Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

About Us

Frank D. Russo

The California Progress Report is published by Frank D. Russo, a longtime observer of and participant in California politics.

About Frank Russo.
About California Progress Report.

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column? Contact Frank here.

Sponsors

Books

Diesel Pollution from Construction Equipment: An Opportunity for the Air Board to Build a Cleaner California by Rulemaking This Week

Diane-Bailey.jpg

By Diane Bailey
Health and Environment Program
Natural Resources Defense Council

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has a tremendous opportunity on Thursday to eliminate much of the smog and soot spewed by heavy construction and other “off-road” equipment. The off-road rule, under development for roughly three years, will cleanup several hundred thousand of the dirtiest pieces of equipment used in construction, at airports and in mines statewide.

Construction equipment is the second largest source of diesel pollution in California. The new rule will provide more diesel soot reductions and health benefits than all seven of the in-use diesel fleet rules that the air board already has passed. Not only will this rule clear away the toxic diesel soot clouds surrounding construction sites - helping nearby residents and workers breathe a little easier – it also is a critical step towards meeting national air quality standards. A strong rule is especially important in smog-choked Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley.

Smog and soot from diesel equipment takes a serious toll on human health. Diesel exhaust is a mixture of toxic chemicals, carcinogens, and tiny particles that lodge deep within the lungs. The health rap sheet for diesel exhaust is long. It includes impaired lung function, aggravated respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis, emphysema and asthma, increased hospital admissions for cardiac and respiratory illnesses, and even premature death. In fact, it’s estimated that 4,000 premature deaths would be averted by the rule CARB is about to consider. The savings in health costs are estimated at $18 to $26 billion -- yes billion -- as compared to a cost to industry of $3.5 billion for cleaner equipment.

As a result of countless concessions to industry, this rule is affordable, feasible and flexible. It includes compliance choices such as exhaust control retrofits, engine upgrades, incentive funding, opportunities to lease equipment, and a gradual phase-in over more than ten years. Public funding for exhaust controls, engine upgrades and new equipment has been available for years through the statewide Carl Moyer incentive program and other local funds. Such assistance will continue to be available for some time to small businesses to help defray the costs of meeting this rule, as long as these businesses act in a timely manner.

As different rules governing clean construction pop up all over California – San Francisco, Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley already have their own rules – this statewide rule is an important step to guarantee health benefits and provide consistency for business. We know that at least 9,000 people die in California each year due to air pollution. That’s why scores of public health, environmental and medical experts have spoken out in support of this rule.

California businesses must realize that clean air isn’t just good for people, it’s good for our economy. We are hopeful that, as the new CARB chairwoman, Mary Nichols will lead the board to adopt the strongest, most health-protective rule possible.

Diane Bailey is an engineer in NRDC's health program whose work focuses on reducing exposure to diesel exhaust and other air pollutants. Before joining NRDC, Diane worked at Citizens for a Better Environment and a local transportation planning agency in Houston. She holds a bachelor's degree in chemical engineering from Washington University and a master's degree in environmental engineering from Rice University.

Posted on July 24, 2007

Comments

Diane and All:

You should note that CARB's urban bus rules result in very clean diesel engines. CARB should be able to apply some of the technologies and techniques that the public transit industry to off-road and construction equipment. Up to about 400 hp much of that equipment uses the same engines as public transit buses.

-- Chris Peeples --

=====================================
H. E. Christian (Chris) Peeples
At-Large Director
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
1600 Franklin Street, 10th Floor
Oakland, California 94612-2800
510-891-7151, Fax: 658-1425
cpeeples@actransit.org
www.actransit.org
=====================================

Posted by: Christian Peeples at July 24, 2007 06:17 PM

Check out this report from the Union of Concerned Scientists (researched/written by Vehicles Engineer Don Anair) on this very topic:

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/california_driving/digging-up-trouble.html

Posted by: Dan Kalb at July 24, 2007 06:21 PM

The primary issues with the regulation are the poor available technologies (which result in increased danger and delays), the uneven nature of the regulation (the industry is going to change shape immensely) and the direct placement of cost burden on the industry (relying on this trickle-down debt method will lead to companies dying out before they can pass the burden to the consumer).

If the cost burden was handled through taxes and grants, including compensation for delay (liquidated damages can negate profit quickly), the burden for California would be miniscule; CARB's lowest estimate would cost every citizen a whole $7 a year. This would net California the same profit in health benefits without the added difficulty of forcing so many companies to struggle.

The cost of a trip to McDonalds, once a year, could save California this whole mess, and all the millions or billions of dollars that will be wasted in the struggle and in the need to hire so many more regulators to hunt down scofflaws.

Unfortunately, saving time and money and human lives is less important than appearing "tough" on polluters and taxes.

That said, the regulation's intent is a wonderful one, and if funded properly, would be well worth all the hassle. It just suffers from a bad case of politics.

And a quick FYI: At the second most recent CARB meeting, the latest calculation on CARB's part was stated as being closer to 4 billion. You can't just get your information from the "big" meetings and press releases; this affair is far more complex and dynamic than the sound bytes given to reporters suggest.

Posted by: Jona at July 25, 2007 09:30 AM

How about improving the system we have?

Ask for a fuel ethanol waiver allowed in the 2005 energy bill

Fuel ethanol uses lots of water

Audit "Smog Check" to fix the fault in more of the failed cars

Chief Sherry Mehl, DCA/BAR, has never found out if what is broken on a Smog Check failed car gets fixed, never

Improving Smog Check and fuel policy can cut car impact in half in 1 year and save money

About $20 billion in savings in first year

I'm confused about promoting products from offshore rather than improving our system

Clean Air Performance Professionals

Posted by: Charlie Peters at July 26, 2007 08:28 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Get email updates!

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.



© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.

RSS

Stat tracker