Biden Administration May Relax EPA Rules Driving Electric Vehicles: Report
In recent years, the American car market has been pushed toward becoming a significantly more electric one by the Biden Administration's strict Environmental Protection Agency rules. Those car tailpipe emission rules are so strict that they could result in two-thirds of all new cars having emissions at all by 2032. But now, after months of pressure from automakers, dealers, labor unions and the other side of the political aisle, the White House may ease up on that plan—a move that will sure to draw the ire of EV proponents and anyone sounding the alarm over global warming.
This report comes from the New York Times, citing three unnamed officials said to be familiar with the plan. The exact details of this plan are not known, except that a "sharp increase" in EV sales would not be required "until after 2030."
The new EPA rules are expected to be finalized this spring, the Times reports.
If so, the move could have profound effects on the future of the EV industry, America's ability to compete against a rising electric China, and a signature Biden policy achievement as he faces a tough reelection battle.
From the Times:
The E.P.A. designed the proposed regulations so that 67 percent of sales of new cars and light-duty trucks would be all-electric by 2032, up from 7.6 percent in 2023, a radical remaking of the American automobile market.
That remains the goal. But as they finalize the regulations, administration officials are tweaking the plan to slow the pace at which auto manufacturers would need to comply, so that electric vehicle sales would increase more gradually through 2030 but then would have to sharply rise.
The change in pacing is in response to automakers who say that more time is needed to build a national network of charging stations and to bring down the cost of electric vehicles, and to labor unions that want more time to try to unionize new electric car plants that are opening around the country, particularly in the South.
Last year was a landmark one for EV sales, with all-electric cars making up 7.6% of the market and record sales from every brand. But the rate of EV adoption slowed down toward the end of the year, moving less quickly than the industry anticipated. The so-called "EV slowdown" is often overblown, but the transition has been hampered by combatant car dealers, a largely inadequate public charging network, intense political opposition and concerns about how the cars operate differently than gas-powered ones.
https://insideevs.com/news/709077/biden-epa-rollback-nyt/
*****************************************Labor union urges Scottish Labour Party to oppose heat pumps and pursue hydrogen
Labour delegates attending its [Scottish] party conference this week will be urged to support the Scottish Government turning its back on Patrick Harvie’s heat pumps strategy and instead press ahead with using hydrogen to heat homes.
Bosses at the GMB union, who have been publicly hostile to the Scottish Government’s strategy to clean up how buildings are heated, are calling on Scottish Labour to oppose heat pumps and other renewable heating systems being pursued by [Scottish minister] Mr Harvie, and instead turn attention to hydrogen – believing it will help safeguard jobs.
But Mr Harvie has told The Herald that hydrogen “is not expected to play a central role in heating buildings”.
An independent study commissioned and published by WWF Scotland last year concluded that using hydrogen for heating was a “distraction” and called for the focus to be put on other methods, primarily heat pumps. […]
Bosses from the GMB union, which represents energy workers in Scotland, will table a motion at Scottish Labour conference on Friday, calling for more focus to be put on hydrogen for heating.
The motion to be tabled at Scottish Labour’s conference in Glasgow this weekend, seen by The Herald, will back “deep concern” over the Scottish Government’s heat in buildings plans, claiming the strategy “proposes banning gas boilers and forcing onto households untested systems such as heat pumps which come with higher installation and running costs”.
It adds that “the existing, vast and skilled gas workforce and 280,000km gas network” could be “be reskilled and repurposed to provide low and no-carbon hydrogen to homes”.
Mr Harvie, the Scottish Government’s Zero Carbon Buildings Minister, has launched a consultation that will phase out fossil fuel gas boilers by 2045, when Scotland has pledged to become net zero.
***********************************************
Two windfarms share £80 million just to switch off
The cost to consumers of so-called windfarm constraint payments is rising quickly.
Regular readers will know that I have long been concerned over the extraordinary level of payments to windfarms to switch off. These so-called ‘constraint payments’ are deemed necessary when the wires in the transmission grid have inadequate capacity to get a generator’s power to market. When that happens, the windfarm (and it is always a windfarm) is paid to switch off, and a gas-fired power station is paid to switch on so that the end user of the electricity is not left short.
This is particularly a problem for windfarms in Scottish waters, because there is relatively little transmission capacity running across the border to England, where most of the power users are found. In 2022, I noted that the offshore windfarm called Moray East had spent 25% of the previous year switched off. The suspicion is that there may be perverse incentives for developers to build windfarms in Scotland precisely so they receive constraint payments.
With a large new offshore windfarm called Seagreen coming on stream in 2023, I was interested to see how things had developed. The data, taken from the Renewable Energy Foundation, is revealing.
Figure 1 shows that the total payments to windfarms has risen to £303 million, off a constrained volume of 4.3 terawatt hours. That’s roughly four days’ electricity demand thrown away entirely.
And if we break down the 2023 bill, we can see that once again it is the canny Scots who are the big beneficiaries (Figure 2), with Moray East getting an extraordinary £43 million, and Seagreen (as expected) not far behind at £39 million.
Moray East’s constrained volume is 590 GWh, which will represent something like 20% of its output. Seagreen’s is 759 GWh, which will be somewhat higher.
Interestingly, payments to Moray East’s neighbour, Beatrice, have fallen away sharply, from £33 million in 2022 to just £9 million in 2023. I don’t know why this is.
In summary then, the rip-off continues, and indeed is getting worse.
*************************************************
An ESG Asset Manager Exodus
Has the tide turned on environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing? It appears so. JPMorgan Asset Management, BlackRock and State Street Global Advisors on Thursday retreated from the Climate Action 100+ investor compact because they don’t want the political and legal liability.
Climate Action 100+ describes itself as the “largest ever global investor engagement initiative on climate change.” Its 700 or so institutional investor members manage more than $68 trillion in assets (before Thursday’s exits). Their goal is to force companies to zero out CO2 emissions by 2050.
Members are supposed to “engage” 170 “focus companies” such as Boing, Home Depot and American Airlines—that is, threaten to vote against non-compliant corporate directors and back shareholder resolutions that pressure management. Their campaign has had great success with 75% of targeted companies committing to “net zero.”
But the climate left is never content. Last June the alliance impelled its members to publish information on their “engagements” and to explain how and why they voted on shareholder resolutions flagged by the outfit. The point was to embarrass asset managers that climate scolds accuse of being insufficiently committed to the cause.
Asset managers have been walking a fine legal line. GOP Attorneys General in 2022 warned that they might be violating their fiduciary obligations and antitrust laws. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan in December subpoenaed BlackRock and State Street Global Advisors for documents and communications related to their involvement in “collusive” agreements.
The climate alliance’s new rules would compound the legal and political jeopardy. In its withdrawal announcement, State Street said its rules “are not consistent with our independent approach to proxy voting and portfolio company engagement.” BlackRock said the rules “would raise legal considerations.”
All true. But perhaps their customers have also begun to realize that ESG and net-zero mandates are political crusades that accomplish little except politicizing investment. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink noted correctly last year that ESG has been “entirely weaponised.” But asset managers should have known that bowing to the left would invite pushback from the right.
New York City Comptroller Brad Lander lambasted the trio on Thursday for “caving to climate deniers.” “We are in the process of reviewing how well our managers are aligned in that approach and will consider our options for the management of our public market investments,” he warned.
What does it say when the climate left believes it can achieve its goals only by intimidation and coercion?
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment