Is California Going To Ban Dark Colored Cars?
Is California Going To Ban Dark Colored Cars?
So is California in the process of banning dark colored cars? Responding to an informal survey asking why more consumers were purchasing white vehicles over other colors, Jay Hickman mentioned that California “is considering legislation that would phase out darker colored cars on the basis that they use more energy from air conditioning.” As off the wall as that sounds, California’s Air Reserve Board (part of the California Environmental Protection Agency) did consider, and subsequently reject this option.
In late March 2009, a whole series of articles in national newspapers and internet blogs claimed that California planned to ban darker painted cars. Michael Arrington wrote in the Washington Post (March 26, 2009) that CARB (California Air Reserve Board) wasn’t talking about banning certain colors, but were wanting to ban paints that don’t “reflect” very well and that “jet black remains an issue.” The article claims that “black is evil” and that the new regulations would be “phased in beginning in 2012.”
Another article on AutoBlog.com by Jeremy Korzeniewski (March 25, 2009) goes into more depth: Korzeniewski says that paint suppliers have been testing their pigments to see if they can create a “black” that is reflective enough to reduce the energy the air conditioner uses to cool down a car’s interior. The article says that CARB is proposing that vehicle pigments meet a 20% reflectivity by 2016. And when paint suppliers add the “proper pigments and chemicals…to black paint, the resulting color is currently being referred to as ‘mud-puddle brown’.” Naturally, this would be a stumbling block.
Snopes.com states that the banning of dark colored cars in California is “mostly false,” and says that in March 2009, CARB took up the mission of “Cool Cars Standards and Test Procedures” with an eye toward meeting the goal of “promoting and protecting public health, welfare, and ecological resources through the effective and efficient reduction of air pollutants” and towards meeting the requirements imposed by AB 32 (The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006). AB 32 requires that the state reduce greenhouse gas emission to 1990 levels by 2020.
According to Snopes, CARB was considering “curbing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by reducing the use of air conditioning in automobiles, something that might be achieved through requiring the use of solar reflective paint/coating and window glazing on the new automobiles.” CARB noted that a goal of 20% “reflectivity” would be harder to achieve and that “jet black remains an issue, even at this level”. And this was all well and good, but Snopes references the San Jose Mercury News report stating that CARB never actually proposed this, and that the reflective paint requirement was just part of a draft proposal. The reflective paint requirement was “ultimately decided against as not cost-effective” and the ban is “completely fallacious,” said Stanley Young, spokesperson for CARB.
The actual regulation proposal posted on CARB’s website (www.arb.ca.gov) bears out Snopes. The proposal posted on May 8, 2009 speaks volumes about reflective windshields and windows and doesn’t even address “cool paints” until Appendix C.
“As originally envisioned, the proposed regulation focused on solar reflective paints, with solar management glazing added to the proposal during the regulatory development process. However, the final proposal does not include solar reflective paint,” states the proposed regulation order. “Although the staff believes that these paints should be developed and used, the timeframe of this regulation is too short to ensure that pigments for all desired colors can be developed.”
Car consumers may prefer white painted vehicles (as reported by the 2008 DuPont Automotive Color Popularity Report), but they won’t be forced into that purchase in California anytime soon.
Popularity: 1% [?]
