Electric trucks at any cost should have conversations about the conundrums associated with this mandate, before implementing a Mandate.
Published Dec 5, 2023 at Heartland https://heartland.org/opinion/california-aims-to-force-adoption-of-electric-trucks-but-19-states-sue-to-block/
Ronald Stein is an engineer, senior policy advisor on energy literacy for the Heartland Institute and CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”
The California GREEN movement, at any cost, is progressing at warp speed.
Earlier this year, California passed regulations that would turn the trucking industry upside down. Zero emission mandates would disrupt the industry, raise shipping costs, and put trucking companies out of business. A group including 19 states and several trucking organizations recently filed suit to block the California regulation.
A little background on the EV Truck mandate:California’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) Regulation goes into effect on January 1, 2024. The ACF requires that truck operators buy only Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) trucks for medium-duty and heavy-duty trucking operations as early as January 2024. The ACF also requires that trucking companies transition their fleets to 100 percent ZEV trucks by 2035 to 2042, depending upon class of truck.
This EV truck mandate lacks conversations about the many conundrums associated with this mandate, i.e., the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about:
- For those huge EV truck batteries there is virtually non-existing transparency of the environmental degradation and the human rights abuses occurring in developing countries with yellow, brown, and black skinned people. Both human rights abuses and environmental degradation are directly connected to the mining for the exotic minerals and metals that are required to manufacture those EV batteries. The children used to produce the lithium for an EV battery is appalling.
- California has almost 400,000 miles of roadways used by the State’s 31 million vehicles. Those roadways are heavily dependent on road taxes from fuels that contribute more than $8.8 billion annually, the same gas tax revenues that also funds many environmental programs. That $8.8 billion revenue source will diminish in the decades ahead as EV’s begin to replace internal combustion engine vehicles.
- The heavier EV trucks will put more wear and tear on the California roadways. How will the State replace $8.8 billion from fuel taxes to maintain the California roadways?
- California is the 4th largest economy in the world and has three of the largest shipping ports in America—No. 1 in Los Angeles, No. 2 in Long Beach, and No. 7 in Oakland. Ships arriving and departing from the ports up and down the coast from San Diego to San Francisco.
- Many truckers are individual operators that may just stop coming to California! Those trucks that access three of the largest shipping ports in America move a lot of products for the entire country.
- Trucker’s travel all over the nation, thus heavy EV truck charging stations sites would need to be built all over the nation to keep those trucks moving.
- EV trucks are only for those in wealthy countries as Nearly Half the World Lives on Less than $5.50 a Day, as billions still struggle to meet basic needs. They may never be able to enjoy the materialistic living styles of those in wealthier countries.
- Electric trucks suffer major disadvantages when compared to diesel trucks:
- Diesel trucks can travel about 1,200 miles after filling the tank in 15 minutes. The range of electric trucks is about 150-330 miles, and recharging may take hours, even on a high-speed charger.
- EV truck cabs cost two-to-three times as much as diesel cabs, an incremental cost of as much as $300,000 per truck.
- EV cabs also weigh about 10,000 pounds more than comparable diesel versions.
- China emits more greenhouse gases in a day than California trucks emit in a year.
The California GREEN movement continues to be a National Security risk for America as 4th largest economy in the world is already importing most of its crude oil demands from foreign countries, to support the States’ 9 International airports, 41 Military airports, and 3 of the largest shipping ports in America, and is now mandating that the trucks that move many of the products to Americans be electric!
Ronald Stein, P.E.
Author | Columnist | Energy Literacy Consultant
https://expertfile.com/experts/ronald.stein
I know of a company that just foist two for now, soon more EV Vans (large Ford Transit) on their worker “How do we charge them? Where for that matter” (building they’re in is short on electric expansion) “Not our problem, you figure it out” so they are at opposite ends of the building with extension cords running to them. Hope they charge enough to last the day in freezing temps.
forgot to mention they are parked where Ice is known to fall from the roof, so no one parks in those spots in winter.
Most likely California will move trailers throughout the state (intrastate) with Electric Tucks and will move interstate trailers to Transfer Hubs at State Boarder stations where they’ll be picked up by traditional diesel trucks for the remainder of the trip cross country. Likewise trailers entering the state will be dropped at the State Border Transfer Hubs and picked up there by Electric Trucks to move to their destination within the state.
Trailers moving from Arizona or Nevada to Oregon or Washington and beyond will be picked up at a Transfer Hub on the east border and dropped off at a Hub on the northern border
Question. I read that the batteries for the truck weigh 8000 lbs each and that there are 2 batteries. If that is the case, the truck’s payload may be reduced since there are strict weight limits for trucks, so it may not be as simple as switching trailors – cargo may need to be shifted to meet weight restrictions
Absolutely, batteries add much to the Vehicle Tare Weight and affect GVW allowances. Most likely anything being sent to or transferred through CA will have additional total Cargo Weight restrictions to accommodate battery weight.
WUWT had an article on electric trucks a year or so ago. In that article they claimed that the batteries would be stored in the trailers. In either case, there’s going to be an entire industry created just to move cargo from one trailer to another as cheaply as possible. If competition is allowed to operate (rare these days) those shipping to and from CA will have to bear all of this cost.
If a company tries to spread the cost amongst all their customers, they will be undercut by those companies that don’t have any operations in CA
We were in Arizona a few years ago. There were a lot of trains carrying shipping containers or loaded trailers, so much of the west-east cross-country freight may currently be by rail. That doesn’t work well in areas which don’t have railway lines, though, so may be a problem for intrastate transport within California.
The other observations were that the trailers on semi-trailers
(tractor trailers) only had 2 axles rather than the 3 we’re used to, and I don’t recall seeing any B-doubles.
I think our weight limits are around 30 tons for a single trailer and 50 for a B-double.
Most US States have a maximum gross weight of 80,000 pounds for single trailer semi trucks.
Factoid about that. Bill Clinton got the support of the Teamsters union for his first run at getting elected Governor of Arkansas. He did that by promising to get the truck weight limit raised to 80,000 pounds to match surrounding States. Trucks were literally driving around Arkansas, only entering the State if they were picking up or delivering within it, and to do so they couldn’t bring or take as much cargo.
But in his first term he took no action on that promise. When he ran for re-election the Teamsters were against him and he lost. So when he ran again, he made the same promise *then made sure he followed through* after getting elected. And he stayed as Arkansas Governor until getting elected President.
Seems to me California’s action preventing interstate operating ICE trucks from entering the state would be unconstitutional. But it could conceivably outlaw the sale of ICE trucks within the state. Stupid, but legal.
Probably right, unconstitutional.
Congress can always override the state, and the military can easily mandate exemptions for trucks hauling to and from military installations.
Well.. that is certainly ‘efficient’, and ‘cost effective’…
Most likely the shipping business will move out of state. Can’t force out of state or international trucks to go full stupid on EVs.
So hopefully they will get crushed?
All part of the plan. Remove energy source. Cripple economy. Limit food supplies. Stagnate work opportunities. “Vote for us and we’ll make everything whole again” …. (that we screwed up to begin with).
The history of this era of California may one day be written with the title:
The Follies of a Fool.
Just believe with all your heart, and you to will be able to fly
I think I can! I think I can!
“Just believe with all your heart, and you to will be able to fly”
Worked for me for about 40 years.
Just through yourself at the ground. And miss.
We can all fly. At issue is a safe landing. CA has penciled-in their first lesson. Let’s see how it goes.
gruesome Newsom!
Wikipedia says he has “severe dyslexia that still affects him. It has challenged his abilities to write, spell, read, and work with numbers.”
“and work with numbers.”
Thats …
Dyscalculia ( / ˌdɪskælˈkjuːliə /) [1] [2] [3] [4] is a disability resulting in difficulty learning or comprehending arithmetic, such as difficulty in understanding numbers, learning how to manipulate numbers, performing mathematical calculations, and learning facts in mathematics.
Dyslexia is a learning difficulty that affects word reading and spelling skills, and is a continuum across the range of intellectual abilities.
You can have one or the other … or both !!!
A common symptom of dyslexia is reversing symbols in a sequence. So maybe there’s: DOG and you read it GOD. Or maybe there’s 1234 and you read it 1324. Dyslexia can definitely make working with numbers hard. I don’t have any difficulty “understanding numbers, learning how to manipulate numbers” etc., but when you reverse two digits it makes getting the correct answer impossible no matter how well you understand the concepts.
Whenever I need to do arithmetic I do the problem, write down the result, and then do it again to see if I get the same answer. And if it’s important I do it three times.
There’s dysgraphia, where a person has no problems at all with reading, but difficulties writing such as repeatedly writing or typing a letter you do not want to write or type. For example you want to type “example” but you type exe and you *know* that second e is the wrong letter so you hit backspace and command your finger to hit a, but it strikes e again. Sometimes it’ll happen several times until you visually focus on the right key and force your finger to hit the desired letter.
I’ve had this all my life and called it “semi-dyslexia” until a few years ago when someone who knows about these things recognized it as dysgraphia. When I was in school they said I had dyslexia but apart from that did nothing to help.
I had to develop on my own a “mental filter”. I always got top grades in spelling and vocabulary, but my writing was (still is) horrible and my handwritten papers were a mess from so many erasures to make corrections. Computers were a ‘godsend’ for me. If you think it’s frustrating watching your fingers hit the wrong keys, imaging what it feels like being in grade school in the 1970’s seeing your fingers make the motions of drawing *the wrong letter* then doing it two or three more times as the paper gets more smudged and thinned by the pencil eraser.
With a computer there’s so much less stress in writing. I see the wrong letter appear on the screen then just pop backspace and go again. No worries. 🙂
Cobalt, not lithium, is produced with forced and child labor, mostly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Lithium is mostly mined as a brine.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/12/06/californias-electric-truck-mandate-conundrums/#comment-3826479
Ronald won’t reply. I’ve criticized his offerings of very poorly researched stuff with nary a reply. I can’t believe that his much vaunted book can be well researched (likely pulitzer has been taken over by the Dark Side). We get a steady diet of appallingly researched crap from climateers. Spare us the same from our own “experts”.
I have read that 250 tonnes of earth must be moved to produce a battery for a Tesla. Stop government mandates for EVs and stop government subsidies for EVs. $7.5 billion has been appropriated for EV chargers under Joke Biden but none have been actually built so far…..tax EV owners for chargers.
Will only ‘green’ concrete and natural asphalt be allowed for road construction in California? Or is the intention to revert to dirt tracks and wooden bridges?
As it is now, some of their potholes have potholes.
And every pothole is a massive jolt to the structure of the lithium battery.
What could possibly go wrong !!
There go the trees!
If the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) Regulation was passed by the state legislature and signed into law by the governor, what’s the problem? That’s how “democracy” works. There might be opposition to it but evidently a majority of the people’s representatives found it to be the right thing to do. A citizen of another state might loudly point out its disadvantages but isn’t in a position to effectively negate the results of democracy.
At the same time, if implementation of ACF causes huge problems for the citizens of California, if it turns out that a mistake was made, that’s their problem. Other states and the federal government have no obligation to rectify policy decisions and, in fact have no constitutional duty to do so. A failure of this law isn’t the same as the damage produced by a flood or hurricane, a force majeure.The Prunies have drawn their bath water, let them sit in it.
Will be watching for the reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere as a result of California’s actions. If it doesn’t happen, then all the action was for nothing.
At some point even stupid people realize that throwing resources into solutions that do nothing is a waste of time.
I used to believe that too. Not any more. These people are brain dead and should be take off of life support
Yes, there are a lot of low-information voters in California. They vote for low-information politicians.
The problem for the rest of us is when you disrupt California’s economy, as EV mandates will, you disrupt the economies of the rest of us, too.
Thus, 19 States are suing California over the EV truck mandate.
That’s Democracy, too.
In 2020 when the pandemic first hit, human CO2 emissions dropped by 6%, yet the CO2 in the atmosphere kept rising at the same rate, at least to the eye. https://www.co2.earth/monthly-co2
That is because most of the atmosphere’s CO2 comes from non-human sources.
ps.. a small change in man’s 3 or 4% percentage of released CO2 is not going to make any noticeable difference whatsoever.
The problem is that trucks cross state lines, all the time. By effectively attempting to regulate inter-state commerce, California is exceeding its jurisdictional authority. This will surely be the subject of multiple legal challenges that will likely (and hopefully) prove successful.
The author neglected the most obvious difficulty. There are no such EV trucks available to buy starting 1/1/24. The Pepsi bottler experiment in CA is just that, experimental.
Gavin failed to take that into consideration.
I guess trucking will just stop in California January 1, 2024. Truckers can’t drive conventional trucks, and EV trucks are not available.
Radical Democrats are SO stupid! One stupid idea after another with these guys. Fortunately for them, and unfortunately for us, there are a lot of stupid voters out there.
California politicians are trying real hard to make California the climate alarmist “crash-test dummy” for the United States. The Wall of Reality is rapidly being approached. The crash is inevitable.
As I read it, January 1, 2024 only affects new trucks. There will be little to no impact to trucking for quite a while. Like lobster in a pot with the heart slowly rising….
You really can’t fix stupid
With enough duct tape, you can mute it.
I don’t know, Mark. I don’t think there’s enough tape in the world to mute all that we’re seeing lately.
The great tragedy is that not only can’t you fix it, it often causes no harm to the stupid person itself. I used to wonder if it physically hurt to be that stupid, but I soon realized the only pain is inflicted on those around them.
The stupid are oblivious.
“”Zero emission mandates would disrupt the industry, raise shipping costs, and put trucking companies out of business. “”
Part of the de-development regime.
I refuse to give any credence to the notion that they don’t realise what they are doing
“The children used to produce the lithium for an EV battery is appalling.”
Shame on You Ronald, an engineer. Virtually all Li is produced by a handfull of countries: most comes from Australia, Chile and Argentina, with smaller amounts from USA and China.
It is inexcusable for someone in Heartland to be a lazy researcher like you are. Ive criticized this aspect of your work to no avail (you don’t ever reply. Do you even read comments?). This is precisely how the Dark Side does its research. Indeed, in many of your pieces I see the same links and photos used by anti development NGOs to put across their pap. I wonder how well researched your book can be if the stuff here is a sample.
I’d like to see Ronald’s reply.
The children are producing the cobalt for the lithium battery’s internal cathodes, as far as I have read.
I think there is an good chance that SCOTUS will get around to ruling that California zero emission mandates for trucks purchased/owned/used by commercial interstate trucking firms are unconstitutional under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, which states that Congress shall have Power to regulate commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
If California was permitted such a regulatory power for trucks that could cross its border, it would effectively regulate commerce on interstate highways and, furthermore, be a violation of equal-protection-under-the-law because non-Californian trucking business would be given a competitive advantage via use of less expensive, longer haul, higher payload, more-convenient-to-operate ICE-powered vehicles vying for the same business.
Can anyone seriously assert that recharging an EV truck after, say, achieving its 300 or so mile maximum range, will be anywhere near as convenient and time-efficient as refueling an equivalent size diesel- or gasoline-powered truck after achieving a 500 or so mile range (such range is really limited by driver endurance, not fuel tank capacity . . . see second-to-last paragraph below)?
And does anyone seriously believe that MWh-capable charging bays will be as plentiful as gas/diesel pumps are now at all truck stops throughout California by 2035? Ka-ching!^3.
Also, for consideration, most long-haul big rigs have the tractor (the cab) equipped with one or two fuel tanks, each typically sized for around 150 gallons capacity. At a typical mileage rate of 6 miles per gallon diesel when hauling a full cargo trailer, the tractor trailer rig can theoretically go 900–1800 miles without refueling.
Where on a long haul rig would one be able to place a battery pack that could deliver even half of that range? . . . this likely means long-haul EV semi-tractor trucks will morph to having an intermediate trailer that is just the battery pack, located between the cab and the cargo trailer.
Gonna to have to move up from an 18-wheeler to a 26 wheeler, good buddy!
The constitution….
no state shall take any action that inhibits trade with any other state.
I think Newsom’s plans fall foul of this.
“I think there is an good chance that SCOTUS will get around to ruling that California zero emission mandates for trucks purchased/owned/used by commercial interstate trucking firms are unconstitutional under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, which states that Congress shall have Power to regulate commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”
Exactly what I have said in the past. I do not see how the Constitutional article about interstate commerce clause is not involved here for trucking companies that operate across state lines.
Congress shall have the power. . . . If they wish to regulate it. They may not. And the increasingly dominant executive has power as well but is unlikely under Bidenism to interfere. Will the vans hauling emigrants to Arizona, New Mexico and Texas be EV trucks?
Trick question?
The problem with your logic is that Congress used its authority under the Constitution to delegate certain powers to California WRT the Clean Air Act. That’s how California has been able to have different emissions requirements for passenger cars. This is just more of the same.
Those emissions requirements are only for vehicles registered in CA, not from other states.
“On June 30, 2022, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Congress did not authorize the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act to devise emission caps such as the “generation shifting” approach in the Clean Power Plan. (West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 20-1530 (2022).)”
— https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2022-08-17/united-states-supreme-court-limits-epas-authority-to-tackle-climate-change/
This begs the question of when SCOTUS will establish that the Congressional-authorized EPA also never had the authority to allow California to set its own vehicle emission standards (including mandated mpg standards and mandating ZEV sales) more stringent than than those applied to other States.
Stay tuned . . . this from an article (https://legal-planet.org/2023/09/13/vehicle-regulations-on-trial/ ) dated September 13, 2023:
“Vehicle Regulations on Trial
Three big cases in the D.C. Circuit will determine the fate of Biden’s vehicle regulations. This week, the D.C. Circuit hears three cases challenging use of federal regulations to push adoption of electric vehicles and to allow California to forge path toward zero-emission cars. . . .
Ohio v. EPA
This is a challenge to the waiver that EPA has given to California, which allows the state to set its own standards for greenhouse gases and other pollutants. The standing issues are similar to those in the previous case but arguably even stronger. Assuming the court doesn’t toss the case entirely, there are some nitpicky issues about the meaning of the Clean Air Act provision creating the waiver. However, the big issue is a claim that the provision is unconstitutional because it grants one state regulatory powers that it doesn’t give others.”
Highway bridges and pavement are designed for truck weights so there is a limit and if batteries take up a lot of weight then the cargo must be reduced in weight.
Yes.
“All states must allow trucks up to 80,000 pounds on designated Federal highways if they can pass the Federal Bridge Formula test (see Federal Bridge Formula Calculator). Many states allow heavier loads without requiring special Permits.”
— https://oversize.io/regulations/dot-truck-weight-limits
So, assuming a semi-tractor trailer truck using the Federal highway system is at the maximum of 80,000 pounds gross vehicle weight and is also compliant with the Federal Bridge Formula test for all bridges it will be using on its designated route, any weight of batteries takes away weight from cargo.
150 gallons of diesel fuel at 7.1 pounds per gallon, giving a fully loaded semi a typical range of about 900 miles, would weigh about 1065 lbs.
In comparison, the weight of a 875 kWh battery pack for the Tesla Semi, giving an estimated maximum range of 500 miles, is estimated to be 10,000 lbs (see https://www.torquenews.com/14335/tesla-semi-broken-down-details ). Rationing linearly up to 900 miles range would imply a battery pack weight of 18,000 lbs.
That extra 16,900 lbs needed for battery versus diesel comes right off the maximum cargo weight, all other things being equal.
A typical long haul semi can carry 42,000–48,000 lbs of cargo, so if one wanted an EV semi to have a 900 mile range before recharging, it would only be able to carry about 62% of the cargo of an equivalent diesel-fueled ICE semi at maximum gross vehicle weight.
SCOTUS just recently allowed California to dictate to the US Pork Industry the conditions by which any pigs are raised on any pork sold in California. [May, 2023 decision]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Pork_Producers_Council_v._Ross
That does not bode well for using interstate commerce as a reason to nix this California bill.
Seems to me that California will be dropping in their status as #4 (or is it #7) in the world’s economies if they keep up all these Green Mandates. Time will tell, but it is really easy to predict.
Yeah, it looks like a trainwreck getting ready to happen.
Radical Democrats are a trainwreck. They screw up everything they touch.
The weight of the battery reduces the weight of the load a truck can carry. This together with the unproductive time spent charging the batteries means that we’ll need 50-100% more trucks to move the same amount of goods.
The mandate (you can’t really call it a plan because there’s clearly been no actual planning) is simply insane.
Depends what they’re moving. UPS trucks are usually full but not near the weight limit. As an extreme example, my cousin used to work for a potato chip company. You could probably carry a tractor trailer load of potato chips in a 1/4 ton truck, if it weren’t for the volume.
I concede that electric trucks are quite useful for moving air.
Unfortunately, the actual task involves moving more than 10 billion tons of goods per year.
Most trucks just are not at the weight limit.
Australian truck company J Anus has the solution, swappable batteries! (fork lift not included)
John has since made a follow up to answer all those that said” that’s a Kenny, and they’re diesel”
There are so many problems with this mandate it’s hard to know where to begin….One major thing (regarding how destructing it will be) is exactly how the law is written. Does it only apply to trucking companies based in CA? Or to any that operate within the state’s borders? Trucks can and do cross state borders all of the time, everything from small box delivery trucks to big rigs. In other words, could a trucking company based in Nevada operate only diesel powered trucks into and out of CA?
If this only pertains to trucking, delivery and other businesses based in the state, it may not initially have as much negative impact. For one thing, some of those companies may simply choose to leave Cubafornia for other states. But then there are nation wide companies like UPS and Fedex – which aren’t based in the state. They might be able to get by for a while using electric trucks because they carry less weight and only have relatively small local areas in which they operate.
However, that also brings up the charging issue. Yes, they can plug in and charge all their trucks at a local hub – if – and this is a big one – if they can get enough juice to recharge the entire fleet! Newscum told EV owners not to charge during certain hours when the grid was struggling to keep up. What happens when a delivery or local trucking company is told they must cut back and therefore will only either be able to charge their fleet half-full, or only charge some of their trucks?
Electric passenger cars draw a lot of juice – just imagine the draw of a dozen tractor trailers plugging in…..and how many truck stops will be building and adding such chargers? Perhaps only those real close to an electric substation that can handle the load! Gee, you could light a small town for hours with the energy drawn by said hypothetical truck stop.
As said, this could work out OK for very small fleets – that have good access to nightly charging – and are permitted to do so. But surely not for big rigs…dream on!
It applies to any company with gross revenue of $50mm (including subsidiaries) or more and 50 heavy trucks or more under common ownership. So it applies to Mexican trucks too.
From what I can find, about 1/3 of the truck tractors are owned by companies with fewer than 20 units. The main effect of this law will probably be to transfer freight from big companies to small companies. Walmart probably owns thousands of trucks, so they would be subject to this law, but if they contract out with individual truckers to move their California freight they won’t have to worry about this law, because it only applies to the trucks they own.
Another effect will probably be to help the railroads.
https://casetext.com/regulation/california-code-of-regulations/title-13-motor-vehicles/division-3-air-resources-board/chapter-1-motor-vehicle-pollution-control-devices/article-34-high-priority-and-federal-fleets-requirements/section-2015-high-priority-and-federal-fleets-applicability-definitions-and-general-requirements
In 2022 Calif produced 42% of it’s electricity from natural gas. It imports 1/5rd to 1/3rd of it’s electricity from other states, it has the second highest electricity prices in the US (after Hawaii), yet it restricts what it’s private utilities can charge consumers to the point rendering their carrage of the product to hazardous and to bankrupting them. Where is the electricity for these trucks coming from?
Each truck stop will have at least one SMR to feed the charging stations, yeah, right.
That might actually work.😉 Won’t stop the fires though.
I predict huge truck parking/trans-shipment/recharge points at Sparks, Yuma, and Las Vegas. A new industry of exchanging cargoes at these points will arise for the short-haul EV trucks operating within California. Everyone in California will pay for the consequence of these actions.
Agreed. It should also have the effect of diverting ship cargo landing away from Los Angeles to other ports. Cargo has been diverted from LA for some years now. This has already resulted in some increase in ship traffic through the Panama Canal for landing trans-Pacific cargo in Atlantic ports. But this should increase the trend to further avoid California.
Is the dolt Newsom under the impression that an entire continent will tamely adhere to his wishes?
How is it possible that we let California set de facto national energy and environmental policies? I know the EPA and many members of Congress like it because it lets strict regulations in through the backdoor without anyone in Washington having to go on record. But doesn’t it violate one or more federal laws? Why doesn’t the Supremacy Clause come into effect?
See my answer below. You won’t like it because California has a natural transportation monopoly.
Because Congress used its authority under the Constitution to give California special powers under the Clean Air Act to make their own regulations. That’s why CA has been able to have different emissions requirements for passenger cars.
One more largely rhetorical question — Why don’t trucking companies just give California the finger and refuse to do business there? Same with the hog farmers.
California should isolate itself from the western power grid. Neighboring states should refuse to sell power to California in the summer. I’m sure there’s plenty of demand elsewhere.
Because LA is the biggest and busiest seaport in North America. A huge proportion of the imports into North America as well as its exports go through Los Angeles. This is particularly true for container traffic.Other jurisdictions have been slow to build up capacity to compete with LA. For example, the delay time for a container ship trying to land cargo at Vancouver or Prince Rupert is between 9 and 12 days. This is a significant part of the total transit time from Shanghai of 28 to 35 says for port to port cargo delivery.
This isn’t about product demand in other states. It’s about transportation infrastructure bottlenecks.
Fair enough. But when California ports were backed up traffic rerouted to the Gulf ports and the East coast ports.
Add hefty permanent costs and delays to Chinese imports and guess what happens?
The Panama Canal can’t handle today’s traffic load, add 25% more and it’ll just stop working. It’s running out of water to operate its locks.
Worry!
I can imagine that Mexico might take advantage of the situation and create sea terminals to connect with sane states, bypassing the crazies.
California has ten or twelve ‘short-haul’ railroads. They’re also targeted.
Let’s place this in perspective.
The powers that be in California just added 8,000 to 10,000 pounds to large trucks.
Trucks that regularly will cross the Sierra Nevadas and according to Newsome’s delusions across the Continental Divide.
Past the runaway truck exits designed for modern trucks before 2024. Trucks so much heavier that they’ll quickly destroy roads.
Sooner or later, one of these overladen EV trucks will desperately need one of those truck off ramps designed to slow and stop runaway trucks.
Will they stop a truck with 5 dense tons, up front in the cab?
If not, 5 tons of highly combustible lithium battery will pollute the side of a mountain and whatever water drainage lays below, anxious for lithium contaminates.
At this point in the Cali EV alleged save the world saga, Newsome appears to be a strong candidate for the anti-Christ.
Too heavy for weight limits, only solution is that they will carry that much less weight of cargo. Should raise shipping prices 15% just by that alone.
The article didn’t cover another transportation boondoggle California recently passed. CA AB5 has effectively banned California owner operator truck drivers from hauling freight out of the state.
“The heavier EV trucks will put more wear and tear on the California roadways.” That is true only if the current California axle/weight laws remain on the books. California’s neighboring states allow trucks to gross 105,000 lbs. on an eight to nine axle combination, a set-up which causes less pressure on the roads per tire thus easier on the roads, creates faster braking times using 16 to 18 brake drums vs. the normal ten, and decreases the overall amount of truck traffic on the highways.
They get fun on icy roads.
Silly silly people. (Sorry, a Brit speaking. We have silly people too.)
If this were national, I’d suspect railroads of sabotaging the trucking industry to rail’s advantage. But it’s not even that low level of smart or principled.
A group including 19 states and several trucking organizations recently filed suit to block the California regulation.
There’s a part of me that hopes they fail. This insanity won’t stop until the masses start feeling the pain from these policies.
Unfortunately, there’s also a large portion of those masses who will never understand the cause of the pain.
This is a great analysis that shouldn’t need stating. When will we voters restrict ourselves to electing individuals with a proven intent of making our lives better and with the intellectual skills to reach, what to most sentient people are obvious conclusions, based on the available evidence.
Never… the voters like nice-looking, soft-spoken people, with no Critical Thinking skills.
Another article with an AI generated image without describing it as such.
WUWT should do better. They are setting themselves up for a disinformation campaign against them.
That is NOT Gov. Newsom in that image.
With regards to E Trucks,
The truck drivers are also going to sit around for several hours waiting for the batteries to get charged up for another 300 miles or so.
extra cost in driver wages? Who will pay for that?
Imagine this: A modified B double trailer configuration. The first trailer is modified to solely carry the E-truck’s batteries; the second is a standard double trailer carrying freight. Once in a Nevada hub, the freight-carrying trailers of two e-trucks are combined and joined to a traditional cab, and heads for the intended destination. E-trucks release their modified trailers and connect the trailers to charging stations, The driver then links his cab to a different modified trailer having a fully charged battery, and returns to its California port. You only need to develop a quick connection between the cab and battery trailer.
Material costs would add substantially to the total freight cost, but labor costs would not be substantially more. You eliminate drivers having to wait hours for their trucks to charge. You just need a whole lot of Ebattery trailers.
Or just expand a bloomin’ Mexican Pacific port and bypass CA entirely!