PD Editorial: Gas-powered cars get a California expiration date

Leadership often is a matter of timing, of spotting the moment when a far-fetched idea becomes a matter of common sense and self-interest. Gov. Gavin Newsom believes California stands at such a point and is ready to lead the nation by ending the sale of gas-powered cars and trucks by 2035. Californians should hope he’s right.

Making a headline grabbing announcement is easy. Selling the idea to the public, implementing it, ensuring that it’s feasible and that vehicles will be available and affordable is much harder. Electric cars currently account for less than 10% of car sales statewide.

Yet Newsom’s 2035 deadline, announced in an executive order on Wednesday, looks more necessary and less impractical by the day. The transformation is vital to California’s economic and environmental future.

California is leading the nation, but not the world on this. Fifteen nations already have announced plans to ban new sales of gas- and diesel-powered cars and trucks. Some of them — including the United Kingdom, Norway and India — have more ambitious timetables than the one set by Newsom.

The bans are in response to a warning by the International Panel on Climate Change: To avoid a catastrophic increase in temperatures, global emissions of carbon dioxide must be reduced by half within a decade.

Ripple effects would include cleaner air. Remember how quickly the skies turned blue after the coronavirus stay-home order in March?

Newsom’s order positions California to achieve a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions sooner than any other state – though other states are now likely to follow California’s example. Transportation accounts for half of California’s carbon dioxide emissions, and more than 80% of the pollutants that cause smog in the state’s cities.

The governor announced his order against a backdrop of climate calamity. Fires aggravated by drought and climate change have burned 5,600 square miles of the state’s forests and grasslands this season. The need for a robust response grows more urgent with each new blaze.

Opponents of a rapid switch to zero-emission vehicles argue that the change should flow from consumers’ choices. A government mandate, they say, would force people to buy vehicles they do not want or cannot afford.

The let-buyers-decide argument has some merit. Fortunately, California consumer preferences are steadily becoming more closely aligned with Newsom’s order. Adoption is helped as the costs, especially over the lifetime of the vehicle, come into parity with gas-powered cars.

But government still has a useful role in accelerating that market shift. Next up, Newsom must articulate a transition plan that includes getting as many gasoline-powered cars off the road as possible. He’ll have a better chance of success if he works with the Legislature, something he notably didn’t do by going the executive order route.

California is now committed to joining nations around the world in creating conditions that favor the emergence of clean transportation industries and the infrastructure that supports them. Because the state is already home to leading industries in this sector (think Tesla), Newsom’s executive order is in line with California’s economic interests. And those of at least some automakers: Ford Motor Co. praised Newsom’s order.

Zero-emission vehicles alone won’t solve California’s, or the world’s, climate crisis. But that crisis is sure to worsen without ambitious action to curb the transportation sector’s carbon dioxide emissions. In the absence of federal leadership, no state has a larger responsibility — or a greater opportunity — than California.

You can send a letter to the editor at letters@pressdemocrat.com.