First Name | Lisa |
---|---|
Last Name | Rosen |
Email Address | lrosen@eesolar.com |
Affiliation | Office Manager |
Subject | Don't Eviscerate ZEV Mandate |
Comment | 1020 Marvista Ave Seal Beach, CA 90740 March 24, 2008 RE: Retain Strong ZEV Mandate To Mary Nichols and CARB Board members: Please follow the resolution of the board of May 2007. Do not reduce the requirements for clean vehicles. Requirements can be reduced if there is a necessity to do so, but once they are gone, restoration is a tedious process. Under both AB 32 and the ZEV mandate it would be better to allow your agency the possibility of effective regulation, rather than diminishing implementation. Research with fuel cells has not yet yielded any significant breakthroughs. Manufacturers should be allowed the option of producing the vehicles that will comply. If vehicle research is successful, but infrastructure questions arise, leaving the requirements in place with an alternative path to compliance strengthens the likelihood that both CARB and auto manufacturers will continue their efforts with the urgency of a serious deadline in place. If Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Vehicles can not be brought to market, with the postponements previously allowed, the manufacturers should be allowed to instead produce (and sell) BEVs of the quality that past compliance produced. Walter Puetz of Mercedes Benz wrote that his company anticipated that they could bring 100,000 fuel cell cars to market by 2015, at a cost equal to that of a diesel hybrid. If this is the case, it is one more argument for leaving the present regulations in place. Postponing difficult decisions makes them even more difficult as time passes and options diminish. The proposed silver-plus credit for plug in hybrids should not be implemented as recommended. It would not be effective in promoting CARB goals. A vehicle that can only run ten miles (at 18 mph) would not provide much in the way of clean air benefits. The vehicles for which this technology is proposed sound very unattractive to the drivers who care about vehicle efficiency and clean air. BEV technology ten years ago was better than this. Any vehicle in this category should be able to operate in Electric mode at full speed. There should also be a requirement that the vehicle not be equipped with software that prevents any addition to the battery pack. Manufacturers should not be given credit for any vehicle unless it is sold to the public. The citizens of California should be given an accounting of the effectiveness of this program: the actual number and type of vehicles on still on the road. The travel provision--giving credit for vehicles sold or placed in other states--is not a good idea. Yours truly Lisa Rosen |
Attachment | |
Original File Name | |
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted | 2008-03-24 21:32:59 |
If you have any questions or comments please contact Clerk of the Board at (916) 322-5594.