Senate Panel Weakens Methanol Vehicle Bill After Lobbying Effort

In the face of an all-out lobbying effort by the major oil companies, a Senate committee Tuesday gutted an anti-smog bill that would have required vehicle manufacturers to begin selling cars and light trucks in California that can run on methanol or other low-polluting fuels.

The measure, by Republican Assemblyman Bill Leonard of Redlands, would also have enabled the state Air Resources Board to require that 15% of service stations begin pumping methanol as the vehicles start becoming available in 1991.

But against Leonard’s strong objections, the Senate Governmental Organization Committee voted 6 to 2 to remove all of the measure’s deadlines for requiring methanol-fueled vehicles--leaving in place only a 16-member commission to study the feasibility of low-polluting fuels and cars.

Opponents argued that the measure was premature, forcing the energy industry to spend billions of dollars to gear up for increased methanol production, even though consumers may not want to buy methanol-fueled cars because of potentially high costs and inconvenience.

In an interview following the amendment of his bill, Leonard described the committee action as “a butchering” of the measure, which he said could have reduced motor vehicle emissions by as much as 20%.

The oil industry lobbyists “went all out,” said Leonard, who pointed out that his bill will need a special waiver of rules if it is to get out of the Senate this year, even in its weakened state.

In a related action, however, the committee voted 7 to 2 for a measure by Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco), to require all California cars, beginning with 1991 models, to be equipped with vapor-recovery canisters that remove gasoline fumes when the cars are being refueled. The bill was opposed by the automobile manufacturers, who Brown accused of mounting a major, last-minute lobbying effort to resist adding to the anti-smog equipment now required of all cars sold in the state.

Vapor Recovery Systems

In addition, Brown’s bill would require that service stations in the state’s rural counties install vapor recovery systems on their gas pumps--a requirement already in place in the state’s most heavily polluted areas.

Brown argued that adding the automobile canister requirement to existing controls could have a significant impact on pollution in the South Coast Air Basin--reducing total emissions of hydrocarbons, a chief component of smog, by as much as 40 tons per day. If the figures are correct, the canisters could have an effect on smog that approaches that of the state smog check programs requiring inspections of vehicles every other year.

Automobiles sold in California already are equipped with small canisters, about the size of a one-pound coffee can, that recover gasoline fumes from carburetors and fuel tanks. The Brown bill would increase the size of the canister so that more vapors would be recovered, and would require that the system be engineered to recover fuel vapors during refueling as well.

Representatives of the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assn. argued that requiring the more complex system on new automobiles would add as much as $160 to the cost of each vehicle, although Brown’s measure would drop the requirement if costs exceeded $35. The auto industry also argued that there are cheaper ways to achieve a somewhat greater reduction in smog, a contention buttressed by an analysis from the state Air Resources Board.

Both the Brown and Leonard bills have national implications because they would modify the so-called “California car”--a vehicle meeting pollution requirements that are generally the strictest in the nation and setting a standard for the rest of the country.

Both bills were intended, in part, to convince the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that the state is taking steps to reduce smog, particularly in heavily populated areas such as the South Coast Air Basin, which includes Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

The federal agency has threatened to ban construction of factories and other developments that are major sources of pollution if, as expected, those areas fail to meet federal clean air standards by a Dec. 31 deadline. However, state regulators say that federal sanctions would have little practical effect because large, pollution-producing projects are unlikely to be given permits under the state’s strict anti-smog rules.

The Leonard bill fell victim to one of the state’s most effective interest groups, the oil producers, who spend sizable sums on campaign contributions as well as lobbying. In last year’s general election, the oil and gas industry contributed $294,075 to legislative races--much of the total from a handful of major oil companies, according to a report by the California Fair Political Practices Commission.