Last week’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to look at regulating greenhouse gas emissions actually could help companies in Southern California.
For starters, California already passed a law requiring greenhouse gas generators to slash carbon emissions by 25% to 1990 levels by 2020.
That means companies here could have a head start against competitors in other parts of the country.
But the benefits also could extend to companies in Southern California that don’t emit greenhouse gases. That’s because if the EPA does require automakers to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles, it could mean less sweeping future regulations on local industry.
“When cars burn less fuel, it not only reduces greenhouse gas emissions but also smog-forming emissions,” said Sam Atwood, spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which is welcoming the Supreme Court decision as long overdue.
The district for years has been complaining to the federal government that vehicles are a major contributor to smog,in some studies up to 50% of the total problem.
Yet automakers never have been required to do their “fair share” to clean up, according to Atwood. The district doesn’t have the authority to regulate fuel economy standards. So in order to meet stringent clean air targets, it has had to put more of the onus on local industries it can regulate.
“Industry should not have to take on more than its fair share, especially if the auto industry can be made to observe its fair share,” Atwood said.
More Clean Air
Speaking of clearing the air, the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s massive new clean air plan goes to public hearings next week before coming to the district board on May 4.
The 10-year plan is designed to meet federal deadlines for reductions in smog-forming compounds, including a 50% reduction in sulfur oxide and 25% for nitrous oxide in the next 10 to 15 years. Various industries and public agencies would have to spend billions of dollars to meet these targets.
Specifically, the plan contains two controversial proposals: requiring developers of major commercial and housing sites to mitigate the air quality impacts of those projects,including the vehicle trips generated by the life of the project; and requiring industrial plant operators to change out major pollution-generating equipment more frequently.
Dropped from the plan since it was first unveiled last fall were proposed fees on all major development projects to fund work on cleaner-burning engines and fuels. The fees died thanks to fierce opposition from the Building Industry Association of Southern California.
Instead, there would be a menu of pollution reduction measures developers could choose from, such as building fueling stations for alternative-fueled vehicles.
Equally controversial is the “facility modernization” proposal. Now, the only times that most major pieces of industrial equipment have to be replaced are when a new facility is built or an existing one expands. Under the district plan, most industrial equipment would be assigned an average lifetime, after which it must be replaced with the cleanest available equipment.
So, if an industrial boiler has an average life span of 10 years, then it must be replaced within that time.
Industrial groups oppose this, saying that it should be up to the facility operator when to replace aging equipment that can cost tens of millions of dollars.
Labor Relations
Three major Southern California grocery chains that are in contract talks with thousands of employees have agreed to lock out all their workers if employees target one chain with a strike.
The three chains,Kroger Co.’s Ralphs, Safeway Inc.’s Vons and Supervalu Inc.’s Albertsons,issued the joint statement just days before a contract extension expires today. It follows a vote last week by Albertsons workers authorizing a strike if an agreement is not reached.
The agreement “calls for the lockout of employees from all three companies within 48 hours of a strike against any one company,” according to the joint statement.
“We signed this agreement to protect our companies, our customers and our employees’ jobs in the event of a union strike,” spokeswoman Adena Tessler said.
Union leaders blasted the agreement, calling it a “shocking display of contempt” on the part of the management of Ralphs, Albertsons and Vons.
The union is pushing for the repeal of a two-tier wage system that it agreed to at the conclusion of a devastating strike three years ago. The grocery chains have resisted the efforts to roll back the system in which new workers are paid less and receive fewer benefits than veteran employees.
That strike began when Ralphs locked out employees after grocery workers voted to strike against Vons and Pavilions.
Fine is a staff writer at the Los Angeles Business Journal.
