Rulemaking - Clean Vehicles Program and General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources

1425 Results

Sort:

Comment From: Ken Johnson

9/28/22 @ 3:44 PM
The EV mandate and gas engine ban are unrealistic and unfair, will cost billions to implement and will unfairly penalize rural communities and working families.
Stop this madness.
No attachments

Comment From: Fred White

9/28/22 @ 3:39 PM
Relating to the Clean Vehicle Program. This Clean Vehicle Program is unrealistic in it's purpose and implementation. This program was implemented out of state and by a non-elected body. The Clean Vehicle Program was not voted on by Washingtonians. Th...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Charles McElrath

9/28/22 @ 3:38 PM
EVs are still too costly and don't work for most families. Washington residents should be able to choose the vehicle that works best for them. The mandate and gas engine ban are unrealistic and unfair. The total cost will be billions to implement and...↓
No attachments

Comment From: ARTHUR SNIDER

9/28/22 @ 3:36 PM
When will this "Green" insanity stop?? It's an absolute fact that you can't produce the amount of electricity to accomodate all these vehicles via green energy sources. And why in the world would ANYONE want to follow the lead of a state like Califon...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Jim Rosemary

9/28/22 @ 3:33 PM
In the strongest possible terms, I urge the WA Department of Ecology to reject the proposed rules, Chapter 173-423 WAC � Clean Vehicles Program, and Chapter 173-400 WAC, General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources.

1) The entire basis for even consi...↓

2) Eliminating my choice to purchase a vehicle based on the type of engine is contrary to my freedom to do business with whomever I want. Because the number of electric vehicles is limited, this becomes a "forced choice" with the State of Washington putting its thumb on the scale of commerce. This is contrary to our national objective to have a free and fair marketplace.

3) Electric vehicles are an unaffordable alternative for many Washingtonians. Not only the cost of initial purchase, but the cost to maintain (such as more frequent tire replacement) is higher than gas or diesel-powered vehicles. Replacing a battery for an EV can range from $10,000 to $30,000! This ruling would impart an additional financial burden, especially on the poor and middle class citizens who cannot afford this option.

4) Electric vehicles actually have a negative impact on the environment. It starts with the mining of rare-earth minerals to manufacture the batteries used in EV's, to the additional increase of tire deterioration that introduces microparticles into the environment, to the disposal of non-recyclable batteries and other components. And what power source is going to charge the batteries? This may necessitate bringing more power plants online that consume more resources. EV's are NOT a "green" alternative, but just the opposite.

5) Washington's electric grid is not up to the task to support a massive increase in EV's. Washington has neither the power generation capacity nor the infrastructure in place to support the necessarily huge increase in electricity demand that will accompany this lurch toward EV's.

For these and many other reasons, I urge the Department of Ecology to reject these proposals and any others like them that may be introduced in the future. Thank you.
No attachments

Comment From: Thomas aw Mains

9/28/22 @ 3:30 PM
I'M a 3rd generation family farmer in Eastern Washington. We are very rural and don't believe that this electric vehicle mandate will work for us, do to the distances we drive and will be very expensive for us to operate our farms. This is very unfai...↓
Tom Mains
No attachments

Comment From: John Fannon

9/28/22 @ 3:24 PM
Can we please stop the insanity? This forced change is unsatisfactory. Who are you, dictators?
No attachments

Comment From: Ja,es York

9/28/22 @ 3:19 PM
Please stop the stupidity. Banning gas vehicles is probably the most stupid idea you could come up with. First there is no infrastructure to support wholesale conversion. Look at California, a perfect example of short sighted politicians like your...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Robin Johansen

9/28/22 @ 3:17 PM
I would like to submit my objection to the adoption of the California motor vehicle emission standards for the state of Washington. This will do very, very little to affect the world temperature and will cost the average citizen so much money to inst...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Theresa Clark

9/28/22 @ 3:14 PM
You people who will be making these decisions for the people of Washington, you should put yourselves in our shoes. We are struggling to pay our bills, buy groceries, medical care just to name a few items. How do you think the every day person is g...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Jerry Heitzman

9/28/22 @ 3:14 PM
I'm an electrical engineer by degree and believe that this bill places the proverbial "cart before the horse"! Washington States current electrical infrastructure is insufficient to provide sufficient charging power for an all electric automobile sta...↓
No attachments

Comment From: James Johnson Anonymous

9/28/22 @ 3:14 PM
Gentlemen: With the fire starting once again on several tesla cars this idea of no gas/diesel cars is silly and self destructive to our society. The idea that some governmental entity can restrict citizens ability to move around or travel will kill...↓
Regards, Mr. and Mrs. James and Gail Johnson
No attachments

Comment From: Val Williams

9/28/22 @ 3:13 PM
This bill proposing all Electric vehicles and the phase in period, In my opinion is short sighted and typical of Washington State Blunders. I believe a much longer time is required so that the power grid can be upgraded to accommodate the future grow...↓
of most of new replacement EV batteries. The cost of replacement EV batteries should also be considered,
Most EV batteries will be in the $5to $10,000 dollar range plus another thousand for installation.
Does anybody in state government have any since of reality????
No attachments

Comment From: Marc Christensen

9/28/22 @ 3:13 PM
This has to stop. It is absolutely unconsciousably wrong to allow an unelected bureaucracy from another state to force their policies on the citizens of the state of Washington. This violates our state and federal Constitutional principles as well a...↓

The idea that the people of Washington won't suffer unsustainable harm to their lifestyles and livelihoods by being forced into electric vehicles that lack adequate capability is rediculous. Almost as rediculous as the idea that mandating electric vehicles in the state of Washington can have any material effect on global climate change. This quite honestly stupid idea coupled with the Governor's equally stupid idea of breaching lower Snake river dams will destroy the economy of Washington. For what, to send some virtual signal?

Time for you people to recognize that inexpensive power and carbon based transportation is critical to our state and stop this pursuing this nonsense.
No attachments

Comment From: Kent Hendricks

9/28/22 @ 3:06 PM
I urge you to oppose this extraordinarily expensive "follow-the-leader-down-the-rathole" mandate to ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles.
The average EV costs $66,000. This mandate will cost consumers and businesses billions that we don't have.
Creatin...↓
We don't have enough electricity generation to make this work. The cost of electric grid upgrades needed for new EV charging loads, are unknown and would likely be in the billions.
Please get off this ridiculous bandwagon and think this through. We don't want to abandon inexpensive and abundant and quite clean energy and replace it with energy that is expensive and limited.
Thank you.
No attachments

Comment From: Monty Rowley

9/28/22 @ 3:04 PM
This is a politically driven ideology which I oppose. Why not skip the climate change dogma and address crime and corruption? Those are the real threats.
No attachments

Comment From: George and Esther Bieda

9/28/22 @ 3:01 PM
We do not support your plans to require Electric Vehicles in place of gasoline vehicles. The EV's are too expensive and WA State does not have the Electrical Power to fuel the EV's. Gasoline vehicles will around for a much longer time.
No attachments

Comment From: Frank Vance

9/28/22 @ 2:55 PM
EVs are still too costly and don't work for most families. Washington residents should be able to choose the vehicle that works best for them.
• The average EV costs $66,000.1 This mandate will cost consumers and businesses BILLIONS.
• Creating the cha...↓
• The cost of electric grid upgrades needed for new EV charging loads, are unknown and could be in the BILLIONS.
No attachments

Comment From: DOUGLAS ROBERTSON

9/28/22 @ 2:54 PM
These rules are ridiculously excessive and expensive, prohivitively so for working families. And just WHERE is all that electricity supposed to come from??
No attachments

Comment From: Ted Irvin

9/28/22 @ 2:49 PM
It has already been proven that California cannot meet their own law. They can't even keep the power on in hot weather. Now Washington is going to do the same thing. STUPID! The cost of this folly is going to be felt by all residents. Wake up and sto...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Rick Porter

9/28/22 @ 2:45 PM
There should be no state government rules on this. The public should decide their choice of transportation based on all the factors they consider important when they make a transport buying decision. Government has usually been wrong and the public...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Keith Forsberg

9/28/22 @ 11:06 AM
I am concerned that a new environmental problem will be created from the battery disposal of used EV battery packs. Whatever legislation is created should address this issue. I would like to see that the EV manufactures are made responsible for used ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: mary kidd

9/28/22 @ 10:03 AM
It takes oil to make electricity. the kids in Africa are exploited for making the batteries in the Congo they make maybe a dollar a day this is slave labor. we don't have the infrastructure to charge all of these vehicles the batteries are dangerous....↓
No attachments

Comment From: Alex Dail

9/28/22 @ 4:32 AM
The move to EV ought to be a free market choice and not manipulated by laws or price control of petroleum. The whole feild of vehicles that use petroleum ought to be considered; that is how it will affect farming, the moving of goods and produce (the...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Frederick Chavre

9/28/22 @ 3:23 AM
Laws that dictate 2035 electric cars only belong in places like Russia or North Korea. The over production of CO2 is best addressed in a free market based on real not hyped science. Stop being communist and more importantly promote real discussions u...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Concerned Citizen

9/27/22 @ 11:00 PM
No! I do not like your new rules by 2035 for Zero Emission Vehicle standards by 2035. Sure, it might suit all the city people, but the country and rural areas are only gonna be hurt.
You think things cost lots more, just wait until you request us folk...↓
No we are not all embracing your all electric vehicle idea! Just because you shove this way of thinking down our throats, we don't all agree with your ideas and way of thinking.
We all can't live in your big cities and who would want to. I know my letter won't change your minds, but you've got to consider us country, rural and farmers and loggers and how far we have to travel to do things and how long its gonna take to travel anywhere.
No, no, on your 2030 or 2035 all electric (zero emissions) proposal! Don't have to follow California! Where's all the electricity coming from when you also want to do away with dams!
No attachments

Comment From: J. Polehn

9/27/22 @ 10:56 PM
9/27/22
My vote on this "climate" change/electric vehicle (ev) mandate tripe is a resounding NO! The climate of the earth has ALWAYS been changing. The change is not necessarily negative. And carbon is needed for plants & animals to live.

Provide th...↓

Further, if evs are so great, every gov't employee should be required to purchase & drive one on their OWN dime (i.e., no subsidies). You know... Lead by example. And those proposing this idiocy need to stop purchasing or using anything made from fossil fuels, grown by using fossil fuels, or transported with fossil fuels including food including the governor's home, airplane, limousine, etc..

Technical--
Before this law is rammed down folks throats, we expect our gov't employees to do the following:

*Complete a peer reviewed complete life cycle (i.e.., "cradle to grave") evaluation comparing evs to gasoline & diesel powered vehicles (e.g., energy use to produce, energy use to use, energy use to dispose of, etc.) & include the infrastructure costs for each & inflation. Make the report available to the public for review & comment at least 1 year before placing ev requirement into law & notify the public of the report's availability. Include in the documented evaluation the removal of the materials used to make the evs from the earth in China, or other country, that uses fossil fuel to dig up the materials & China, or other country, enslaving its people to do the work. Also, include the impact from disposal of the ev's hazardous materials. And include a complete cost-benefit analysis comparison between evs & gas powered vehicles, including air planes, farming equipment, police & emergency vehicles, etc. including the cost of the gov't/NGOs doing these studies.

*No peer reviewed evaluation has been done of the impact on our electrical grid & what it will take to upgrade & maintain that upgraded grid. Provide that evaluation for public review & comment prior to placing the ev requirements in the law . It should be noted that grid is used to ship power to CA & that should be addressed in the report.

*A report should be provided on the companies pushing the ev law & the companies, & countries, benefiting from use of our taxpayer monies from the ev law & the report provided to WA State citizens.

*Put the ev proposal to the vote of the people & require that 3/4ths of WA citizen voters approve of the proposal prior to putting it on the law books and that the outcome of the vote & the vote process & machines have a forensic audit done by an independent 3rd party.
No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Anonymous

9/27/22 @ 5:45 PM
These regulations depend on climate change as a fact and that climate change is man made. The truth is Earth's atmosphere is continually changing from year to year and season to season and has experienced many warming and cooling periods. You have ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: shawn rapp

9/27/22 @ 4:46 PM
I see one main problem with this regulation. Washington is already one of the most taxed states in the country and the money to build the infrastructure does not come out of thin air. It is going to cost everyone in Washington a lot more money. Gover...↓

I really don't see how this can work in the less populated areas of the state.
Sure, I can pay to build a charging station at my house and the daily drive of 60 miles to and from work shouldn't be a problem.

Personally, I am nearing retirement age and need a new pickup before I retire. What do I do? I can't wait for an electric version to be available and can't afford it anyway. If I buy an ICE version I will not be able to afford the gas once I retire. Since we know gas prices are going to increase significantly when fewer vehicles are using it. I see a future when ICE vehicles get taxed just for owning them.

How do I take an electric pickup camping in the woods for a couple weeks at a time? I have not seen anyone address this issue.

Just a couple thoughts.
No attachments

Comment From: Chad Donaldson

9/27/22 @ 12:36 PM
Inslee's forced electric vehicles idea is ridiculous! The tech is no there. We're not even close. It takes hours to charge a vehicle, it takes power to do it. What happens when we have to do brown outs in the heat from climate change? Not to men...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Lois Powell

9/27/22 @ 12:09 PM
are you crazy.
No attachments

Comment From: Paul Bond

9/27/22 @ 11:56 AM
There are 250 million gasoline powered cars in the U.S. Many are collector cars, muscle cars, 4WD vehicles, and cars that people aren't going to want to part with, nor will be able to afford to. How dare you people force this on us, considering curre...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Cheri Rapp

9/27/22 @ 11:44 AM
Affordability- Not only is this plan utterly unattainable, it unaffordable for the average working middle class family. My household has 3 adults working different shifts, which would require the purchase of a minimum of 2 electric vehicles just to ...↓

Infrastructure- I do not believe the electric grid can currently handle energy strain from every household in the state charging electric vehicles. I envision massive traffic issues due to electric vehicles with drained batteries all over I-5 with no way to charge them to get back down the road. There would need to be charging stations all over the cities, roads, interstates and state, including destination sites. There would need to be the same number of charging stations along every road and interstate and in every town, city and state in the nation, otherwise any kind of travel or road trip would be impossible. THERE ISN'T. Road trips are all my family can afford to do. We don't have the privilege of jumping on a private jet taking luxury vacations like our overpaid gluttonous lawmakers.

Natural Resources- the battery these vehicles use require vast amounts of natural resources to build. What happens when those natural resources become depleted? Millions of gallons of diesel is required to mine the ore that will be consumed. How does that impact the carbon footprint? There is also the issue of recycling/disposing of these batteries when they reach the end of their lifecycle.

This regulation is going to financially destroy the average middle class working Washington family. I do not support this proposal and I will vote against anyone who does, as will almost every person I've spoken to about it. This is undoubtedly one of the least thought out proposals I have ever heard. This administration is at best out of touch with the average Washington citizen and is out of touch with reality. Beyond frustrated.
No attachments

Comment From: Glen Gipe

9/27/22 @ 11:26 AM
This is an unrealistic goal and is without a common sense approach. The presumption is electric cars will make our lives better. However the fact is 98% of the US electricity is generated by fossil fuel. Climate impact of mining ore for the batteries...↓
No attachments

Comment From: William Tadlock

9/27/22 @ 10:49 AM
This is Ludicrous since we do not have the infrastructure to support electric vehicles in the state of Washington! You cannot drive from Bellingham Washington to Walla Walla on a single battery charge making it does a longer more expensive trip than ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Eric Rindal

9/27/22 @ 10:24 AM
Ecology show move to ban if able, all advertising of ICE based vehicles as was done with cigarettes. If Unable to direct impose such a ban, should endeavor to request the legislature do so in the next session. Removing advertising by manufactures and...↓
No attachments

Comment From: A very annoyed WA resident Anonymous

9/27/22 @ 9:51 AM
This plan is totally unattainable. Not one thing about it is well thought out except in how to destroy WA citizen's on every level. Well, I should rephrase this to say Im sure that is actually this regimes goal.
No attachments

Comment From: Robert Wanpler

9/27/22 @ 9:50 AM
This is by far the most asinine thing living in Washington state. Most living families can't afford a new car let alone an EV with these skyrocketing prices and price gouging that the local dealerships are doing here in Washington state it shouldn't ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Steven Silvey

9/26/22 @ 5:32 AM
Sirs,
I have attached some comments, so why are not hybrid vehicles not considered, and further the fact that vehicle production is not considered.
Attachments:

Comment From: Richard Rigby

9/24/22 @ 4:23 PM
I heartily agree with, support, endorse and encourage the adoptions of these rulemaking measures.
Industry leaders and scientists alike generally agree on the increasingly urgent need to combat environmental degradation and ecological disaster by taki...↓
P.S. Yes, I recently bought my first plug-in car - used, not new. And I love it!
No attachments

Comment From: Riley Simpson

9/23/22 @ 3:17 PM
These types of regulations have good intentions and should be considered as future goals but seem too ambitious. We shouldn't do something because California is doing it.
No attachments

Comment From: Jeromy Luffman

9/23/22 @ 1:47 PM
How can these vehicles be referred to as "Zero Emission"? A majority of America's energy is derived from fossil fuels with very little energy actually coming from renewable resources (see link).

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

In addi...↓

Prior to pressing these vehicles into the public, shouldn't we at the very minimum increase public renewable resource energy options, establish an infrastructure for charging based on renewables and improve the batteries requiring fewer natural resources?
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/23/22 @ 6:24 AM
Washington needs to stop following everything California does. It hasn't made California a more enjoyable place to live and it won't benefit Washington either. This plan will put many mechanics out of business. The electric grid can't handle the a...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Vivek Swamatha

9/22/22 @ 8:52 AM
The total carbon footprint (mining of rare Earth metals, refining the ore, transportation and production) exceeds that of their gasoline counterpart. Moreover, the electric grid does not have the capacity to charge BEV's. Look into renewable gasolin...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Cathy Spencer

9/22/22 @ 6:27 AM
Attachments:

Comment From: Tony Czaban

9/21/22 @ 5:26 PM
This is ridiculous and frustrating. There is no infrastructure in place and stating that you are confident that you can get there is putting the cart before the horse. I hope every idiot that supports this ludicrous idea is fired or voted out of o...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Leah Hadfield

9/21/22 @ 3:03 PM
Blindly following California's recent vehicle emission rule-making is short-sighted virtue signaling. Washington State is awash with regulation so burdensome that it makes doing business here distasteful. I hate the idea of wanting to leave my home t...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Paula Bonneville

9/21/22 @ 11:21 AM
While a great goal, the reality is such that more people in Washington state are unable to afford a new EV than can afford one. Our state has such a crisis of people that cannot afford to even rent a home, and now we are expected to shell out $50,000...↓
No attachments

Comment From: June Jones

9/17/22 @ 11:17 AM
While I am not opposed to EV and hybrid automobiles, where I live an EV is just not practical. We travel at least 35 miles to a decent grocery store, deal with snowy roads and closed mountain passes during the winter, and power outages during winter...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Steven Silvey

9/17/22 @ 10:53 AM
Why is it that the language in the governors message only states %, as one has learned % of what?
Why is it we are following California, are they better then us, have done better research, or is it political in that they are fully Democratic, and in a...↓
Unfortunately, when the state asks one to believe the ecology resources department I personally find it hard to do given previous mis-truths published on their web site, and fact that in talking with people they seem not to do scientific research of the basic kind. (stating that plastic bags are toxic)
Is there a report that states that the electrical grid can support 400 amps power to each house.
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/16/22 @ 2:48 PM
I find this pro I find this proposed rulemaking to be incredibly idiotic. The recent strain on the California power grid (https://nypost.com/2022/09/01/californians-asked-not-to-charge-electric-cars-amid-heat-wave/) as witnessed by CA Gov. Newsom beg...↓
In addition to the pressure on the electric grid/supply, the proposed rulemaking has several other economic and societal issues. EVs continue to be extremely expensive. Even with federal tax incentives, something that can be legislatively ended with a change in the control of either the Oval Office or the House/Senate, EVs are still out of reach for most Americans. The average price of a new EV is DOUBLE that of a gas-powered new car (https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=7c339d1694c48274JmltdHM9MTY2MzAyNzIwMCZpZ3VpZD0wZmEwOGQ1YS03NmRhLTY0NjEtMmVkMi05Yzc1NzJkYTY2ZTUmaW5zaWQ9NTQ0MA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=0fa08d5a-76da-6461-2ed2-9c7572da66e5&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly9jb25zdW1lci5mdGMuZ292L2FydGljbGVzL2J1eWluZy1uZXctY2Fy&ntb=1 and https://www.npr.org/2022/08/27/1119360031/california-gas-cars-electric-cars-zero-emission-climate-change). So not only are EVs extremely expensive, but with an arbitrary mandate, the State will create an economic imbalance. The rule will stop the sale of new gas-powered cars effective 2035. What will happen is easy to foresee. A lot of gas-powered cars will be bought (new) before the cutoff date. Post-cutoff, the re-sale of gas-powered cars will boom as simple economics shows that WA state in its infinite wisdom has created an economic imbalance (supply and demand) with a limitation of supply. This means upward pressure on the price of 'used' cars. Since low to middle income families typically use cars for near the economic life of a vehicle (nearly 12 years), that means that individuals will further extend the use of gas-powered cars and see an active re-sale market (https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a33457915/average-age-vehicles-on-road-12-years/). I personally have a truck that is in good condition and is 18 years old. It has another 10 years of realistic life in it at a minimum. That vehicle would see it's resale value increase if this was 2035. Furthermore, those who can least afford EVs would now be faced with the 2035 supply imbalance and see gas-powered cars as alternatives even more pricey and being on the road even longer.
The EV charging network is nascent. Until EVs can be readily and rapidly charged just like pulling into a gas station to fill up your tank, EVs will continue to be inconvenient for all but shorter driving (under 300 miles). From J.D. Power: Owner satisfaction with availability of public charging stations differs by region: Led by California, the Pacific region has the highest number of public chargers. At the same time, it has the highest concentration of EV owners, yet they are not as satisfied with the availability and condition of public chargers as EV owners in some other geographic areas (https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2022-us-electric-vehicle-experience-evx-public-charging-study). A home charging station currently runs around $500 .
Rare earth minerals. EVs are very reliant upon rare earth minerals such as Lithium and unfortunately, China and the CCP ("ChiComs") have been very adept at aggressively moving to control rare earth minerals over the past decade. America cannot be reliant upon ChiCom as illustrated by the COVID-19 pandemic (PPE and origins). We are in a nascent Cold War with the CCP, and we cannot afford to increase our entanglements with the ChiComs.
Other considerations. First, the gas tax will need to be adjusted more equitably to impose a like-for-like tax on EVs. WA state has one of the most punitive gas taxes in the nation at approximately $0.52/gallon, which is the third highest in the nation (https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gas-taxes-by-state). Gas taxes are a regressive tax.
My last thoughts are simple. If this rule were to be enacted, it could and should be challenged in court, but more importantly, it shows further overreach by a 'nanny state' that knows best. In all likelihood, I'd be one of the many, many people buying up a nice gas-powered SUV just before the deadline and milking along the life of my gas-powered vehicles until they are economically unfeasible to maintain. This rule will hurt the lower and middle class the most, but as evidenced by the gas tax and sales tax in this state, which is seems to be Washington State's plan A.
In the words of President Reagan, "Government is not a solution to our problems. Government is the problem." The "government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few phrases: if it moves - tax it; if it keeps moving - regulate it; and, if it stops moving, subsidize it." Unfortunately, this proposed rule only further confirms the truth in Reagan's axiom.
No attachments

Comment From: nick rohrbach

9/16/22 @ 12:14 PM
Hello, this comment does not appear to apply directly to this comment period; however, I am looking to comment on the Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Plug-In Hybrids Washington State Tax Exemptions. Can the state legislature increase this tax exemption...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Carol Gehl

9/15/22 @ 10:56 AM
I'm a mother who is angry about the lack of action on climate. I'm writing today from the Climate Action Now app to thank you for following California's lead and moving to ban the sale of new gas-only cars by 2035. After the Inflation Reduction Act, ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/15/22 @ 8:13 AM
There are several issues with Washington's proposed rule to follow the California standard that has adverse impacts on the state of Washington citizens and rural locations.

1) Vehicle cost, range, and design limitations. Today's electric vehicles rang...↓
2. Electric vehicle market uncertainty. The potential rollback of federal tax incentives for the purchase of new electric vehicles hinders vehicle investments and innovation. Market uncertainties disincentivize vehicle manufacturers to invest in high-capacity, long-range, and lightweight batteries for electric vehicles. These rollbacks will also cascade effects on investments towards charging station infrastructure. Fewer vehicles manufactured and adopted will result in lower utilization of charging stations. Maintaining planned incentives and phase-out schedules will give manufacturers a clear sense of the market and drive investments toward what will likely be the future mode of transportation in America.
3. High capital cost and remote areas for charging infrastructure. Electric vehicle charging is expensive to install and maintain, which lowers the willingness to invest in infrastructure. Low population density, remoteness of certain rural areas, and charging time make it more difficult to find optimal areas for public charging infrastructure. Collaboration between local and regional transportation agencies will need to be in place to ensure a connected network with higher utilization.

Washington is not ready for this and likely will not be ready by the proposed deadline without an influx of cash and infrastructure across the state. Supply chain issues will also need to be resolved it currently takes 9 months to a year to be able to order a new vehicle and charger and installation even longer. Let us recover from the COVID-19 issue that was imposed by the Governor before we even look at implementing this.

Additionally, I am more likely to support this if the Washington state fleet of vehicles is completely EV (explain to me how a State Trooper on 12-hour shift will keep their vehicle charged), the governor only uses EV transportation vs. gas guzzling SUV to be transported around, and the governor when coming to Eastern side of the state flies only commercial and in coach.

Do better for rural stakeholders of Washington this policy is driven by the dense population located along the I-5 corridor.
No attachments

Comment From: Laura Schinnell

9/14/22 @ 2:45 PM
The State of Washington should not be proposing these rule changes. It is very short-sided to propose these rules without having the proper infrastructure in place for the rules to be effective. I think the State with these rules will cause undo harm...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Matthew S.

9/14/22 @ 2:20 PM
As a general principle, the state of Washington should not adopt policies or regulations from other states without express legislation with parallel but independent language. Washington voters deserve to be represented by its state government and no...↓

On the substance of the proposal, it is ill-advised and poorly timed. For reference, California recently posted conflicting guidance, namely a push for zero-emission vehicles while the California Independent System Operate called for people to avoid charging their electric vehicles due to the strain it would place on the grid.

Washington's electric grid is not ready for this transition, even if the lower Snake River dams are left in place (though the same people pushing for zero-emission vehicles and the same ones wanting to removing hydropower capacity in Eastern Washington--but strangely not hydropower dams owned by Seattle City Light or Tacoma Power). Similarly, transitioning to zero-emission vehicles has other environmental costs that are often neglected. What is the environmental impact of battery production and eventual disposal, wind turbine construction, etc. (e.g., rare earth mineral mining and supply chains)?

The transition will happen organically over time. Trying to force it through too soon will not create an "aha" moment leading to newer and cheaper technology, but instead will create unnecessary financial hardship for the people of the state of Washington while unlikely to achieve any net positive environmental gains.
No attachments

Comment From: Rachel Updegrove

9/14/22 @ 12:16 PM
Electric vehicles helps resolve one issue including reducing emissions into the air therefore reducing pollution when extracting, transporting, and refining. However they create an entirely new set of issues such as: cobalt, graphite, lithium, and ni...↓
Attachments:
Download
Download

Comment From: Craig Zora

9/14/22 @ 6:37 AM
One of the main takeaways from the Norwegian EV success is that it was neither difficult nor expensive. Mostly it was done by exempting EVs from taxes, access to public transport lanes, parking etc., and building charging stations. For other countrie...↓
Attachments:

Comment From: Michael Schoonmaker

9/14/22 @ 6:31 AM
Horrible idea. The cost is out of reach for most people. Trying to by a used car for under $5000 is almost impossible. Let alone a electric one that most people or shops have no idea how to work on. Maybe in 50years not 13.
No attachments

Comment From: Greg Dineen

9/13/22 @ 9:01 PM
Reading trough the comments regarding mandating only electric powered vehicles in Washington, they are overwhelmingly negative. Will the comments matter? Doubtful. The people making the rules don't value the comments and do not represent the people. ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Hollatz

9/13/22 @ 5:09 PM
No, you idiots in WA government aren't going to kill our livelihoods with your BS Green New Deal.
No attachments

Comment From: Angela Ingram

9/13/22 @ 3:23 PM
Our power grid isn't ready and this isn't any better for the environment. You are making laws based on a fairy tale and we, the citizens will pay for it. You are driving this state into the ground.
No attachments

Comment From: Theresa Funkhouser

9/13/22 @ 3:15 PM
Re purposal for clean vehicle proposal wac -
Many Washingtonians live in cities where clean vehicles and charging stations are available- and where this could be a resource to cut pollution however there is a smaller amount of us (like me) who live in...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/13/22 @ 2:36 PM
We lease note that in the global concept the US is but a small fraction. That would be point one.
Until batteries for these vehicles are made and kind more realistically it is worse for our environment. That would be point two.
Electricity comes from ...↓
We can be self sustainable if we use only local petroleum resources. There is no reason to import. That would also employ a large number of people at a living wage. Point four
No attachments

Comment From: Kevin Anonymous

9/13/22 @ 2:25 PM
How is electricity generated? How are the batteries produced? How are the batteries disposed of? Can the power grid support this? None of these questions, when answered honestly, equate to the viability of all electric vehicles state wide. This is po...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Robert Dutton

9/13/22 @ 2:17 PM
WHEN a Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) megaquake and tsunami event occurs (and it will), Grays Harbor County and Pacific County will be without electrical power likely for months (according to FEMA). Without having fossil-fuel run vehicles and heavy e...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Kenneth Bos

9/13/22 @ 11:57 AM
The goal of zero emission vehicles is a lofty one indeed. It is also an admirable goal. However, what must be examined is the entire life cycle of the vehicle in question. How much damage are we doing to mother Earth in the lithium mines and in gathe...↓

It is also important to note that we must have the infrastructure to supply electricity for charging of such vehicles. One estimate is that California for instance would use double the electricity that it is currently using. However, California is right now experiencing a shortage of electricity. Where are the new sources of electricity? Will we burn coal or construct nuclear power plants? Will vehicle charging stations be diesel powered?

These and other topics MUST be addressed before we make a decision to convert to use of so called zero emission battery powered vehicles.
No attachments

Comment From: Courtney Anonymous

9/13/22 @ 11:37 AM
This is a no. California is a perfect example of why this is a bad idea. Do not do this.
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/13/22 @ 11:27 AM
Absolutely not! This is not an effort to save the environment, this is to fill the pocket books of the rich. The batteries are far more dangerous for our environment than a gas/fuel vehicle. Look at California black outs, the electricity can't handle...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Melissa Howard

9/13/22 @ 11:15 AM
Batteries for electric cars are worse than using gas and diesel for the environment. There are limited stations to charge your vehicle. What happens when you have a crash on the freeway and then everyone runs out of power I their vehicle?
California i...↓

I love the effort to help the environment but I don't think this is the answer.


Please work to start thinning our forests again so we can stop having forest fires all throughout the west coast.
No attachments

Comment From: Jason Mooney

9/13/22 @ 11:09 AM
This is the dumbest idea I have ever seen. You guys already tax the hell outta us and do nothing for us with the tax taken. We can't afford this. Did you know a electric vehicle battery cost upwards to $25,000 and they go out regularly. Did you know ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Cindy Carpenter

9/13/22 @ 11:06 AM
I think this is completely stupid. Inslee wants to be like California look at the problems they are having with the electric cars not being able to be charged and the batteries exploding. Not to mention how expensive they are. We don't need to be lik...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Nancy Smith

9/13/22 @ 10:53 AM
No! No! No!
No attachments

Comment From: Brittany Anderson

9/13/22 @ 10:07 AM
I think this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. Power plants have to use coal to make these batteries not to mention the weight of these batteries and the weight of the vehicle puts a lot more wear on the tires making it even more expensive...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Emily S.

9/13/22 @ 10:05 AM
The move to all-electric vehicles is a proposal that should not be considered for several reasons:
1) Even this week California has asked residents to refrain from charging the limited number of cars in their state due to power grid issues. Until the...↓
2) Secondly, how do you propose to create charging stations for those in rural or recreation areas? People would be unable to enjoy what Washington has to often instead of taking a 3 hour trip over the mountain pass to experience Leavenworth, see Mount Rainer, or even enjoy the Washington coast would take longer because the battery would be drained to the vehicle and you would need to stop to charge. The infrastructure is not there to support this outside the Puget Sound or I-5 corridor region. I seriously think the Washington State Department of Ecology and Governor Inslee do not think about rural Washington when coming up with these policies. The cost of charging station installation even in my home alone does not make this feasible I can see some disadvantages in counties like Grays Harbor or Jefferson being able to install this throughout their towns and cities.
3) The environmental impacts that are not fully considered for the implementation could be counterproductive for example Electric vehicles do generate emissions in a different way, however. The power plants supplying energy to the grid we use to charge those vehicles can produce harmful greenhouse gas emissions if they're powered by burning fossil fuels. Areas on the West Coast have a more renewable-heavy mix, drawing on sources such as wind and solar to power more of the grid, but they still rely on fossil fuels to some extent. Extreme heat and cold have negative effects on the efficiency of electric vehicles. EVs in more extreme climate areas in the U.S. can use up to 15%(Opens in a new window) more energy on average, according to Carnegie Mellon University's Department of Engineering and Technology. In the very coldest areas, it can be as much as 40%(Opens in a new window) more energy use. Cold weather slows down the chemical reactions that take place inside the lithium-ion batteries that power all-electric cars, and it requires more power for auxiliary electrical systems such as heating. That extra energy use could translate to higher emissions if that power is drawn from fossil-fuel-burning power plants.
4) Battery manufacturing alone was not considered in this policy: Battery and vehicle manufacturing are the most emissions-heavy processes involved with an EV. Around half(Opens in a new window) of the lifetime emissions from an EV's battery come from the electricity used in its manufacturing and assembly, according to the Swedish Environmental Institute. There's also the matter of the metals that go into those batteries, such as cobalt and lithium. These metals have to be mined out of the earth through processes that are anything but green(Opens in a new window). In fact, mining the materials for an EV battery and assembling it produces more emissions(Opens in a new window) than the production of a gasoline car. The processes involved in mining rare earth metals are water-intensive(Opens in a new window) and can be harmful to the surrounding environment, wildlife, and people. EV battery recycling is another area of environmental concern. It's currently very difficult to extract the metals from a battery at the end of its life and use them in the construction of new ones, and the process is energy-intensive. That could be why a 2019 Chemical and Engineering News report puts the number of lithium-ion batteries currently being recycled at under 5%.
6) Driving Patterns need to be considered: Whether an EV is used mostly for city or highway driving is another determining factor in their environmental cost. Studies have found that in city driving conditions, EVs and other electrified vehicles like hybrids have the potential to drastically cut emissions(Opens in a new window) and save drivers money over their lifetime compared with conventional cars�especially in stop-and-go traffic. On the highway, though, EVs did only marginally better than gas cars at reducing emissions while costing more.

In conclusion, EVs already have less of an environmental impact over their lifespan than gas cars. That impact can only go down. A grid increasingly powered by renewable energy sources, when coupled with an efficient battery recycling program as well as improvements in battery technology, will go a long way toward making EVs the green machines we all picture in our heads. Progress has already been made toward those ends, but we have a ways to go before Washington State should even consider implementing a policy such as this. WE ARE NOT CALIFORNIA due better for all your citizen Washington.
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/13/22 @ 9:28 AM
I would prefer this not being ramed down our throats. In the USA there should be Freedom for US to choose when etc. The infrastructure in WA state and for that matter the USA is not in place. It won't be by 2035 either! At minimum make it 2050. This ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Crystal Dressler

9/13/22 @ 8:40 AM
No thank you! Have you not been keeping up on what's happening in California?

Please tell me how you plan to execute this? Are we to have electric fire engines, ambulances, helicopters, planes, boats, ferries, trains, jets, semi's, farm equipment, tra...↓

You want to put this through in Seattle, go for it, but leave us country folk alone! We want no part of this! And how about you start with your private jets and limos, you don't need those, if fact, I don't see why governor Inslee doesn't just ride a bicycle everywhere, he could save us all.

You're tearing this country apart! We already had one civil war to gain freedom from government control, I don't want to have another!
No attachments

Comment From: Jom Lawrence

9/13/22 @ 8:34 AM
I am against the rule of making all cars sold electric. We do not have the electrical grid infrastructure to support this action. Ev vehicles are not the answer.Please do not implement these rules. Thanks.
No attachments

Comment From: Don LeVering

9/13/22 @ 8:28 AM
I think it is a VERY BAD IDEA! Electric car and trucks do NOT have the range or power of gas. I travel long distances and don't want to take 3-4 days to do what I can in 1 day.
No attachments

Comment From: Rashell Sheary

9/13/22 @ 8:19 AM
No, we shouldn't require this. Maybe 2045 or something. There are not enough charging stations, they take too long to charge, the power requirements, etc. The average person cannot afford a new vehicle even with the tax credit. Then the increased cos...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Daniel Penner

9/13/22 @ 8:00 AM
no i do not want this. i will never drive a ev.
No attachments

Comment From: Don Adsitt

9/13/22 @ 6:33 AM
You cannot legislate the climate. The earth goes through natural cycles. The earth emits thousands of tons of pollutants every day into the atmosphere, volcanoes, forest fires, undersea methane vents, landfills etc.
The grid must be Zero emissions and...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Frederick Chavre

9/13/22 @ 3:39 AM
If EVs are so great how come they must be mandatory. It is clear that there are many problems with electric vehicles at this time. Slave labor, strategic rare earths, massive pollution, lack of recycling for said batteries. I am 70 and we were stuffe...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Clark County Citizens Inc.

9/12/22 @ 8:25 PM
The over 6,000 members of Clark County Citizens United, Inc. are adamantly opposed to changes to WAC Chapter 173-423 Clean Vehicles Program, which proposes incorporation of California's motor vehicle standards. Washington state needs to stay far away...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Mary Nevius

9/12/22 @ 6:11 PM
I believe that moving towards green energy is a great goal.
Current battery technology does not allow for the elimination of gas powered vehicles to be a practical solution. In addition, the cost of electric vehicles is more than the average consumer ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Melissa T

9/12/22 @ 4:27 PM
This is a horrible idea. The infrastructure already can't handle what ev are in the state. The materials to make the batteries for ev cars are not any better for the environment and they're extremely difficult to dispose of.
No attachments

Comment From: Peter Sweet

9/12/22 @ 2:58 PM
Have you noticed that California, having adopted a similar policy, recently asked people not to charge their electric vehicles during the recent spate of hot weather to reduce stress on the power grid? So 13 years before the goal is supposedly to be...↓

To adopt this policy, without PROOF that the grid IS (not might be) adequate to support it, is insane. Please do not do it.
No attachments

Comment From: Don Enochs

9/12/22 @ 12:50 PM
California can not support the charging of vehicles today. Why would Washington follow that. It is totally undemocratic to allow our EPA to set law regarding elimination of fossil fuel.

More importantly medium and low income will not be able to afford...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Kirk VanGelder

9/12/22 @ 12:02 PM
As an automotive expert and automotive textbook author (Who supports electric vehicles), I am vehemently opposed to banning the sale of fossil fueled vehicles by an arbitrary deadline, or at all! Our infrastructure cannot handle it. Our resources for...↓

Also, there is the 80/20 rule. It takes 80% of the effort and cost to achieve the last 20% of improvement, which is where we are at with vehicle pollution. Gas powered cars today emit fewer pollutants out the tailpipe than they breathe in through the induction system.

Let the battery technology catch up to the challenge. There are some encouraging research being done, but not in time to meet this ill-advised timeline.

Lastly, electric vehicles are not zero emission unless they run on electricity created from nuclear, hydro, solar, or wind power. Until those can produce the needed electricity for an affordable cost (Nuclear and Hydro do, but we don't have near enough of it), electric vehicle mandates need to be thrown in the trash!

Focus on improving electrical capacity (Preferably nuclear, the grid, and battery technology. Allow the market to transition to electric vehicles at its own pace!

Very Sincerely,

Kirk VanGelder
Author - Fundamentals of Automotive Technology - Principles and Practice 1e, 2e, 3e Textbook
Author - Maintenance and Light Repair 1e, 2e Textbook
ASE Master Certified Technician
ASE Advanced Engine Performance Certified
No attachments

Comment From: richard rylander

9/12/22 @ 11:14 AM
I object to both actions. We are NOT California. The attempt to ban the sales of new fossil fuel vehicles by 2035 is not only stupid but will devistate the economy. The economics don't work. The damage to the environment is far worse than fossil fuel...↓
No attachments

Comment From: David Heye

9/12/22 @ 9:14 AM
Again, Washington is just following the lead of California. Our Governor is a one issue politician.

As soon as our Governor starts being driven around in an Electric Limousine (ie: Today), I'll start thinking about an electric car. I spoke with Puget ...↓
It's interesting that within a week of California Governor Newsom issuing his edict on Electric Cars, California was telling people not to charge their Electric Cars to avoid Brownouts!!!
Having been in the Automotive business for over 50 years, having government officials issuing edicts when they know nothing about the technology is laughable. I've had my current cell phone for about 3 years and currently it has lost 15% of its battery storage capacity (normal). Electric Car batteries will have the same issue. So, although a current EV may have a range of 250 miles in 3 years that range will drop to around 212 miles and keep dropping. In the end a used EV will be worthless because the battery will cost too much to replace so the EV is a throw away (not very good for the environment).
Lastly, the vast majority (95%) of the chemicals used in making the current EV Batteries come from China. I really don't want to be beholding to China.
I know you don't really care about my opinion because you've already been given your marching orders and are just going through a laughable charade. Thank you anyway.
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/11/22 @ 11:11 PM
Attachments:

Comment From: Sheila Anonymous

9/11/22 @ 7:51 PM
I support the move toward a greener future and I am concerned about a few things:

1) Is it wise to be pushing so hard for increased reliability on the electric grid when as a country we are increasingly struggling to prevent blackouts during extreme w...↓

2) A flare from the sun, a major magnetic shift or EMP could wipe out some or all of our electrical grid and the equipment that relies on it. What is being done to prevent that type of damage and how will the average person find help in coping with such an event? Is there a local, regional, national, or global plan for these type of events?

3) How are the working class and those living on limited incomes either from disability, age or other circumstances going to afford to maintain these increasingly expensive vehicles and other tech items?
No attachments

Comment From: Doug Lyons

9/11/22 @ 4:22 PM
I am not in favor of legislating what kind of energy we should use in our vehicles. You should concentrate on improving the electrical grid and let the market place determine whether one should choose to select an electric vehicle, hybrid, or petrole...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Shirley Owens

9/11/22 @ 10:08 AM
I am requesting you rescind any requirements for EV vehicles and allow people to buy what they desire. Was the Legislature in on making these rules? The vast majority of significant policies such as these, need to go before the Legislature, who are o...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Lisa Reising

9/11/22 @ 9:35 AM
I am 100% for these new regulations to cut carbon emissions through electric vehicles. And do this soon. Following California is important. My only concern is the infrastructure needed to charge the vehicles. I want to purchase an EV now but I do not...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Terry Menges

9/11/22 @ 7:51 AM
While I appreciate the effort to help the environment, this is not a "one size fits all" law implementation. In a city setting where a driver travels less than 50 miles round trip per day this might seem effective. For those that live in a rural lo...↓

With this new law I understand that we would see better air quality. What are the studies of the impact of battery disposal? With a 100 percent increase of EV sales and the demand on our aging power grid, what are the impacts of rolling blackouts just like California? Additionally we hear reports of our leadership wants to breech dams and impact hydro power, that adds additional demand on the power plants. I see a lot of progress with the wind generation but what will the impacts be with the increase of wild fires? Will the wind farms survive the infernos? There needs to be balance! Put more effort into mass transit, light rails move millions in foreign countries. Why do we need 6-8 lanes of highway through Seattle/Tacoma? Building a reliable light rail between Bellingham and Portland, Spokane and Seattle would eliminate emissions. The rail needs to be timely, affordable and reliable! Amtrak is always late and expensive, some people use it but there's a lot of variables in there when the freight trains have priority. If you've ever traveled to Japan, Singapore or South Korea you can set you watch by the train and it's reasonably priced. You could travel 100's of miles for just a few dollars. This would seems to be a much wiser investment in our future than a 100% gamble on electronic vehicles.
No attachments

Comment From: Darla Donovan

9/11/22 @ 7:37 AM
What incentives will be offered to those who do not make enough money (eg, those on Social Security Etc.) to take advantage of the tax breaks or who cannot afford a new or used EV? We will be stuck with our gas operated vehicles while seeking very li...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Martha Bishop

9/10/22 @ 7:09 PM
This is wonderful. We are passing tipping points that will lead us into climate chaos. Any action we can take to reduce fossil fuel use will help. I drive a 2015 Volt which I love. We try to keep our mileage low so we don't have to burn gas. I o...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

9/10/22 @ 6:19 PM
This is absolutely absurd. Washingtonians should not be forced to switch to electric vehicles. I understand wanting a better climate, but try something more realistic and reasonable such as transitioning to hybrid vehicles. Find some middle ground he...↓
As many people have said in their comments we are not California. Thirsting County and counties north have the highest populations and are more democratic. If you look as the state as a whole there are many more conservative people who are trying to live a quiet life in the PNW. We are not lemmings of California, that's why most of us Washingtonians choose to NOT live in California. It will be so refreshing once our dictator of a governor has been stripped of his powers of control and we can go back to living as free people.
No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]