Thread by @DemBourbon

Lots to like here, but, like much of her campaign's Medium-post policy making, this Warren plan is more sizzle than steak

I’m finding that quality of Warren’s plans quite vexing, as her supporters point to her PLANS above all

A (sorry long) #GND thread:

https://twitter.com/sunrisemvmt/status/1208046370768031744

First, I’ve compared Sanders & Warren’s GND before, on the fed investments they were planning to put into combatting the climate crisis

It’s a bit out of date (back in Oct, she was proposing less $$ than John Delaney!), but here are those thoughts:

https://twitter.com/DemBourbon/status/1183132167842471936

Some Warren folk are quick to dismiss Sander’s $16T plan as “Bernie’s 7 min abs” (dogsh!t line recycled from HRC) or just a ruse to "outflank" others

The size *is* important, but it’s not worth losing sight of what’s really at stake: investments DO stuff

https://twitter.com/AmziQureshi/status/1208198939889016833

And that’s where a good point from Warren supporter @tianyuli42 comes in: Warren doesn’t NEED to invest as much b/c she’s using *other* levers (corp regulation) to bring about change

But CAN you bring about the GND's change w/ those levers?

https://twitter.com/tianyuli42/status/1208471218061369344

@tianyuli42 Of course, it depends WHAT you want to do

So let’s take a concrete issue that touches all of our daily lives: transportation

Why? It’s our biggest contributor of GHG, adding over 2 billion tons to our atmosphere every year. To make progress, we have to push it down. Fast.

@tianyuli42 Think about the scale of the problem: there are 275 million road vehicles in the US. 250m light-duty vehicles creating 53% of transport emissions, over 12m trucks creating another ~21%, 1m buses at ~1%

Data from
nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?… &
bts.gov/content/number…

@tianyuli42 The US transportation fleet is only fully replaced every 15 yrs, as only 7% of vehicles in any given yr are new

When we hit zero emissions as the standard for all new cars & light-duty trucks, buses, and medium & heavy-duty trucks, it's still 10+ yrs before decarbonization

@tianyuli42 So, of course, even before we have universal ZEV standards, we want to increase the likelihood that people will *choose* to go for available ZEV options

Currently, there are 1.27m ZEVs on the road, 2% market share but <.5% of all road vehicles

@tianyuli42 It’s taken since 2011 to get to 1.25m vehicles, and growth has been impressive (23% over the previous year!), but, at this rate, it’s 2050 before we have 275m ZEV cars on the road

By then we’re well on our way to 3 degrees of warming

@tianyuli42 As the candidate with The Plans™, Warren has, of course, done the work and put out plans that are, she says, “the most detailed of any presidential candidate” (from her Buzzfeed op-ed)

So let’s get to em and see how we’re gonna decarbonize transportation!

@tianyuli42 Happily, since Warren is now trying to land the @sunrisemvmt endorsement, she created (on 12/24) a header for these plans & included the GND in her top 6 (until now you’ve had to scroll though her 40+ rows of 3 plans/each, hunting for them)

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt The 100% Clean Energy for America (9/3) & My Plan to Create 10.6M Green Jobs (12/19) are the ones

Scroll to the 100% Clean Vehicles & Restarting Our Transportation Sector (respectively), and you’ll find how we’re gonna decarbonize transportation

Plan 1: medium.com/@teamwarren/10…

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt In both, there are 4 planks, mostly laid out in the first plan and elaborated on in the second:

1 Set emissions standards
2 Invest in charging network
3 Boost demand & spur innovation by
4 Buying/funding ZEV purchases

So let's see the details

Plan 2: elizabethwarren.com/plans/green-jo…

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt First, and very much on brand, the regulatory piece:

Warren’s EPA will simply set emissions standards that say all new vehicles must be zero emission by 2030—year over year, that’s a reduction 3x more stringent than those of Obama’s EPA

Undeniably a bold regulatory move

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt Where’s it get us?

Well, the growth rate of ZEV purchases will increase substantially: all new purchases after 2030 (~17m vehicles/yr) will be zero-emission.

Then we just have to wait for the old gas guzzlers to be cycled out of the fleet

Zero emissions by 2045, baby!

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt Of course there are different ways to model the effect standards would have on spurring innovation thus reducing costs thus increasing ownership. Surely the transition would be *somewhat* faster...

BUT the key point is: you can’t just rely on regulating newly produced vehicles

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt If you want to actually reduce the GHGs being belched into the air IPCC-level FAST, you need to *increase* the rate at which ZEVs are being chosen over alternatives

The most obvious problem here is that people are, despite the growth we’ve seen, still reluctant to buy ZEVs:

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt That reluctance stems from several reasons (2nd img above) that get repeated plenty of places & are neatly summarized in this @MorningConsult poll from earlier this year:
morningconsult.com/2019/05/22/for…

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Warren, naturally, is aware of this and so has Plans™ for interventions in the market that will spur consumer demand

Impediment A: Vehicle ranges are a concern: we don’t have sufficient charging infrastructure, the technology is not standardized / interoperable

Warren’s plan:

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult What’s this get us? Well, there are ~2,500 US interstate rest stops. If we’re building DC Fast stations for long-distance vehicles, we have a charging network capable of supporting... what?

Enough, Warren’s team implies

But really?

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult CA has ~18.5k charging stations, 10% of which are DC Fast stations to support a 570k ZEVs. They’re adding more to support more

Warren’s GND (a station in 2500 federal rest stops) adds enough infrastructure for... 800k more ZEVs

Big infrastructure burden being left to... others?

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Maybe not!

Because the plan also ensures charging stations as “widespread and accessible… as gas stations”

But HOW is this ensured?

There’s no stated investment, no program to deliver funds, no new regulations proposed. These aren’t small details!

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Bernie, meanwhile (well, in Aug), proposed $85.6B for EV charging, an impressive number but totally arbitrary, 7-minute ab stuff, amirite!?

No

At $100k a pop, that's 850k stations

That CAN support a fleet of about 250m ZEVs, if we take CA as a model (1800 for 570k ZEVs)

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Impediment B: These cars are too expensive! Especially long-range electric vehicles, which currently start at about $36,000

How’s Warren propose to bring down the cost? Government investment as market intervention, mostly.

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Some unstated portion of her $1.5T “Green Manufacturing” procurement program will be spent replacing the 600k Fed govt fleet

Some unseat portion of her $???B BUILD Green program will help replace the 900k buses & 3.5M state/county/municipal vehicles

That’s 5M of 270M vehicles

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult These plans are just scaling up (to a degree that’s unstated) existing local programs

Scaled ALL the way up, they can replace 5m vehicles and take 58M tons of GHG out of transportation, leaving… 1.15 billion or so?

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult “But I thought you said CONSUMERS find ZEVs were too expensive”

Well yes, but don’t worry: all these govt ZEVs will spur efficiencies in supply chains & R&D breakthroughs, which will, over time, lower prices for owners of the other 265M vehicles, increasing demand

Over time

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Another "increase demand" piece is the “Clean Cars for Clunkers” Program

Now THAT will lower prices!

Give people $$$ to reduce upfront costs

But in Sept, Warren didn’t say how much (L)

And in Dec, CC4C gets not just LESS detail but is ENTIRELY ELIMINATED (R)

!!??

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult No idea if we should count this, or, if so, how we would guesstimate what exactly it’s supposed to do

The Cash for Clunkers program was $3B paid out in ~$4400 on 680k car sales during 3 months of 2009

On what parts of that is “Clean Cars for Clunkers” “based”?

Details missing

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Bernie, meanwhile (again 8/19), stated the target price for consumers (<$18k) AND total funding for ZEV credits ($2.8T)

The grants are on a sliding income-based scale that’s not spelled out, but if the idea is to cut the cost of LREVs in half & spend that, it’s about 150M ZEVs

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult And, of course, Bernie proposes a BUILD Green-like program. His grants focus on school district & transit buses and overlooks the broader publicly-owned fleet. So there’s ~3M vehicles he ISN’T replacing

But even then a Sanders GND nets 147M MORE vehicles swapped out for ZEVs

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Put another way, in 10 years, a Sanders GND directly reduces light-duty transport emissions by 60-80% vs 2017

A Warren GND?

2% for sure

Plus… wherever the regulated market gets us?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult The 1 billion ton difference here stems from what Sanders’s plan LEADS with, what follows “As president, Bernie Will:”

Those investments

They’re important

Here they are summarized:

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Looking at the differences in detail in, and (implied by that) thought behind, these plans, who can really believe that Warren’s climate team is “listening” to anyone here?

What on earth did they learn about the challenge of decarbonizing transportation?

https://twitter.com/socalmd54/status/1208531739204706304

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult So I’m all in for #PresidentSanders because stopping the climate apocalypse & the descent into brutality it’ll ensure is my top issue

And Sanders's GND is, in concrete, measurable ways, the only one that seems up to the task of averting that awful future

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult If it’s your top issue & you support Warren, ok!

But you should be asking:

1. Can we hit IPCC emissions targets *without* decarbonizing transportation before ~2045?

2. If not, can we decarbonize sooner *without* huge public-sector investments in infrastructure & incentives?

@tianyuli42 @sunrisemvmt @MorningConsult Or, reread Bernie's GND and get excited for the future we can build, one that averts catastrophe and can help create a more humane world.

The end

berniesanders.com/issues/green-n…