currently have the capability to add millions of battery electric or even fuel-cell electrical vehicles today.” Some people are also skeptical that California’s existing investor-owned electric utilities are going to be able to safely build and maintain the additional infrastructure necessary to keep up with increasing demands on the grid. Compounding that skepticism are California’s increasingly extreme heat waves, which are causing record electricity demands from Californians cooling their homes and businesses. If demand exceeds capacity, the state faces the prospect of rotating power outages. The short-term solution to avoiding planned outages is for Californians to reduce their power usage during peak hours—a task which may be hampered as more residents will need to tap into the grid for their transportation needs.

While federal programs currently support efforts to develop the country’s electric vehicle charging network, more state and local action will be required to ensure the demand is met. Because California homeownership is among the lowest in the country, some ZEV owners may not be able to install charging stations in the rental homes or apartments where they live. Local agencies may also see an increase in applications by project developers for siting, building, and supporting public charging stations. In the long term, local agencies may need to confront the challenge of transportation charging with more holistic solutions, such as mandating new housing or business construction to include a minimum number of charging stations or to provide charger access to members of the general public.

Vehicle Purchasers

This Rule will likely further some vehicle purchasers’ existing concerns about purchasing electric vehicles, concerns such as range anxiety (i.e., the mileage from a charged battery is insufficient) and the lack of market options to meet their desired configurations. CARB notes that there are currently over 70 different makes and models of electric, plug-in hybrid electric, and fuel cell electric vehicles on the market including pick-up trucks, SUVs, and hatchbacks with 4-wheel-drive options. That number should grow as manufacturers introduce new models to comply with the Rule. CARB also states that new electric vehicles “typically have ranges above 200 miles,” which meet most daily driving needs. Furthermore, CARB believes that ZEVs “already save consumers thousands of dollars over the life of the vehicle compared to conventional cars . . . up to $4,600 in fuel costs in just the first seven years.”

Due to its scope, breadth, and potential effects on many relevant stakeholders in the transportation industry, challenges to this Rule are likely. Nevertheless, the transportation industry is already building its capacity to produce greater numbers of electric vehicles. Interested stakeholders may also want to consider relevant grants under the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act, which authorizes, among other things, grants for funding new infrastructure needed to charge ZEVs and certain tax credits for alternative fuel refueling stations in rural or low-income areas.

© 2023 Beveridge & Diamond PC National Law Review, Volume XII, Number 253
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Timothy M. Sullivan Environmental & Natural Resources Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond Baltimore, MD
Office Managing Principal

Tim Sullivan’s practice focuses primarily on environmental and natural resources litigation before federal and state courts and adjudicatory bodies.

He represents and advises public and private clients in regulatory, litigation, and other matters involving many federal and state environmental and natural resources laws, with a particular emphasis on Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the Clean Water Act. Tim is the Managing Principal of Beveridge & Diamond's Baltimore office. 

    In...

    410-230-1355
    Joshua H. Van Eaton Environmental Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond Washington, DC
    Principal

    Joshua H. Van Eaton helps clients resolve high-stakes compliance, enforcement, and litigation matters.

    He brings the perspective gained from a distinguished U.S. government service career to provide clients with strategic counsel on air, water, and waste issues with a focus on mobile source emissions. He also litigates those matters and advises on proactive environmental compliance strategies.

    Prior to joining Beveridge & Diamond, Josh served as Senior Trial Attorney in the Environmental Enforcement Section of the Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) of the U...

    202-789-6033
    Mary Crowell Environmental Lawyer Beveridge and Diamond
    Associate

    Mary focuses her practice on a mix of regulatory advising and environmental litigation.

    She advises clients on issues arising under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Clean Air Act (CAA). Mary also has experience with toxic tort litigation and advising on waste and product regulation.

    Prior to joining Beveridge & Diamond, Mary served as a Law Clerk with the U.S. Department of Justice in the Environment &...

    202-789-6077
    Elizabeth A. Glusman San Francisco Environmental Attorney Beveridge Diamond
    Associate

    Elizabeth A. Glusman is an Associate at Beveridge & Diamond's San Francisco office who focuses on regulatory compliance. 

    Her work includes counseling some of the world’s largest technology companies on environmental, health, and safety regulations. She also assists companies in navigating the evolving regulatory landscape surrounding product regulation, supply chain due diligence, and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues.

    Liz also maintains a robust pro bono practice representing asylum seekers and...

    415-262-4013
    Anthony G. Papetti Environmental Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond New York, NY
    Associate

    Anthony’s practice focuses on general environmental litigation and automotive regulatory compliance.

    For the past two years, his experience has been extensively involved in the Department of Justice-appointed Independent Corporate Compliance Monitor and Audit matter in connection with the Volkswagen AG diesel emissions proceedings. During this experience, Anthony has gained tremendous insight into complex corporate compliance management systems and the automotive product development process, including both domestic and international vehicle emissions certification...

    202-789-6042
    Advertisement
    Advertisement
    Advertisement