U.S., Auto Makers Discuss Plan for Alcohol-Fuel Use

Bush Administration officials have begun sensitive negotiations with major auto makers over a plan that could require them by the end of the century to produce millions of cars and trucks that burn alcohol-fuel blends, Administration officials confirmed Thursday.

EPA officials, while denying that they have offered “a deal” to the auto makers, conceded that if the manufacturers can produce enough cleaner-burning alcohol-fueled cars, the Administration would see little reason to push for stricter emissions standards for gasoline-fueled cars.

At the same time, as a separate part of its effort to restart the long-stalled effort to strengthen the nation’s clean air laws, White House officials have prepared a series of options for handling airborne carcinogens that they plan to present to the Cabinet’s Domestic Policy Council as early as today.

A copy of the options paper, obtained by The Times, indicates that even the Administration’s most aggressive option would do less to reduce the level of toxic chemicals in the air than a proposal endorsed last year by the Ronald Reagan Administration.

Bush’s staff met immediate criticism from environmentalists for both the airborne carcinogen options and the alcohol-fuels proposal.

“This is Bush’s biggest environmental test,” said Richard Ayres of the National Clean Air Coalition, “and his advisers are intent on making him flunk it.”

The third part of the clean air package, a plan to control emissions thought to cause acid rain, already has been presented to the Domestic Policy Council. The Administration’s plan would call for significant reductions in acid rain, sources said, although less than environmental organizations had hoped.

Bush would like to have the full clean air plan, one of two major domestic policy initiatives planned by his Administration for this spring, ready to present to Congress before the end of the month.

The alcohol-fuels plan first was revealed to senior auto industry executives in a meeting late last month by William G. Rosenberg, the Michigan businessman that Bush has tapped to head the Environmental Protection Agency’s air pollution programs.

In a series of meetings with executives of General Motors, Ford and other car companies, Rosenberg made clear that the Administration favors the use of “alternative fuels,” such as gasoline-alcohol blends or, in some cases, pure alcohol, as an option to reduce the emissions that cause smog, EPA spokesman David Cohen said.

Rosenberg told auto makers that their agreement to introduce cars that burn alternative fuels could mean that the White House would strip its clean air proposal of other emission control requirements, Cohen said.

Insists No Deal Was Offered

Cohen insisted that Rosenberg did not offer a specific deal. The discussion of the various emission control requirements had not been presented as a quid pro quo , he said.

But Richard D. Wilson, director of the EPA’s office of mobile pollution sources, said that Rosenberg and EPA Administrator William K. Reilly have pointed out that if auto makers agreed to make significant changes, “there would be less need to go to such dramatic extremes in reducing emissions from gasoline engines.”

While the use of alternative fuels has long been debated, the legislation backed by the Administration would mark the first federal requirement that auto makers produce cars that use fuels other than gasoline--a dramatic shift that would overturn decades of practice.

By courting the auto industry, the Administration hopes to avert the opposition of House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Dingell (D-Mich.). Dingell, a powerful congressional ally of the industry, for years has blocked a series of clean air proposals put forward by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles).

Plan Expected Next Week

Waxman plans to introduce his own clean air proposal early next week, congressional sources said.

Used as a gasoline additive, alcohol makes car engines burn more cleanly. It acts particularly well to reduce carbon monoxide, the chief pollutant in many high-altitude cities such as Denver and Phoenix.

Pure alcohol reduces pollution still further, cutting ozone, the principal component of smog. The South Coast Air Quality Management District already has announced ambitious plans to convert a major portion of the vehicles in the Los Angeles region to pure alcohol by the end of the century, a goal that many experts and auto industry officials say may be unattainable.

Because the details of the Administration’s plans remain unclear, the impact on Southern California is difficult to assess. Much will depend on whether the Administration plan requires burning pure alcohol as fuel, which would be consistent with the AQMD plan, or an alcohol-gasoline blend, which “would not be adequate to deal with our problems,” said AQMD executive officer James M. Lents.

Called Best Solution

Administration supporters of alternative fuels, led by Rosenberg and White House counsel C. Boyden Gray, a longtime alcohol fuel advocate who drives a methanol-powered car, argue that alcohol fuels represent the best solution to smog because current technology already cleans gasoline-powered engines about as much as can be done practically.

Environmentalists, however, point out that auto makers already are producing cleaner cars for California than for the rest of the nation and have proposed that California’s tougher rules be made nationwide.

Although auto makers might be persuaded to favor alcohol fuels over nationwide application of California’s strict emission standards, the idea already has drawn fire from major oil companies, which would face substantial costs in converting to the new fuel mix.

The oil companies, however, are likely to be much happier about the airborne carcinogens plan, for which White House aides have proposed nine options. Several of the options offer virtually no additional federal regulation of the dozens of carcinogenic chemicals currently poured into the atmosphere by industrial processes ranging from dry cleaning to steel making.

Under one option, for example, control would be left to state officials for an unspecified number of years after which the federal government would “evaluate the residual risk after controls are implemented and make legislative recommendations at that time.”

The most stringent option is similar to one proposed last year by then-EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomas and proposed by Dingell again this year. Both plans would impose federal requirements for control technology on more than 100 industries. The Administration’s proposal, however, would require less strict controls than Thomas’ plan had envisioned.

White House aides briefed Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney on their acid rain proposals Thursday as Mulroney visited Washington and met with Bush. Acid rain has been blamed for damaging forests and lakes in Northeastern states and in Canada.

“I’m pleased with what the President had to say today,” Mulroney told reporters at the White House after his meeting with Bush. “We’re moving along. . . . I’m very encouraged.”

Administration officials have said that they plan to present Congress with all three parts of their clean air package simultaneously in a single bill.

But at least some of Bush’s allies in Congress have advised him to move first on the acid rain plan, which is likely to gain him substantial positive responses, and to wait until later to unveil the other two parts of the plan.