TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Please act today, Take Action to Keep Strong ZEV Policies in CA - Oppose AB 1964!

Discussion in 'California' started by gene, Aug 24, 2016.

  1. gene

    gene Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,015
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Please visit this link to comment: Plug In America

    the bill only extends the green HOV decal program for PHECs, but not the white decal program for pure battery electric vehicles (BEVs), which are cleaner than PHEVs and have zero tailpipe emissions. If nothing changes, drivers of BEVs will not be allowed to access the HOV lane after January 1, 2019. This is just backwards policy, and will not help California achieve the state goal of 1.5 million ZEVs ont he road by 2025. And, as EV drivers, we know that access to the HOV lane can tip the scale in favor of purchasing a BEV. AB 1964 will no doubt slow the growth of the BEV market.

    There's more bad - AB 1964 will adversely affect the market for PHEVs by placing an additional income restriction on who is eligible for the green decal. Rather than cause this market uncertainty when EV sales represent just 1.7% of California new car sales in 2015 (a tiny portion), we urge the removal of the income restriction, and suggest that additional incentives be put in place for the low-income and used vehicle market.

    We need to act before the day ends on Thursday, August 25, 2016 to keep strong ZEV policies in place in California - ones that build off of California's past strong leadership on EVs. Tell your legislator to oppose AB 1964 today!
     
    • Like x 1
  2. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,159
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Got any more details? This is absurd... The green stickers are the ones that should be allowed to expire, not the white... Who the hell came up with this BS? GM???... As for the income restriction aspect of it, it makes no sense to place any sort of income restrictions on who can get the stickers either, rebates yes, stickers no...

    Jeff
     
  3. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,159
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Just emailed both of my reps and did the plug in America option as well... This is just dumb beyond dumb... Kudos to GM... There is no way in hell they aren't responsible for this BS...

    Jeff
     
  4. RubberToe

    RubberToe Supporting the greater good

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    822
    Location:
    Pasadena, Ca
  5. cwerdna

    cwerdna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,031
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Agreed that this bill is absurd. I also do agree it's ok to put income limits on the CVRP but not the stickers.

    Thanks to a reply on Tivocommunity (TiVo Community, which you can't see unless you have a free account there), I looked at the opened up the 8/18/16 analyses from Bill Analysis, "The sponsor of this bill, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers,"

    About the Alliance Overview | Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers says "The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is an association of 12 vehicle manufacturers including BMW Group, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Company, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz USA, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen Group of America and Volvo Car USA."

    Notice a few names missing? Hmmm...

    Look at the quantities of PHEVs and BEVs (if any) sold by some of the above suspects at July 2016 Dashboard - HybridCars.com, esp. Ford, which sells tons of PHEVs (e.g. both Energis) but a pittance of Focus Electrics. Look at GM's Volt numbers vs. their Spark EV numbers... and so on.

    I'm guessing the income limit for the stickers is a means of trying to punish Tesla.
     
  6. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,159
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Hopefully this never makes it to the governors desk... Despite Tesla's flaws, and there are multiple ones, I will NEVER buy another car from a traditional car dealership again. Hear that GM? NEVER. I'm tired of these clowns trying to take down an American automotive company using dirty tricks, deception, and lobbying...

    Jeff
     
  7. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    GM and Western States Petroleum Assoc. They've clearly had a hand in this, too, with GM's help.
     
  8. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,241
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    #8 McRat, Aug 26, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2016
    If you have been following CARB and it's bureaucrats, a far more likely instigator is Toyota.

    Volts did not get HOV stickers when pure gas Toyotas were getting them. The highest CA rebates are for Hydrogen.
    When Toyota stopped production on the PiP, the green stickers also stopped.

    If you think CA kisses Chevrolet where the sun doesn't shine, you'd be wrong. They kiss the company of the Rising Sun.

    But go ahead and think Americans are crooked, inept, and CARB loves America. It fits the media model, so it must be true.

    Whatever Toyota wants, Toyota will get in California. They are the only Official California Government Green Automobile. The rest get table scraps. Like Tesla getting an income cap on rebates.

    EDIT - When the Japanese could not come up with a realistic EV, California abandoned the EV mandate. Coincidence. Sure. We have the best state government on the market. We might be expensive to rent out Sacramento, but you get a lot for your money. Ask the public employee unions. Money well spent.

    Doesn't the head of CARB drive a Toyota Hydrogen car when she is not in her state owned limo?
     
    • Dislike x 1
  9. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,159
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    I don't really care "who" is responsible for this absurd bill... I typically blame GM whenever and wherever I can as they have went to extensive links to hinder Tesla at every possible juncture... I don't doubt your assessment that in this specific case, Toyota is to blame, but that doesn't change my disdain for GM or the role they are likely playing in this scheme...

    Jeff
     
  10. NikeWings

    NikeWings Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages:
    964
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    To add a bit more context than shared in the plug in summary.........

    The CA hybrid green sticker issuance was halted last year when it hit the allowable issuance cap of 85k in Nov. The cap had been increased 2 or 3 times by the Governor over the past several years but he declined to increase the cap last year due to a bigger political picture involving the CA cap & trade program. (This was the same reason he did not renew the funding for the CARB rebate which was depleted in June.) All of the CA HOV sticker programs were set to expire together in 2019. Since the green sticker drought, the hybrid manufacturers/dealers have seen sales drop and been lobbying heavily since mid-last year to get the cap increased before summer recess. It didn't happen.

    So while this bill appears to be an intentional slap to the white decal holders, it never was really about the whites. It was solely to get the green cap raised and while they are at it, increase the sunset provision. And if politics weren't politics, then a finely coordinated effort would have been pursued to modify the entire program but its politics so this has been only focused on and financed for the greens. And the ones with skin in the game for the green hybrids......you guessed it.

    And a side note on Toyota. They have been at odds with CA legislature for years ultimately announcing the relocation of the Toyota USA HQ to Texas along with thousands of jobs with it. There has been a parade of politicians now fighting against their low mileage hybrids and aiming to make the minimum electric range distance at 30 in order to qualify for a green sticker. So its been messy and nasty for quite some time.
     
  11. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,241
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    That is not true. CARB still hungers for Toyotas. Nor does Sacramento care about job creation other than public unions.

    California lost >10 times more jobs from pushing GM and Ford out of here than they lost from Toyota. Did they care? No they did not.

    Why did they stop raising the number of Green Stickers at the same time Toyota stopped the Plug In Comedy Prius (filthy slow, lousy range, overstated HP, exaggerated Cd)? Coincidence? At the SAME TIME Toyota management said "EV's are not the future" and released the Murai and the CARB chief drives one? Hell after millions and millions of dollars, there are still only 3? hydrogen stations that actually are in 24hr operation.

    My daughter's Volt uses 1 gallon of petrol every 384 miles as of today. My son's uses a gallon every 440 miles. Both cars have driven nonstop over 300 miles at 75 mph when needed, something no EV can do today. This is not Toyota Marketing Hype. This is digital telemetry generated by OnStar that cannot be altered.

    We don't even NEED the green stickers, but it's a slap in the face that Gas Hondas and Gas Toyotas got HOV stickers in 2011. True hatred for Chevrolet, true love for Imports, or just incompetence? I'd like to think CARB is run by folk who have never used a car and have 4th grade educations, but I doubt it. The hatred for Chevrolet has been demonstrated, and I've never heard of a California Law that favored domestic auto production, ever, especially production in California itself.

    If California really cared about Toyota jobs in California, they would have done something. CARB wants Toyota cars, trucks, and SUV's, but CARB does not want manufacturing sector jobs in our state.
     
    • Dislike x 2
  12. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,159
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Um... Do you work for GM???

    Jeff
     
    • Like x 1
    • Funny x 1
  13. TaoJones

    TaoJones Beyond Driven

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2014
    Messages:
    1,299
    Location:
    The Americas
  14. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,241
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    When Toyota determines that Tesla is cutting into their sales (Toyota doesn't compete), watch what happens. Just a prediction. GM and Ford are no threat, as we hate them. Toyota is a different animal. We love them, and if we have to choose between Toyota and Tesla, I'm confident we won't pick Tesla.

    No, I just believe that American workers are not as lousy as most folk do.

    The Japanese are not biologically superior to Americans. Not then, not now.
     
  15. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,241
    Location:
    Norco, CA

    Better answer is I do not trust Toyota. Not their cars, not their management, not their politics.

    I believe Toyota is the currently the biggest threat to the EV industry in the entire world.
     
  16. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,159
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Fair enough, you'll get no arguments from me...

    Jeff
     
  17. NikeWings

    NikeWings Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages:
    964
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Hi McRat, I do not understand your opening statement of "its not true". Which point of mine (or maybe all) are you questioning? Since the majority of your concern is expressed around the perceived favoritism for Toyota (which I am not debating, just clarifying what I thought was a poor excerpt depicting the bill), then I will address that one.

    My comment indicated some nasty gamesmanship and political undercurrent against Toyota. It began when the green cap was first hit and people realized it was mostly toyotas filling the till. Exacerbated again, when the 2nd cap was hit. Its a political hot potato but there has been a quiet movement against the early Prius and whether it will ever amount to anything, who knows. But its known. Such as this quote from Jalopnik's article

    "Several issues are in play for the HOV perk’s possible resuscitation as expressed in the course of our speaking to automakers, advocates, as well as ARB, but at this juncture people are asking to stay off the record as interests jockey and people look to what bill is proposed. One oft-repeated concern has been the inclusion of the Toyota Prius Plug-in Hybrid, now-discontinued and awaiting potentially higher-range replacement. This 2012-2015 car gets up to 11 miles EPA-rated range and unlike former rules for regular hybrids granting HOV access contingent on a minimum mpg threshold, the present no-minimum e-range green sticker program includes this low-range car."

    That and several articles like it, were the basis of that particular comment. if there is something else I should clarify, then happy to do so. I do not disagree with you entirely, but as I said earlier, I was bringing context to an article that IMO did not present the current bill objectively. It was not written as an attack on Tesla and in fact, there is another bill supposedly being drafted to extend the whites to 2025. For sure, if it gets any legs then it too will be traded for another legislator's pork.
     
  18. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,037
    The love for Toyota (and Japanese cars in general) in CA is because of high demand for smaller commuter vehicles (which they make reliable examples of). The big three for a time had made horrible commuter cars and ruined their reputation.

    And let's not forget that GM sued CARB over the ZEV mandate (a huge factor in what ended it), while Toyota didn't.
    GM Takes CARB to Court Over ZEV Mandate : EVWORLD.COM

    Also, GM sold the Nimh battery patents to Chevron, which refused to license them for larger battery packs (ending the source of Panasonic batteries for the RAV4 EV). Toyota actually made an unusual move of selling the vehicles to the public, even though they could have stuck with a lease like everyone else. If GM didn't make the patent move, Toyota could have continued selling the RAV4 EV.
    Toyota RAV4 EV - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Finally, Toyota (and Honda) provided hybrids to fill the gap (and serve as a replacement vehicle for any EVs they may have crushed) while the ZEV mandate was dead. GM and the big three provided nothing (closest thing were the two modes, but they sold poorly and did not fit the type of vehicles Californians drive).

    Eligible Vehicles - Single Occupant Carpool Lane Use Stickers
    I think you are imagining things. The green sticker limit always required roughly a semi-annual renewal (about once every half a year because it is raised in 15k increments) tacked onto other bills. What is different recently is transit agencies are starting to feel like the sticker program is impacting HOV lane availability for actual carpools. Actually this concern was raised already for the previous raise to 85k (which was opposed by some transit agencies).
    California's 85,000 green carpool stickers are all gone

    As for love for FCVs, the current Carb Chief had always been an FCV fan. She was also very enthusiastic about the Honda FCV (she owned a Fit EV previously also).
     
  19. cwerdna

    cwerdna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,031
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #19 cwerdna, Aug 27, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2016
    If gas == gasoline powered, the above is completely wrong. California stopped issuing yellow HOV stickers by late 2007 (see below).

    IIRC, one could still get replacements if the original stickers were stolen or body parts that were damaged/needed replacement due to accident. I was in that boat when someone knocked off my rear bumper cover. Eventually, the CA govt required stuff like police report, sticker fragments, etc. in order to receive replacements.

    I still have the now useless and expired yellow HOV stickers on my 06 Prius. Per Subject Top Page: Eligible Vehicles - Single Occupant Carpool Lane Use Stickers updated in Dec 2008
    From Subject Top Page: ELIGIBLE VEHICLES - SINGLE OCCUPANT CARPOOL LANE USE STICKERS, dated September 2007, the 85K limit on the yellow stickers was already hit by then.

    Per Eligible Vehicles - Single Occupant Carpool Lane Use Stickers from Dec 2010 (the month the Volt began shipping):
    The stickers then did expire on July 1, 2011.

    Of course, the Volt didn't get HOV stickers for model year 2011. It didn't meet enhanced AT-PZEV requirements until model year 2012: New enhAT-PZEV Chevy Volt ready for California HOV access, extra $1,500 in rebates *UPDATED. 2011 Volt was a dirty vehicle in terms of EPA air pollution score/CA smog score (neither is related to CO2 output).
     
  20. cwerdna

    cwerdna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,031
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #20 cwerdna, Aug 27, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2016
    Clearly not, if you look over say http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/zev_tutorial.pdf (which came from CARB Mandate For Zero Emission Vehicles) or some of the stuff at Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Program.
    Although I doubt it was directly designed to help domestic auto production, I guess you didn't understand the California ZEV program and the ability of automakers to buy and sell ZEV credits to others. Tesla has sold by FAR the most to others (e.g. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevcredits/2012zevcredits.htm and Zero Emission Vehicle Credits). The money received from those sales helps with Tesla's bottom line.

    The CA ZEV program is why we even have PZEVs, AT-PZEVs, enhanced AT-PZEVs and ZEVs vs. very few ZEV choices outside CARB states. ZEV also benefited domestic auto production in the form of Nissan, which has been producing US market Leafs and batteries in the US since early 2013.

    I found this old document from 2011 http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/clean_cars/acc summary-final.pdf. To quote
     

Share This Page