Billions: The Big Picture

Jenna Cittadino — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:01:00 -0400

I admit that my last blog may not have convinced many people that it is urgent to act on global warming unless you are a cat lover like I am. So this time around I'm going to make my point by discussing a topic we can all relate to: cars.

According to Daniel Sperling, "...more than one billion vehicles populate the earth today" (Two Billion Cars: Driving Towards Sustainability). He warns that we are rapidly approaching two billion cars (probably in about 15 years) primarily due to an increase in demand from developing countries such as China and India, as well as continued population growth. Matt Rosenberg says, "The world's current... growth rate is about 1.14%, representing a doubling time of 61 years. We can expect the world's population of 6.5 billion to become 13 billion by 2067 if current growth continues" (geography.about.com).

Are we ready for an extra billion cars on the road? Are we ready for an extra 6.5 billion people inhabiting this earth?

Last November, President Obama announced greenhouse gas reduction targets for the United States. The targets aim to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and an additional 80% by 2050 (www.uctv.tv). These targets seem attainable, but what happens when there are twice as many cars on the road and twice as many people inhabiting the earth? Luckily the targets stay the same even though the variable changes. If stray cats don't convince you the time to act is now, perhaps that will.

We are fortunate there are people in this world such as Senator Fran Pavley. Fran was a middle school teacher from Agoura Hills, CA, who left that challenge to work for the California State Assembly (and eventually for the State Senate). She has authored some of California's "gold standard" climate change legislation including Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley), which was signed into law in 2002. AB1493 directed the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations that require carmakers to reduce global warming emissions from new passenger cars and light trucks beginning in 2009. The regulations are projected to achieve a 23% reduction in global warming from new vehicles by 2012 and a 30% reduction in global warming emissions from new vehicles by 2016. 17 other states have also adopted or have announced plans to adopt California's vehicle emission standard.

In 2007, the EPA denied California a waiver to set more stringent auto emissions and fuel efficiency standards than required by federal law. In response, California and 15 other states filed suit against the federal government. In early 2009, President Obama signed a memorandum requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider the application by California.

Transportation is a significant source of GHG emissions, accounting for almost 28% of total U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2004 (according to the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2004, published in 2006 by the US EPA).

Therefore, it is imperative to regulate tailpipe emissions and pave the way for alternative fuel vehicles to rule the road in order to reach emissions reduction targets.

This is also an incredible opportunity for Detroit. By following the Pavley bill regulations for new vehicles they produce, car manufactures can have a major impact on tailpipe emissions reductions and can hold an important place in history. Not to mention, their sales will likely skyrocket since cars that get excellent miles per gallon are in high demand. Not only is this an opportunity for them to save their companies, but this is their responsibility to their consumers.

The time to act is now. This is not just about us today, but about the 6.5 billion children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, great-great grandchildren...I think you get the big picture.

To Drill or Not to Drill?

Jenna Cittadino — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:10:00 -0400

That is the question of my blog this week. Watching Rudy Giuliani speak at the Republican Nation Convention last Wednesday and listening to thousands of people chant, "Drill, baby, drill," I realized how confused our country is on this, well, confusing issue. Somehow we arrived at a place where Republicans and Democrats are more divided than ever, and over issues like offshore drilling, which had once been off limits by both parties. I believe people are misinformed, because if the facts were understood, the choice would be clear, no matter what your party affiliation.

The major misconception I've observed is that offshore drilling will lower high gas prices. The fact is that if these projects were to start today, it would take years before new refineries would affect the market...if ever. Not to mention the amount of oil that could be produced is tiny in comparison with the amount that is produced worldwide. And let's face it-these refineries really can't start producing today, because realistically it would take years to build a new refinery and.... large amounts of money.

Since there seems to be a consensus with both parties that we have a problem with our oil addiction, why not get over that addiction by investing that money into developing alternative fuel infrastructures and converting more cars to run on alternative fuels? Terry Tamminen, Executive Director of the Climate Policy Program of the New America Foundation, says that just 20% of the cost of the current war in Iraq could have completed an alternative fuel infrastructure in our country and converted the majority of cars to run on alternative fuel. Even former president of Shell's U.S. operation, John Hofmeister, said, "The internal combustion is a great invention that has served us well for a century, but it is time for us to move on" (www.newsweek.com/id/142130).

I believe the majority of the population wants this to happen. A recent event illustrates this shift. Last week my husband and I were in an accident which totaled our car. This dumped us into the car market, which I learned is a very strange market at the moment: Priuses are in the "luxury" car price range, the Kelly bluebook value for a Honda Civic has actually increased, and the fun new 2009 Honda Fits are so hot that no dealer can hold them through a weekend (and the asking price is $4,000 over the regular price!). Meanwhile, I had an exchange with someone today who said that he wants to buy a Suburban because "they're so cheap right now and the money [he] will save will just go towards gas" (he'll still find he loses out big time with those gas bills!). Who would have thought 10 years ago that a tiny hatchback would be a hot commodity and that one could hardly give a Suburban away? There was also an article in the LA Times yesterday that called the '94 Geo Metro a "dream machine" because of its fuel efficiency, and stated that "the '92 Civic hatchback gets 60 mpg." Interestingly enough, the Geo Metro was made by the now struggling General Motors-if only they had realized what was good for the environment was good for them.

The car market is reflecting what people want and need: fuel efficient, reliable cars. If we begin offshore drilling, we will be backtracking and only fueling our problem (pardon the pun). In Senator Obama's acceptance speech for the Democratic Presidential Nomination he claimed that in 10 years our country will no longer be dependant on foreign oil. I agree this dependence needs to end, but I would like to take it a step further and ask that in 10 years our cars no longer be dependent on oil. Period. I would like to believe that saving money, preserving our health by eliminating cancer and asthma causing toxins, and protecting the planet so our children can survive are issues both Democrats and Republicans can agree on.