Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont has withdrawn his plan to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles in the state by 2035. Lamont had hoped to join California, Vermont, New York, Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts, Virginia, Rhode Island, Maryland and, most recently, New Jersey as one of the states who have committed to ban the sale of new fossil fuel powered vehicles by 2035, but on Monday the governor was forced to pull his plan after the state’s Regulation Review Committee lost at least one Democrat’s support.
It doesn’t mean that Lamont has given up the dream of a gas-powered vehicle ban. He will instead look to the state legislature to pass a bill that adopts California’s standards for vehicle emissions. Lamont seems confident that the 2035 gas-powered car ban can still be realized.
“I think 2035 is working,” Lamont told a reporter on Tuesday. “We’ve tripled the number of EV sales … we as a nation have brought down the price by over a third in the last couple of years. Let’s keep going.”
Despite Lamont’s intransigence about the ban, Senate Republican Leader Kevin Kelly was in a celebratory mood after the proposal was withdrawn.
“Common sense has prevailed,” Kelly said in a statement. “The Governor’s decision to withdraw the regulations is a reasoned approach to address the growing concerns raised by working and middle class families. Adopting California emission standards which ban the sale of gas-powered cars is a substantial policy shift which must be decided by the General Assembly.”
Kelly added, “There are too many questions regarding the capacity of our electric grid, the cost and location of grid improvements, and the negative impact on urban, rural and working poor families. More than 90 percent of our pollution comes from outside the control of Connecticut.”
Kelly’s colleague, Senator John Kissel (R), agreed: “The people’s elected representatives are the ones who should be making this decision. Something so life-changing — something that will take our choice away — needs to be decided by the full state legislature.”
One of the main stumbling blocks to simply rubber-stamping the ban in committee appeared to be the cost of EVs, which, at least currently, are far more expensive than gas-powered vehicles. In addition, the power grid would need to be upgraded in order to meet the electricity needs.
“Affordability is real, technology is real,” said House Speaker Matt Ritter, a Democrat. “These are real concerns that can’t be just shooed away, they can’t be wished away. They have to be worked on.”
Climate zealots were predictably irate over the defeat of the EV mandate.
“I think politics beat good, common-sense policy making,” fumed Ruth Canovi, a lobbyist for the American Lung Association.
Others blamed “partisan politics” for the failure of the new rule.
“It is outrageous that members of the regulations review committee overstepped their bounds to roll back environmental progress and block important clean air regulations,” said Lori Brown of the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters. “If our state fails to move forward, it will be due to partisan politics and not what is best for the people of Connecticut.”
But despite Brown’s assertion that “partisan politics” was to blame, at least one Democrat on Connecticut’s Regulation Review Committee, a committee made up of equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, voiced concerns over the cost and proposed timeline for the transition to electric vehicles.
Republicans complained that Democrats have no real plan for how to get to a gas-powered vehicle ban, only an implementation date.
“There’s no plan,” said Republican House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora. “People want to have their gas-powered vehicles; they want to have choice.”
Supporters of the ban claim that market forces will, necessarily, make EVs cheaper to own in the future as more states follow the lead of California. Additionally, supporters of the ban argue that the technology and electric infrastructure will improve once there’s a need for it.
The climate zealots are big on touting technology that hasn’t really been invented yet. They’re always placing the “renewable energy” cart in front of the fossil-fuel powered horse. Perhaps, instead of insisting that the world bow to their unrealistic demands, their time would be better spent inventing climate-friendly technology that works and doesn’t cost the average consumer an arm and a leg — products we could all get behind.
