California gets a win on emissions-cut law

California won its legal battle against the world's automakers over global warming. But the state still needs the Bush administration's permission to enforce a landmark greenhouse-gas law that would dramatically improve vehicle fuel economy.

A federal judge in Fresno on Wednesday tossed out a lawsuit filed by the major automakers that tried to kill AB 1493, a state law requiring a 30 percent reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions from new motor vehicles by 2016. The law would force automakers to improve fuel economy by an estimated 38 percent, to an average 35 mpg.

The decision provides fresh momentum for California's closely watched crusade against climate change. Yet under federal law, the state can implement its own air pollution regulations only after receiving a waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

"It's a major victory for California," said state Attorney General Jerry Brown. "I hope it sends a powerful message to the White House to grant our waiver."

Last month, the state sued the EPA, demanding a decision on its 2-year-old request for a waiver to implement AB 1493. EPA spokeswoman Jennifer Wood said the agency will rule by the end of December. If the EPA turns down the request, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and others have vowed to sue again.

"With motor vehicles contributing to roughly 28 percent of the state's greenhouse-gas emissions, it is imperative that we be granted the fuel waiver from the federal government," Schwarzenegger said in a press release.

AB 1493, passed in 2002, is supposed to take effect next year, but more lawsuits would likely delay that.

The state's war on climate change relies heavily on AB 1493. Enforcing it would achieve roughly one-sixth of the greenhouse-gas reductions required by another measure, AB 32, the broader and more famous law signed by Schwarzenegger last year. That law calls for a 29 percent cut in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2020.

In their lawsuit, the automakers said AB 1493 violated federal law because only the U.S. Department of Transportation can regulate fuel mileage. They also said complying with California's law would inflate production costs as much as $6,000 per vehicle, depressing sales and costing 65,000 autoworkers their jobs.

But U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii ruled that reducing greenhouse-gas emissions must go forward regardless of the impact on mileage. As for economic hardship, that's for the EPA to consider when it decides California's waiver request, he said.

State officials say AB 1493 isn't nearly as burdensome as automakers claim. The standards can be met largely with off-the-shelf technology; the added cost will be about $1,800 per vehicle, they say.

Hovering in the background is Congress. An energy bill that's passed the House would impose standards similar to California's, although the automakers would have four additional years -- to 2020 -- to get there.

But the Senate hasn't yet passed the bill, and President Bush has threatened to veto it. Among other things, Bush doesn't want multiple federal agencies regulating mileage standards. Auto-industry lobbyists have sounded a similar theme.

Meanwhile, Ishii's ruling is the latest in a string of courtroom victories for California on global warming. Most recently, the Bush administration was ordered to toughen fuel economy standards for SUVs and minivans to combat climate change.

"We keep winning," said David Bookbinder, a lawyer with the Sierra Club, which participated in the Fresno case. "The courts are simply not buying (the automakers') arguments."

Bookbinder said he wouldn't be surprised if the automakers appeal. "Sooner or later, they're going to have to stop throwing lawyers at the problem and start hiring engineers," he said.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers wouldn't comment on an appeal but said, "We need a consistent national policy for fuel economy, and this nationwide policy cannot be written by a single state or group of states -- only by the federal government."

(Reach Dale Kasler at dkasler(at)sacbee.com)

(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, www.scrippsnews.com.)