Global Warming Solutions Reports

Search • RSS Feed

Executive Summary

Emissions from cars and light trucks are a major source of air pollution and global warming pollution in New Mexico. Adopting the Clean Cars Program will reduce this pollution and provide a net economic benefit to the state.

The consensus view of climate scientists holds that global warming is real, that it is being caused by human-made emissions and that we need to act quickly and boldly if we’re to avoid the worst effects of a warming planet.

Global warming, left unchecked, could substantially impact the frequency of heat waves, increase the risk of wildfires, lead to species extinction, cause sea levels to rise and decrease mountain snow packs and available water supplies, already severely limited in the parched Southwest.

Nationally, one million more drivers are on today’s roads than there were just two years ago. America’s cars and trucks already produce more than 360 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year; these emissions are expected to rise another 50 percent by 2015. In New Mexico, the transportation sector is the second largest source of carbon dioxide pollution, making up nearly one-quarter of the state’s emissions in 2000.

Air pollution like smog, soot and cancer-causing air toxics from our cars, trucks and SUVs worsen asthma and lung disease and have been linked to an increased risk of stroke, heart attack and cancer. Nationally, our vehicles are responsible for more than 50 percent of all volatile organic compound and nitrogen oxide emissions—precursors to smog.

Cleaner cars can help to reduce the state’s global warming and air pollution emissions. First, the Clean Cars Program sets strict standards for traditional air pollutants, cutting volatile organic compound and nitrogen oxide emissions by 5 percent and 11 percent respectively. Second, the program would reduce global warming such by 2016, new cars would emit 34 percent less global warming gases, while light-duty trucks would produce 25 percent less. Third, the program helps to drive further technological development by requiring automakers to invest in researching and producing advanced-technology vehicles.

New Mexico is currently considering joining twelve states in adopting the Clean Cars Program’s vehicle emission standards and bringing these high performance cars to our roads.

Automakers, dealerships and their trade associations often suggest that the costs of the program to automakers and consumers would be too steep. However, cleaner vehicles will benefit consumers and the state’s economy in several ways.

Cleaner cars are a good deal for New Mexico’s drivers. Cleaner cars that incorporate advanced-technology components have reduced operating costs, saving drivers money at the pump. Cleaner cars begin to pay for themselves immediately.

- As a result of anticipated gasoline savings, New Mexico consumers could save $623 million annually under the Clean Cars Program.

- Assuming fuel costs of $3 per gallon, consumers will experience a net savings of $245 to $320 per year during the life of a 5 year loan and $490 and $560 per year when the loan is paid off.

- More than 25 models of clean vehicles sold in California and other clean car states are not generally available in New Mexico. Adopting the Clean Cars Program would mean that New Mexicans get better choices and have more access to cleaner, conventional cars and advanced-technology vehicles.

Manufacturers have a history of overestimating the price of producing cleaner vehicles to comply with stronger emission standards. Their claims about consumer impacts and declining sales have not played out.

- Auto industry costs estimates for the 1970s catalytic converter requirements were 1.6 to 3.2 times higher than the actual cost. In the 1990s, Sierra Research, who provided cost analyses for the auto industry, estimated costs that were 4 to 6 times higher than the actual cost of compliance for the original LEV program.

- After automakers and car dealerships sued the state of Vermont citing that its Clean Cars global warming standards would cost too much, weren’t feasible and would limit production, Vermont District Court Judge Sessions said that automakers have “failed to carry their burden to demonstrate that the regulation is not technologically feasible or economically practicable… given the flawed assumptions and overly conservative selection of technologies” utilized. Instead, the Court found that “compliance is possible in the time period provided at a relatively reasonable cost.” Judge Sessions also concluded that the auto industry can make any vehicle reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. The Court did “not find convincing the claims that consumers will be deprived of their choice of vehicles, or that manufacturers will be forced to restrict or abandon their product lines.”

Because drivers will be spending less at the pump—money that largely leaves the local economy and is sent out of state or overseas—the state’s economy will benefit as people have more money to spend on other commodities and in their local stores.

- The New Mexico Climate Change Advisory Group found that the program would actually save money for the state. Each ton of carbon dioxide equivalent reduced would save the state $117, making the Clean Cars Program the most cost effective of the 69 policy options that the state analyzed to reduce global warming emissions.

- The California Air Resources Board (CARB) expects that the money saved through reduced operating costs—money that usually flows out of the local economy—will raise people’s personal income and help to energize the local economy through increased spending on other goods and services. These expenditures would create jobs and help to create new businesses.

- Because the program would also reduce the air pollution that affects rates of asthma, cancer and heart disease, a reduction in state medical costs could also be expected. Health care costs from ozone, smog and air toxics put a burden on the state health care system. Reducing emissions that trigger asthma attacks and increase cancer will inevitably lead to fewer sick days and reduced health care costs for business and government.

The economic, social and environmental consequences of inaction, or choosing to ignore the threat of global warming, will likely be severe, and outweigh any potential unintended consequences of emission reduction efforts.

- In a time of scientific certainty about the seriousness of global warming and increasingly more frequent debate around policy solutions to global warming that would put a price on carbon, businesses that are dependent on fossil fuels or are heavy emitters find themselves in a riskier and riskier business climate.

- The likely impacts of global warming in New Mexico could significantly impact New Mexico’s economy. For example, warmer winter temperatures would hurt ski resorts and other snow sport industries, which provided a $270 million financial benefit to the state in 2004.

- Acting immediately to reduce greenhouse gas emissions—from the transportation sector and economy-wide—would help us to avoid the costs of inaction.