My aging minivan takes dollars in one end and pours emissions out the other. But new regulations adopted by the Washington Legislature mean that when it comes time to replace the family chariot the new version will be cleaner and perhaps guzzle less gas. The new rules also mean that the average cost of a new car will go up.
Our leaders in Olympia have decided to Californicate our cars.
Today, cars sold in Washington have to meet federal clean air standards. Under the new law, beginning in 2009 cars will have to meet the much stricter California standards. Several other states have passed similar statutes, and Washington's law goes into effect only if Oregon signs on, too.
The Department of Ecology says that California-clean cars will cost about $300 extra in 2012 and $1,000 more by 2016. The department also estimates that cleaner cars will save owners $3,500 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle.
Reducing auto emissions is a fairly expensive way to clean the air. (Strike one on the economics count.) According to the Department of Ecology, more than half the global-warming greenhouse gases emitted in Washington come from auto emissions. But reducing CO2 emissions from tailpipes costs more than reducing an equal amount of greenhouse gases from industrial and agricultural sources.
Understand, I'm a city kid and thinking of cows conjures the scents of sweet-smelling pasture. Apparently, the real "output" of a couple of hundred cows is less sweet. In fact, manure piles produce methane -- a gas which is 23 times as harmful as CO2. But with today's technology it's relatively cheap to capture the methane before it escapes and pollutes the atmosphere.
Rather than make me pay a lot extra for my next car, how about an option by which I pay a little extra and the money pays a Washington farmer to cover the manure pile? It's cheaper than cleaning auto emissions, the farmer picks up a little extra business, and as a side benefit allows a city kid to maintain his olfactory illusions.
If we're talking economics, isn't paying a thousand bucks to save $3,500 in gasoline a good deal? It is, if you believe it's going to happen. I'm skeptical when I hear I'm going to get something for nothing -- even when I hear it from the government. (Strike two on the economics count.)
Do you really believe that the auto manufacturers have a way to produce a car that's going to save you $3,500 in gas for an extra grand in original equipment? And do you further believe that if manufacturers could produce such a magical vehicle, they wouldn't produce it without a government order? Sure sounds like the auto companies are throwing away one heck of a good profit opportunity. Perhaps I'm just too suspicious, but I have a feeling that the new cars we see are either going to cost a lot more than $1,000 extra or save a lot less than $3,500.
Nonetheless, two strikes on economics isn't an out. In fact, I believe the Legislature has a base hit on the overall policy front.
Here's the deal. There's a funny quirk in federal environmental law: A state can live with the federal rules, or it can sign on to the much stricter California rules, as Washington is proposing. Those two choices are the only choices. Washington is not permitted to innovate and try different methods. We're not even allowed to position ourselves halfway between the national rules and the California rules. It's all the way federal or all the way California.
Do you want our state to clean up auto emissions and, if so, are you willing to take something of a hit in the wallet? If your answer is yes, then our legislators took the only choice they had. And it was smart policy to tie our rules with Oregon. Greenhouse gases do not recognize state borders. This way we'll do our share if our neighbors do theirs.
Our new auto emission rules aren't the best imaginable and they certainly don't represent the best economic thinking, but they probably are the best feasible. The Legislature got it right.
###
Dick Startz is Castor Professor of Economics and Davis Distinguished Scholar at the University of Washington. He can be reached at econcol@u.washington.edu.
This column appeared in the following publication:
Bellingham Herald, Aug. 7, 2005