Considering that California still has yet to lay a single mile of track for its $126 billion high-speed rail system, first approved 18 years ago, we shouldn’t be too surprised that state bureaucrats are just now getting around to issuing new tire regulations first authorized 23 years ago. They are set to be implemented in three years.
But the story of the California Energy Commission and the Replacement Tire Efficiency Program is a lamentable one. The CEC itself was born of another California energy panic.
Recommended Stories
The legislature passed the Warren-Alquist Act in 1974 after the Arab oil embargo exposed the state’s vulnerability to energy shortages, and utilities projected enormous growth in electricity demand. The law gave the new commission responsibility for forecasting California’s energy demand, approving the siting of major power plants, setting energy-efficiency standards for buildings and appliances, and promoting energy conservation and alternative energy development.
The commission is made up of five commissioners, all appointed by the governor to staggered five-year terms. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) has appointed, or reappointed, all five current commissioners.
Thanks to new grants of power from the legislature, the CEC’s reach extends far beyond power plants. It regulates computers, televisions, faucets, pool pumps, and portable spas. Its 2019 building code required solar panels on most new homes, which the commission estimated would add about $8,400 to the upfront cost of a single-family house.
Tires entered the picture in 2003, when lawmakers passed AB 844, creating the Replacement Tire Efficiency Program within the CEC and directing the CEC to develop regulations by 2007 and implement them by 2008.
After spending $1 million studying the problem, the CEC blew past its 2007 deadline and then abandoned the effort in 2012.
It wasn’t until 2020, after Newsom had appointed former Union of Concerned Scientists analyst Patricia Monahan to be the CEC’s transportation commissioner, that the regulations were resurrected. Monahan had worked for the Union of Concerned Scientists when they first lobbied the legislature to pass AB 844 in 2003.
The commission estimates that the new regulations will cost just $6 per set of tires in 2029 and $26 per set in 2033. These are the same bureaucrats who said California’s high-speed rail system would be completed in 2020 and cost just $10 billion.
Businessmen with experience in manufacturing and selling tires disagree. Dunlop estimates prices could rise 20% as companies absorb new materials, production, testing, and compliance costs.
“Generally, when you attempt to regulate something you don’t understand, or don’t care much about, you create bad policy. And that’s probably what we have here,” said Darren Thomas, president and CEO of Dunlop Tires North America.
BLAME SPENDING FOR OUR $40 TRILLION DEBT
There are engineering tradeoffs as well. One of the easiest ways to reduce rolling resistance is to use less tread. But less tread means tires wear out sooner, forcing drivers to replace them more often. It can also mean less grip, particularly on wet roads, where deeper tread helps move water out from under the tire and prevent hydroplaning. Either way, consumers lose: They will pay more for tires that meet the new standard, replace cheaper tires more often because they wear out faster, and face tires with less grip on the road, increasing the risk of crashes.
Newsom has said, “Affordability is the bedrock of economic mobility. California must be a place where everyone can afford to live, work, and thrive.” He should tell that to the CEC he appointed. Californians need tires to get to work, take children to school, and live their lives. After 23 years of delay, Sacramento’s answer to an affordability crisis should not be another mandate making an unavoidable household expense more expensive.
