Special Order: A Green Hummer

As a California gubernatorial candidate, Arnold Schwarzenegger has been trying to pull his environmental image out of the shadow of the Hummers in his driveway.

He has embraced hydrogen energy for automobiles and said that he would develop public-private partnerships to install hydrogen filling stations every 20 miles on California interstates by 2010, an inducement for automakers to build fuel-cell cars.

And to counter demonstrators who chant “A Hummer Isn’t Green” at his campaign stops, he said he would convert one of his own 12 m.p.g. Hummers to run on hydrogen. (His campaign did not respond to a request asking how many he owns, although The San Francisco Chronicle says he has five.)

According to a Reuters report that was widely disseminated, Mr. Schwarzenegger said in Carpinteria on Sept. 21 that he would fit one of his own Hummers with a fuel cell to test the technology. But his advisers say that is not what the candidate said. Rather, they say, he has a much simpler and less expensive goal: to modify the V-8 engine of a Hummer H2 to burn hydrogen gas.

It is not surprising that press accounts got it wrong, because most automotive hydrogen research involves fuel cells. And other remarks by Mr. Schwarzenegger suggest that he may also have been unclear about the distinction. In a Sept. 10 television appearance on “The O’Reilly Factor,” he said, “I have my Hummer, for instance, right now, trying to see if we can change it, for instance, to try it out and see if it can be done, to have hydrogen fuel cell, hydrogen fuel energy.”

Tai Robinson, one of several hydrogen experts who are submitting bids to convert the Schwarzenegger Hummer, said that the candidate “didn’t know until a few weeks ago that it was possible to burn hydrogen in an internal-combustion car.”

Modifying a Hummer to run on hydrogen gas requires some engine work and hydrogen gas tanks. Terry Tamminen, executive director of the Environment Now foundation in Santa Monica, and an adviser to the Schwarzenegger campaign, estimated that such a conversion would cost $20,000 to $35,000 and take 60 days.

Building a road-ready fuel-cell Hummer would cost much more. John DeCicco, a mechanical engineer who is a senior fellow at Environmental Defense, an advocacy group based in New York, said fuel cells were “still hand-built by Ph.D’s.” He estimated the cost, which would have to include safety and environmental certifications, at $2 million or more.

Among prototype fuel-cell cars, only the Honda FCX has been certified by both the federal Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board.

A green Hummer already exists. The Army is testing a hybrid-power Humvee (the military version of the Hummer H1) that was developed in a government-industry partnership.

Some experts question the utility of a hydrogen-burning Hummer. Amory Lovins, chief executive of the Rocky Mountain Institute in Snowmass, Colo., a pioneer in clean-car development, estimates that the vehicle will need storage tanks many times larger than its gasoline tank to have a comparable range.

Simply replacing the gasoline tank with a similar-size hydrogen tank would yield a vehicle that could travel only 40 or 50 miles between fillups, Mr. Lovins said, “because it’s such a heavy, high-drag vehicle.” Mr. Robinson said his design includes four or five fuel tanks mounted on the roof. Jason Mark, director of the Clean Vehicles Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said a hydrogen car would produce much lower emissions, but any greenhouse-gas reduction would depend on how the hydrogen was produced.

Alan Niedzwiecki, chief executive of Quantum Technologies in Irvine, Calif., insisted that Mr. Schwarzenegger’s plan could work. Mr. Niedzwiecki, whose company is one of the bidders, concedes that the size of the tanks is a factor, but he said a 200-mile range could be achieved using “some tricks of the trade.”

A Recall AND a Fundraiser? I'm toast.

Let's get this over with FAST. Please contribute!

Environmental stances

Published 2:15 a.m. PDT Sunday, September 21, 2003
Get the latest news in sacbee.com's Recall Election Newsletter. Sign up here.

Below are comments by the leading recall candidates and Gov. Gray Davis on how they would handle various environmental issues. Some comments have been edited for space.

1. Growth and Development

Would you support a state law, similar to one in Oregon, to control urban growth?
Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante (D): No. California is much larger and geographically diverse than Oregon. So, I am not sure that the Oregon's land-use law would be appropriate for our state. However, I strongly support smart growth policies. Urban sprawl is a serious issue that effects water quality, air pollution, and available agricultural and open space. I am supportive of local "Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources" initiatives that give voters more control over development, and create urban-growth boundaries to focus investment in existing urban areas and prevent over development in rural and agricultural areas.

Peter Camejo (Green): Yes, we need to protect our natural resources and control sprawl, however, I would oppose any "mandatory growth" provisions.

Gov. Gray Davis (D): Oregon and California are dissimilar in many ways, and have differing growth patterns, economies, and governments. Land use decisions in California are controlled locally, so any statewide solutions to development or land use problems should be made in concert with local governments. My Administration has worked to preserve valuable open space and help control development at the local level through programs that provide for conservation easements on valuable farmland. I have also supported funding for the Williamson Act, which tends to slow growth and prevent leapfrog sprawl by protecting farmland through support for local taxes.

Arianna Huffington (I): Effectively taming sprawl is vital to the future of California's natural environment. However, local land use decisions should be made at the local level, not in Sacramento. The state should encourage localities to adopt smart, alternative growth plans by providing incentives.

State Sen. Tom McClintock (R): No. Believes that is an issue of local control.

Arnold Schwarzenegger (R): No. While often well-meaning, such laws are not always solutions to the complex problem of poor land use planning, which has resulted in fiscally unsustainable sprawl, traffic congestion on commuter roadways, air pollution, pressure to consume scarce infrastructure resources, and loss of valuable open space. We must invest in our existing urban areas and remove barriers to smart growth. For example, there is currently no effective, widely used mechanism for identifying vacant or underutilized sites in urban areas to evaluate their potential for infill redevelopment.

2. National Forests
Do you support the Sierra Nevada Framework, a management plan for the Sierra implemented by President Clinton but opposed by timber companies, the Bush administration and some rural residents?
Bustamante: Yes. I support the Sierra Nevada Framework as a mechanism to maintain balance between reducing the risk of catastrophic fire and protecting wildlife and ecosystems. The Bush Administration has traded good science for crass politics in their proposals to amend the program and allow the mass destruction of old growth forests and weaken environmental protections for critical habitat.

Camejo: Yes, as far as it goes.

Davis: Yes. I absolutely support the Sierra Nevada Framework. It was the product of 10 years of study and public participation, and millions of dollars of investment. The Sierra Nevada Framework allows for thinning programs to reduce the fire risk facing Sierra communities while striking a proper balance that protects the environment. The changes proposed by the Bush Administration are not acceptable. They will result in more legal tie-ups and will delay needed projects to reduce the fire risk for Sierra communities.

Huffington: Yes. I support the Sierra Nevada Framework. As governor, I would aggressively resist the Bush administration's ongoing attempts to roll back hard-won environmental protections such as this.

McClintock: No. Agrees with the Bush administration that more needs to be done to reduce wildfire threats.

Schwarzenegger: Yes, the Framework evolved from a consensus-building process over nearly two decades of hard work by all stakeholders, during a period covering both Republican and Democratic administrations in Sacramento and Washington. The Framework has been widely hailed as a model of forest ecosystem resource protection. As Governor, I will direct all relevant state agencies to work with their federal counterparts to comply fully with the Framework and call on the federal government to honor its pledge to abide by the policies set forth in this unprecedented compact.

3. Coastal issues
Do you support more oil drilling off the California coast?
Bustamante: No.

Camejo: No, the environmental costs and risks far outweigh the limited amount of oil which could be recovered -- especially given that the entire world is going to run out of economically-recoverable oil and gas within a few decades anyway.

Davis: No. I adamantly oppose oil drilling off of California's coast. That's why I sued the federal government when it extended 36 offshore gas and oil leases. We won the case in District Court and in the Court of Appeal.

Huffington: I strongly oppose more drilling off the California coast. We must not auction off our natural resources to the highest bidder. The fact remains, we can't drill our way to energy independence. That can only be achieved by pursuing a sane energy policy that protects the environment, stresses fuel efficiency, and invests in renewable energy.

McClintock: No. If the Arctic were opened to drilling, there would be no need to drill off the California coast.

Schwarzenegger: No. As Governor, I will protect California's coastline by fighting for a ban on all oil drilling in coastal waters and will urge the federal government to purchase the remaining offshore oil leases as it has in Florida.

4. Central Valley smog
Do you support ending air-pollution exemptions for agriculture, as outlined in SB 700?
Bustamante: Yes, I support Dean Florez's efforts to improve air quality and, consequently, the health of countless children in the Central Valley.

Camejo: Yes, air quality must be protected, for both health and general environmental reasons.

Davis: I wholeheartedly support efforts to clean the Central Valley's air. Just three weeks ago, the federal EPA announced the elimination of some Clean Air Act protections, a move that could lead to significant increases in industrial pollution. As a result, I am supporting and will sign SB 288, a bill that will enact in California the protections that the EPA eliminated. The legislature recently passed SB 700, and I have not yet taken action on it.

Huffington: Yes. I would also sign the other four bills recently passed by the Senate in an effort to clean up air in the Central Valley (SB 704, SB 705, SB 708, and SB 709).

McClintock: No. Voted against SB 700 in the last session. Would hurt the state's largest industry.

Schwarzenegger: Everyone must do their fair share to reduce air pollution, but farmers have been unfairly caught in the middle of competing bureaucratic demands. For example, dairy farmers have tried to build methane digesters on their farms to convert manure and organic waste to natural gas, thus reducing both air and water pollution and simultaneously creating renewable energy that our state urgently needs. These projects are tied up by competing permit processes and fought by special interests who don't want farmers competing in the energy business.

5. Water
Do you support expanding the Delta water pumps to move more water south during certain times of the year, as planned by the Cal-Fed program?
Bustamante: There are innovative mechanisms being developed with respect to conservation, water transfers, and desalination. Any increase in pumping should be a last resort and should be coupled with better efficiencies in the water conveyance system and increased protections for affected wildlife.

Camejo: The proposal needs to be amended to promote a higher level of water conservation. We must begin treating fresh water as the limited resource that it is.

Davis: Yes. I fully support this proposal. It is a key part of the Cal-Fed program that my administration helped inaugurate and has supported with $1.65 billion over its first four years. By increasing the overall flexibility of the system we can better manage conflict and protect water quality, water supply and fish. Bigger pumps will be used during seasons when endangered species are not at risk.

Huffington: The biggest concern facing Cal-Fed is the lack of federal funding the agency has received from the Bush administration. The federal government needs to renew its commitment to funding Cal-Fed; then we can explore whether Delta water pumps should be expanded.

McClintock: No answer. Believes that expanding storage should be the top priority.

Schwarzenegger: California must increase its water supply for a sustainable future. But the Bay-Delta cannot supply all of our needs. Sacramento's lack of leadership in supporting state and federal cooperation on Delta water management (CAL-FED) has resulted in Congress not funding the CAL-FED program. As Governor, I will urge the Congress to restore CAL-FED funding immediately. This will include increased conservation efforts among both urban and agricultural users, and the use of market-based mechanisms to create environmental gains in streams for fish and economic gains for farmers, municipal and industrial users.

6. Energy
Do you support more state funds to promote alternative energy and conservation?
Bustamante: California must decrease its dependence on traditional energy sources to avoid the rolling blackouts and gouging that took place a few years ago. We must continue conservation efforts and promote alternative energy sources, including wind and solar energy.

Camejo: Yes, definitely. Because renewable energy directly employs 2 to 5 times as many people for every unit of electricity generated as fossil or nuclear sources, supporting alternative energy will also stimulate much-needed job growth.

Davis: Yes. Improvements in alternative energy and conservation are good for the environment, help ensure a steady flow of affordable energy, and save consumers and the state money. I will continue to support state conservation efforts that have saved thousands of megawatts. The state's "Flex Your Power" program saved 1,468 megawatts in 2002, and is expected to provide the same amount of savings for 2003. And new building standards promulgated by my Administration saved 200 megawatts in its first year alone.

Huffington: Absolutely. Just as government provided the initial public funding for what became the Internet, government needs to play a role in promoting energy efficiency, modern electric infrastructure, and renewables like solar and wind.

McClintock: No. Favors construction of new power plants

Schwarzenegger: We must invest taxpayer dollars wisely so they promote real results. For example, we must facilitate a public-private partnership to develop the Hydrogen economy and strengthen California's position as the high-technology leader in the development of clean fuel choices and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We must also create incentives for energy conservation, such as a Green Building Bank by using private financing and targeted public loan guarantees. This will allow us to swiftly retrofit as many buildings as possible, reducing the need for new power plants, saving money for businesses and taxpayers alike, and preserving air quality. The Green Building Bank will also help finance the addition of solar PV on large flat rooftops, repaid over time by the value of the new energy generated.

7. Budget cuts (Bonus question)
If you were forced to cut one state environmental program, because of the budget crisis, which one would you cut?
Bustamante: Our state's economic vitality depends on a healthy environment. Environmental programs amount to less than 2% of the state budget, and polluter fees generate tens of millions of dollars to support these conservation programs. Rather than cutting these programs, I believe we should continue to hold polluters responsible for their actions and costs in order to save taxpayer dollars.

Camejo: Rather than cut one specific environmental program, various boards and agencies could be combined to eliminate duplication of oversight and/or work. For example, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards and the Department of Toxic Substance Control both do similar sorts of clean-ups, and those functions could be combined to improve efficiency.

Davis: California has already faced major cuts that have resulted in fewer people to do the job of protecting the environment. If the national economy does not recover, additional cuts may be necessary. But the elimination of entire programs is not the answer. I will continue to protect the critical elements of environmental programs by stretching government resources and postponing programs that are important, but not critical.

Huffington: No answer.

McClintock: No answer.

Schwarzenegger: There is a great deal of duplication and waste in many areas of state government, including programs designed to protect the environment. Such waste actually hinders swift reduction of pollution and preservation of parks and habitats. As Governor, I will address this waste equally throughout the budget and will enlist the help of the smartest people -- both inside government and outside of it -- to help my Administration make government more efficient.

Source: Candidates and their campaign staff

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/recall/story/7457549p-8400341c.html

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.