News came in late Friday from Washington state that the state House passed Bill1091 – a statewide clean fuel standard bill – and now is headed to the state Senate for voting. It passed the House with a vote of 52-46 and is the third year the House chamber has voted in support of the policy. The bill would adopt a rule establishing a Clean Fuels Program that would limit greenhouse gas emissions per unit of transportation fuel energy to 10 percent below 2017 levels by 2028 and 20 percent below 2017 levels by 2035.
In today’s Digest, the bill details, who voted for and against it, will it pass the state Senate, what it means for ethanol, biodiesel, other biofuels, and more.
BLOG
Low-carbon fuel standards increase prices. That reality is, however, politically inconvenient. Advocates of HB 1091, which would impose a low-carbon fuel standard (LCFS), continue to pollute the discussion with silly claims in an effort to hide what is a simple truth.
Most recently, Climate Solutions published a two-page flier on the cost of the LCFS, purporting to show that it doesn’t increase costs. OK, they later say, it does increase costs but not much. Then they retreat to the claim that it may increase costs a significant amount, but oil companies should pay for it.
As we’ve noted before, the costs of an LCFS are not a controversy among any of the state agencies implementing the law. They all agree – as we show again below – that it increases costs significantly, so, it feels odd to once again plow this ground.
World Resources Institute
At the same time, state-level climate action will remain essential. History has shown that even an engaged U.S. federal government faces real obstacles to progressive regulatory and legislative action. In the face of federal gridlock and inaction, state and local governments have played a crucial role in advancing climate action, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and supporting the continued maturation of key low-carbon technologies such as wind and solar generation as well as electric vehicles.
Rather than taking a backseat, state leadership must now continue alongside a more supportive federal government, allowing the United States to achieve deeper emissions reductions through a new climate federalism framework that leverages comparative strengths at different levels of governance.
States are making progress toward 100% clean electricity, like the power produced by these Arkansas-made wind turbines. Photo by U.S. Department of Energy/Flickr.
The Biden administration has committed to a historically ambitious climate agenda. We can expect a profound shift in U.S. federal climate policy from one of continued domestic rollbacks and international disengagement, to one of forward progress and cooperation. This is critical, as it is not possible to address the climate challenge without federal leadership, and time is running out to avert catastrophic levels of global warming.
At the same time, state-level climate action will remain essential. History has shown that even an engaged U.S. federal government faces real obstacles to progressive regulatory and legislative action. In the face of federal gridlock and inaction, state and local governments have played a crucial role in advancing climate action, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and supporting the continued
Feb 01, 2021
Keith Wilson, president of Titan Freight Systems, is working with Oregon legislators to draft a bill that would phase out sales of petroleum diesel, starting in 2023, and increase the supply of renewable fuels.
Titan Freight Systems in 2010 set an ambitious goal to reduce fleet emissions by 20% within a decade.
The Portland, Oregon-based company’s Vision 2020 plan had metrics tied to fuel efficiency gains. To execute on those metrics, Titan replaced most of the 2007 EPA Tier 2 and older engine emission trucks in its fleet and invested hundreds of thousands in aftermarket products that included engine idle shut off devices, cab fairings, trailer side skirts, wheel covers and technology for monitoring driver speeds and behaviors.