Sacramento, CA, United States
Sacramento, CA, United States

The California Air Resources Board, also known as CARB or ARB, is the "clean air agency" in the government of California. Established in 1967 when then-governor Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford-Carrell Act, combining the Bureau of Air Sanitation and the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, CARB is a department within the cabinet-level California Environmental Protection Agency. California is the only state that is permitted to have such a regulatory agency, since it is the only state that had one before the passage of the federal Clean Air Act. Other states are permitted to follow CARB standards, or use the federal ones, but not set their own.The stated goals of CARB include attaining and maintaining healthy air quality; protecting the public from exposure to toxic air contaminants; and providing innovative approaches for complying with air pollution rules and regulations.The governing board is made up of eleven members appointed by the state's governor. Half of the appointees are experts in professional and science fields such as medicine, chemistry, physics, meteorology, engineering, business, and law. Others represent the pollution control agencies of regional districts within California - Los Angeles region, San Francisco Bay area, San Diego, the San Joaquin Valley, and other districts. Wikipedia.


Time filter

Source Type

« Johnson Controls partners with and invests in Aqua Metals for lead-acid battery recycling technology | Main | Jato Dynamics: global auto sales up 5.6% in 2016, SUVs continue to surge » Allison Transmission Holdings and Cumminshave received certification from the California Air Resources Board (ARB) for model year 2017 Allison Hybrid H 40 EP / H 50 EP hybrid propulsion systems paired with the Cummins B6.7 and L9 diesel engines used in transit buses and coaches. Originally issued by the ARB in 2014, the dual Executive Order (EO) is required to be reviewed for renewed eligibility on a model year basis. The paired Allison Hybrid EP systems and Cummins engine is used in both straight and articulated transit buses. The Allison H 40/50 EP has been proven to improve fuel economy up to 25% over similar diesel buses. Additionally, its regenerative braking capability can significantly extend the brake change interval by as much as 350%. The Cummins B6.7 is rated at 280 hp (209 kW) while the L9 is rated at 330 hp (246 kW) for the transit bus market. Since 2003, Allison has delivered nearly 8,000 hybrid propulsion systems which have accumulated nearly 800 million miles, saving more than 41 million gallons of fuel and preventing 400 metric tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere.


News Article | February 23, 2017
Site: www.prweb.com

As part of Volkswagen’s $14.7 billion federal settlement for the use of illegal smog check defeat devices in its 2009-15 diesel cars, the Center for Sustainable Energy® (CSE) offers planning recommendations for states to consider when deciding how to allocate their portion of the funding based on recommendations submitted to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) during the recent public comment period. In California, CARB is closely instructing VW on how to expend $825 million that the automaker will provide the state over the next 10 years for zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) investments. It is estimated that on-road vehicles account for 33 percent of the state’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, making deployment of ZEVs among the most critical tools to pursue reduction strategies. This unique “ZEV Investment Commitment” will allow CARB to significantly expand on-going support of initiatives to help achieve GHG reduction goals, through sustained focus on efforts that lead to the decarbonization of the transportation sector. CSE provided comments based on its diverse expertise in support of accelerated ZEV adoption and charging infrastructure deployment gained through administering California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) and electric vehicle incentive programs in Massachusetts (MOR-EV) and Connecticut (CHEAPR). CSE hopes these ideas will serve other governments and public agencies in formulating and implementing ZEV plans. The recommendations outline ZEV Investment Commitment actions in the following areas: About the Center for Sustainable Energy® Accelerating the transition to a sustainable world powered by clean energy. Founded in 1996, the Center for Sustainable Energy (CSE) is a mission-driven nonprofit dedicated to developing a clean energy future that addresses climate change, increases energy independence and generates lasting economic and environmental benefits. CSE empowers such innovation by leveraging its expertise in clean transportation, distributed energy resources, energy efficiency, energy engineering and regulatory and policy support. CSE services include comprehensive program design and management, research and analysis, technical advising, incentive and rebate management, and education and outreach. Headquarters in San Diego with offices in Boston, Los Angeles and Oakland, Calif. Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn.


News Article | February 21, 2017
Site: www.greencarcongress.com

« MAN and Austria’s CNL partnering on medium- and heavy-duty electric trucks; trials this year, production 2018 | Main | €8.5M INTEGRAL thermoelectric generator project with focus on vehicles kicks off in Europe » Hyundai has begun the US roll-out of its Ioniq line-up of electrified vehicles: hybrid, plug-in hybrid and battery-electric. (Earlier post.) The Ioniq Hybrid offers up to the highest fuel economy in the US (up to 58 mpg / 4.05 l/100 km) for a non-plug-in vehicle and the Ioniq Electric is the industry’s most efficient EV (136 mpge / 25 kWh/100 miles). In addition to efficiency and value, a key design goal for the Hyundai team was driveability: specifically, a fun-to-drive, “segment-appropriate” driving experience. During the media launch last week in Santa Barbara, California, Hyundai provided production versions of the hybrid and battery-electric vehicle, and a pre-production version of the plug-in hybrid. Based on relatively short drives in all three variants, we conclude that Hyundai nailed its goals. In addition to the fuel efficiency of the powertrains (described in this earlier post), the Ioniqs are quiet, comfortable, and appropriately dynamic—although not high-performance, all models are a pleasure to drive. Overall, Hyundai tuned ride and handling—as well as noise, vibration and harshness levels—towards superior ride quality, while insulation in the instrument panel minimizes engine compartment noise intrusion. In driving the PHEV variant, for example, there was little change in the cabin noise level (~60-65 dB as measured on an iPhone) when switching from all-electric operation at 60 mph to hybrid operation (when the engine kicked in). Damping in the floor panels, as well as enhanced A- and B- pillar insulation, thicker window glass and noise-cancelling film on the windshield, further improve the quiet and comfortable driving experience. Of particular note is the smooth integration of the engine with the motor in the new 6-speed DCT in the hybrids. The new 6DCT has a measurably higher power transmission than the automatic transmissions used in past systems. Gear shifting is much quicker, with increased system efficiency and regeneration energy capture, mainly because the system is in gear more often than the traditional automatic The engine can be synched with motor speed through a combination of torque demand from the hybrid starter generator as well as engine rpm control (unless the engine has started switching from HEV to EV mode and decoupling and shutting down). Hyundai has improved the synching strategy for engine startup while transitioning from EV to HEV. Previous systems saw an engine rpm overshoot while attempting to synch engine and motor speeds, which can result in some additional clutch slippage. For the Ioniq system, Hyundai minimized rpm overshoot by improving upon past software strategies, moving from a map-based strategy to self-adaptive synch logic. As an example, it rpm overshoot is detected, the software notes this and adapts for the next event. This helps to shorten the synch timing as well as dampen engine startup shock. As a result, mode transitions are quiet, quick and smooth; definitely one of the highlights of the hybrid powertrain from a driver’s perspective. Suspension. Ioniq Hybrid and Plug-in Hybrid feature a multi-link rear suspension system with dual lower control arms for agile ride and handling coupled with excellent ride quality. In addition, extensive use of aluminum in front and rear suspension components saves around 22 lbs (9.98 kg) of weight compared with conventional materials. A reduction of 5 lbs (2.27 kg) per front lower arm unit saves 13 lbs (5.9 kg) at the front suspension, while nearly 9 lbs (4.08 kg) is reduced at the rear suspension. In addition, the placement of the battery systems below the rear seats provides a lower center of gravity for more responsive handling. The hybrid variant—with its smaller battery pack—in particular feels light and grips the road well. However, even with a much larger battery pack (8.9 kWh vs 1.58 kWh), the plug-in hybrid variant handles firmly around corners, avoiding any back-end sway from the additional weight of the battery pack. The Ioniq Electric applies a torsion-beam rear axle, providing more space for the 28 kWh lithium-ion polymer batteries, placed below the rear seats. Ioniq’s responsiveness and feedback from the steering system is clear and precise, with a quick steering ratio for an engaging and responsive feel. Braking force is optimized for maximum efficiency from the regenerative braking system—Hyundai’s third generation of the system—helping Ioniq to maintain a steady state of charge (SOC). Regenerative braking also operates with reduced noise, using the third-generation recuperating stopping system. Regenerative braking force can be adjusted to four levels (0 (none) → 3 (high)) to meet the driver’s preference and driving conditions through steering-column-mounted regenerative brake-level control paddles. The left paddle increases regenerative braking levels for more energy capture; the right paddle decreases regenerative braking levels for more natural coast down. At the highest level the system provides an experience close to—but not quite—one pedal mode as experienced, say, in the Chevrolet Bolt. An Integrated Brake Assist Unit (iBAU) and Pressure Source Unit (PSU) also contribute to quieter operation. This helps ensure ultra-low friction for maximum energy recuperation and efficiency levels. Michelin tires also contribute to Ioniq’s enhanced levels of efficiency, as the car is fitted with low-rolling-resistance tires for 15-, 16- and 17-inch wheels, plus the car’s larger 17-inch wheels (Ioniq Hybrid Limited) are fitted with high-silica tires for better all-around performance. The multi-link suspension system of Ioniq Hybrid and Plug-in Hybrid has been adapted to work most efficiently with low-rolling-resistance tires while minimizing typical tire performance trade-offs. Hybrid sport mode. The Ioniq hybrid offers a sport mode option under which the gasoline engine operates at all times, with the electric motor providing additional traction power for enhanced performance. Sport mode also provides a dynamic shift pattern for an increased sense of direction connection, with delayed gear shifts. Manual mode is available as well. Sport mode also features increased steering effort. Within Sport mode, the display changes into a revolving digital speedometer that is surrounded by an analog-type tachometer, showing engine rpm in red. When choosing ECO mode, the TFT-information cluster simulates the classic speedometer needle. We preferred sport mode when (a) driving for fund on windings roads and (b) overtaking on two-lane roads. Both HEV and PHEV performed well, with the HEV being a bit more sprightly due to the weight reduction, even with a less powerful motor. Electric drive modes. The Ioniq electric offers three drive modes: normal, Eco for maximum energy saving and Sport for dynamic driving. Drivers select the mode via a button on the central console shifter. Hyundai allows customization of the modes through the EV menu. Drivers can set their own climate control, coast regen torque levels and max speed limits for each of the three modes, as well as setting charging time for rate optimization. Features. Ioniq offers advanced connectivity features such as Apple CarPlay, Android Auto and Blue Link, as well as Qi wireless charging for smartphones. (Qi is an open interface standard for inductive charging over distances of up to 4 cm (1.6 inches) developed by the Wireless Power Consortium.) Ioniq is equipped with a high-definition 7-inch TFT information cluster. With a resolution of 1280 x 720 pixels, it displays all gauge functions (speedometer, drive mode, fuel level). Depending on the selected drive mode, background color and gauges are adapted to always provide the most important and useful information. Ioniq also offers advanced safety, including Automatic Emergency Braking with Pedestrian Detection, Lane Departure Warning, Blind Spot Detection and Rear Cross-Traffic Alert, for high levels of both active and passive vehicle safety. With sensor-fusion technology that utilizes the front radar and camera sensors, AEB operates in three stages. Initially warning the driver visually and acoustically, it controls the brake according to the collision danger stage, applying maximum braking immediately before an imminent collision. When a vehicle or pedestrian is sensed in front of the car, the system is activated, operating at speeds of more than 5 mph, and minimizes damage when a collision is otherwise unavoidable. Eco-focused materials. A key characteristic of the Ioniq is its use of recycled or ecologically-sensitive materials. The interior door covers are made of plastic combined with powdered wood and volcanic stone while providing the same quality appearance of typical plastic-based materials. The softer, more natural feel is achieved along with less reliance on oil-based products. This approach extends to other areas of the car as well. Raw materials extracted from sugar cane are partly applied on the headliner and carpet. Paint with renewable ingredients extracted from soybean oil is used to achieve lustrous metallic colors on key components. Freight Charges for the 2017MY Ioniq Hybrid are $835. Freight Charges for the 2017MY Ioniq Electric are $835. Observations. Hyundai positions itself as a value provider, and definitely meets this goal with the Ioniqs. The Ioniqs are priced well, content-rich, perform well—probably better than Hyundai’s “segmenet-appropriate” goal—and carry a lifetime hybrid/electric battery warranty. The range of pricing offers affordable entry points into quality electrified vehicles, with the buyer able to decide which powertrain and which price works best for him or her. All-in-all, all the Ioniqs represent a very attractive offerin—efficient, economical, comfortable and fun-to-drive. That said, there are a few considerations, more related to design than execution. The rated 27-mile all-electric range of the plug-in hybrid, for example, while certainly currently squarely in the competitive range, still will see a number of cold starts from the engine during longer periods of operation. Gasoline vehicle HC and NO emissions are dominated by initial engine start; 65-80% of FTP HC/NO emissions occur in first 40 seconds, with 90-98% in first 120 seconds. PHEV engine cold starts can occur at any point during vehicle operation, and thus present a unique situation compared to conventional cars. Blended PHEVs can have initial engine start under high power conditions, as well as in transition from EV mode. An analysis of engine start data from PHEVs presented by Ryan Hart from the California Air Resources Board (ARB) during the SAE 2017 Hybrid & Electric Vehicle Technologies Symposium showed PHEVs have a higher fraction of cold engine starts than conventional, and a smaller fraction of hot engine starts. The Ioniq PHEV is presumably no worse off in this situation than competitive PHEVs; Mike O’Brien, Hyundai vice president of corporate and product planning, noted that the company is working on methods to reduce cold start emissions from the plug-in. Another consideration is the range of the battery-electric Ioniq. Ioniq is quite competitive with the electric driving range of a number of first-gen mainstream EVs, with 124 miles vs. 125 for the eGolf, 107 miles for the Focus EV, 112 miles for the LEAF. But Ioniq is co-incidentally emerging into the market on the heels of the introduction of the all-electric Chevrolet Bolt. The Bolt offers almost twice the electric range (238 miles), albeit at a price premium of some $7,120. Hyundai’s current answer to the range issue is to look to fast charging. A AAA driving survey found that Americans spend ~70 minutes driving ~43 miles daily. 98% of US new vehicle buyers do not intend to drive more than 100 miles on a daily basis, while 90% intend to drive less than 60 miles daily. As a result, Hyundai suggests, ~90% of new vehicle buyers could operate the Ioniq Electric for two days on a full charge. That does not, however, factor in range depletion due to temperature conditions or other unforeseen elements that add up to contribute to the overall sense of “range anxiety”. To address that, Hyundai is looking to the proliferation of DC Fast Charging stations to facilitate traveling extended distances. Accordingly, the Ioniq Electric is equipped with the capability for 100 kW fast charging. Hyundai is also working with ChargePoint to further enhance the Ioniq Electric ownership experience. ChargePoint has the world’s largest electric vehicle charging network with more than 32,000 locations at which to charge, including more than 400 Express DC fast-charging sites. ChargePoint locations are rapidly expanding, with an increasing focus on fast charging. Ioniq owners will receive welcome kits, informing them with key information and benefits in the use of the ChargePoint charging network, and ChargePoint access cards that are easy to activate. In addition, owners will have the capability to conveniently locate ChargePoint chargers on their mobile devices using the MyHyundai/Blue Link app. Too, because of its efficiency—25 kWh/100 miles for Ioniq vs. 28 kWh/100 miles for the Chevy Bolt and Volkswagen eGolf; and 30 kWh/100 miles for the LEAF), the operating costs for the Ioniq Electric are lower than its competition. (All consumption figures are the EPA combined rating for MY 2017 vehicles.) Driving the Ioniq Electric vs. Bolt. Immediately following the drive of the Ioniq Electric, we hopped into a Chevrolet Bolt that the Hyundai team had brought for comparison. Leaving range issues aside, the Bolt performs more as an idealized EV than does the Ioniq. With its more powerful traction motor, Bolt is quicker off the line and its acceleration is better. On the regen side too, Bolt (which also uses paddles to control regen) is more aggressive, offering a very addictive full one-pedal mode (OPM—which GM engineers have taken to pronouncing “opium”). For our taste, the Bolt performance is more appealing. However, we also found the Ioniq to be a more comfortable vehicle than the Bolt. We preferred the seating position as well as the comfort of the Ioniq seats. The Ioniq Electric is longer, wider, and sits lower than the Bolt; it also offers more interior space—passenger and cargo—than its competition. (On the hybrid side too, Ioniq is more than 2-inches wider and 1-inch shorter than Prius with more dynamic proportions.) Hyundai hopes to expand the market for electrified vehicles with the Ioniq family; the quality of the vehicles and the driving experience, along with attractive pricing, may allow it to achieve that goal.


News Article | February 28, 2017
Site: www.theenergycollective.com

California’s power sector emissions are two-and-a-half times higher today than they would have been had the state kept open and built planned nuclear plants, an Environmental Progress (EP) analysis finds. In the 1960s and 1970s, California’s electric utilities had planned to build a string of new reactors and new plants that were ultimately killed by anti-nuclear leaders and groups, including Governor Jerry Brown, the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Fund (NRDC). Other nuclear plants were forced to close prematurely, including Rancho Seco and San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station, while Diablo Canyon is being forced to close by California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard, which excludes nuclear. Had those plants been constructed and stayed open, 73 percent of power produced in California would be from clean (very low-carbon) energy sources as opposed to just 34 percent. Of that clean power, 48 percent would have been from nuclear rather than 9 percent. EP calculates that’s California’s emissions in 2014 were 30.5 million metric tons higher than they would have been had California gone forward with its nuclear build-out, and retained the nuclear plants it had. EP created this calculation based on the assumption that natural gas was built instead of nuclear. As such, it is a conservative estimate since a significant percentage of California’s power since the 1970s came from coal. Even so, that amount of emissions was equal or greater than the power sector emissions produced by 23 states including Virginia, Minnesota, New Jersey, Washington, and Massachusetts.  And it was greater than the total commercial, power, residential, industrial and transportation emissions of eight states including Idaho, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. Nuclear power plants can be constantly re-furbished and parts replaced for 60 to 80 and perhaps many more years, according to experts. They have no known upper age limit. Electricity and emissions. Data are from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the California Energy Commission. EP’s assumptions are that: Emissions reductions for the subtracted coal and gas power uses assumed carbon intensities of 0.98 kg CO2 and 0.4 kg CO2 per kWh, respectively. Assumed capacity factor for nuclear reactors is 92%, the national average in the USA in 2014. To calculate lost nuclear electricity production, we count plants that were already built and closed, and those plants that were not yet under construction but were close to construction and had a utility operator intent on building it. As such, we are not counting plants defeated early in the planning stages, such as the nuclear plant proposed for Bolsa Island, Malibu, and another in Orange County, but we are counting Sun Desert and San Joaquin Valley. There is a large body of historical evidence documenting the role played by Governor Jerry Brown, NRDC, Sierra Club, Ralph Nader and other groups. One of the best single sources is Thomas Wellock’s Critical Masses: Opposition to Nuclear Power in California, 1958 – 1978 (University of Wisconsin Press: 1998). Additional information comes from Christian Joppke’s Mobilizing Against Nuclear Energy (University of California, 1993), and newspaper articles. Utilities that cancel plants often name reasons for their closure other than public opposition. With reference to the 1964 Bolsa Island Proposal, Wellock notes, “The utilities involved in the [Bolsa Island] project claimed that they cancelled the plant owing to its poor economics. But the economic rationale given to the public masked larger siting problems, including public opposition…”  (Wellock p. 126) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 3, 4, and 5 were included in blueprints but not constructed in wake of anti-nuclear movement and Gov. Jerry Brown’s opposition. Sundesert Nuclear Power Plant. The plant’s two units were intended to be just under 1 GW each. Governor Jerry Brown, NRDC & Sierra Club opposed them, and sought their demand to be filled with coal instead: “Richard Maullin, the Governor’s appointee as chairman of the Energy Commission, has suggested building new coal-fired generating plants in place of Sundesert.” “The State Energy Commission, an arm of the Brown Administration, reported after an exhaustive study that future power needs for which the Sundesert plant was projected could be met by existing and planned fossil fuel generating facilities…” Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station was opposed by Governor Jerry Brown and shut down by a coalition led by Bob Mulholland, an advisor to California’s Democratic Party, and Bettina Redway, Deputy Treasurer of the State of California and the wife of Michael Picker, current President of the state PUC. Against claims that Rancho Seco was inherently flawed, the coalition beat back an effort by a Portland utility to buy it. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was shut down after the head of California’s PUC urged Southern California Edison to accept $4.7  billion in investor and ratepayer money in exchange for abandoning the plant, which at the time was repairing a $700 million steam generator. The original posting of this article can be found here.


News Article | February 16, 2017
Site: globenewswire.com

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Feb. 16, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (NASDAQ:PEIX), a leading producer and marketer of low-carbon renewable fuels in the United States, and Edeniq, Inc., a biorefining and cellulosic technology company, announced they have entered into a technology licensing and purchase agreement to enable the production of cellulosic ethanol at Pacific Ethanol’s Madera, California plant using Edeniq’s Pathway and Cellunator™ Technologies. The Madera plant has a total annual production capacity of 40 million gallons, and is expected to produce up to one million gallons per year of cellulosic ethanol with Edeniq’s Pathway process. Installation is expected to be completed in the third quarter of 2017. Neil Koehler, Pacific Ethanol’s president and CEO, stated: “Consistent with our strategy to improve yields and increase production of advanced biofuels at our plants, we are expanding cellulosic ethanol production to our Madera facility. We began producing cellulosic ethanol using Edeniq’s technology at our Stockton plant in December 2015, and the resulting bottom line contribution is significant. Once commercial scale production is reached at Madera, we expect the technology will increase earnings by over $2 million annually. We will be working with the EPA to qualify this production for generating D3 cellulosic RINs, which provide an important premium, and we expect the approval to be received near or shortly after we begin commercial operations. We are also working with the California Air Resources Board to qualify our cellulosic production at both our Stockton and Madera facilities for additional carbon credit under the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard.” Brian Thome, president and CEO of Edeniq, stated: “We are pleased to expand our relationship with Pacific Ethanol and provide our Pathway and Cellunator Technologies to its second ethanol plant. The low-cost profile of our technologies offers ethanol producers an attractive option for enhancing ethanol and corn oil yields and producing high-value cellulosic ethanol using existing fermentation and distillation equipment. We are excited to have over 2 billion gallons of ethanol capacity either already under license or committed to commercial trials for our Pathway Technology, with additional plants being added each month.” Edeniq’s Pathway Technology is a low-cost solution for producing and measuring cellulosic ethanol from corn kernel fiber utilizing existing fermenters at corn ethanol plants. The Cellunator high-shear milling equipment is a leading yield-enhancement technology that offers the most significant and consistent increase in ethanol yield and corn oil recovery, and produces cellulosic ethanol when integrated with Edeniq’s Pathway Technology. The technology features a proprietary technical validation process, quantifies the amount of cellulosic ethanol produced and complies with the registration, recordkeeping, and reporting required by the EPA to generate cellulosic D3 Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) as defined by the Renewable Fuel Standard. About Edeniq, Inc. Edeniq has developed leading processes for producing low-cost cellulosic sugars and cellulosic ethanol. Edeniq’s capital light and operationally efficient solutions can be easily integrated into existing biorefineries that produce ethanol, other biofuels, biochemicals, and/or bio-based products. Edeniq currently sells or licenses its technologies to biorefineries in the United States. Edeniq was founded in 2008 and is headquartered in Visalia, California with a field office in Omaha, Nebraska. More information can be found at www.edeniq.com. About Pacific Ethanol, Inc. Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (PEIX) is the leading producer and marketer of low-carbon renewable fuels in the Western United States. With the addition of four Midwestern ethanol plants in July 2015, Pacific Ethanol more than doubled the scale of its operations, entered new markets, and expanded its mission to advance its position as an industry leader in the production and marketing of low carbon renewable fuels. Pacific Ethanol owns and operates eight ethanol production facilities, four in the Western states of California, Oregon and Idaho, and four in the Midwestern states of Illinois and Nebraska. The plants have a combined production capacity of 515 million gallons per year, produce over one million tons per year of ethanol co-products – on a dry matter basis – such as wet and dry distillers grains, wet and dry corn gluten feed, condensed distillers solubles, corn gluten meal, corn germ, corn oil, distillers yeast and CO . Pacific Ethanol markets and distributes ethanol and co-products domestically and internationally. Pacific Ethanol’s subsidiary, Kinergy Marketing LLC, markets all ethanol for Pacific Ethanol’s plants as well as for third parties, approaching one billion gallons of ethanol marketed annually based on historical volumes. Pacific Ethanol’s subsidiary, Pacific Ag. Products LLC, markets wet and dry distillers grains. For more information please visit www.pacificethanol.com. Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 Statements and information contained in this communication that refer to or include the Pacific Ethanol’s estimated or anticipated future results or other non-historical expressions of fact are forward-looking statements that reflect Pacific Ethanol’s current perspective of existing trends and information as of the date of the communication. Forward looking statements generally will be accompanied by words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “plan,” “could,” “should,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “outlook,” “guidance,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “will,” “possible,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” or other similar words, phrases or expressions. Such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, production levels of cellulosic ethanol and premiums and enhanced profitability from cellulosic ethanol; the timing of installation of Edeniq’s Pathway process; and Pacific Ethanol’s other plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. It is important to note that Pacific Ethanol’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions are not predictions of actual performance. Actual results may differ materially from Pacific Ethanol’s current expectations depending upon a number of factors affecting Pacific Ethanol’s business. These factors include, among others, adverse economic and market conditions, including for ethanol and its co-products; prices for and premiums attributable to D3 cellulosic RINs. These factors also include, among others, the risks and uncertainties normally incident to the installation of new technologies; and other events, factors and risks previously and from time to time disclosed in Pacific Ethanol’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission including, specifically, those factors set forth in the “Risk Factors” section contained in the Company’s Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 8, 2016.


News Article | February 15, 2017
Site: www.greencarcongress.com

« NanoSteel closes new equity round led by GM Ventures; NanoSteel AHSS in validation testing with 10+ automakers | Main | Extensive rollout for GM 9-speed transmission in China » Ballard Power Systems announced its membership in the “Fuel Cell Electric Bus Commercialization Consortium” (FCEBCC), a large-scale project for which funding has now been committed to support deployment of 20 zero-emission hydrogen fuel cell electric buses at two California transit agencies. Ten (10) buses are to be deployed with Alameda Contra-Costa Transit District (AC Transit) and 10 buses are to be deployed with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The FCEBCC project is funded and sponsored by: the California Air Resources Board (CARB) through the California Climate Investments program; the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Center for Transportation and Environment (CTE), a non-profit member-based organization, is providing project management and oversight. Ballard will be providing 20 of its FCveloCity-HD 85-kilowatt fuel cell systems to New Flyer of America Inc., a subsidiary of New Flyer Industries Inc., the largest transit bus and motor coach manufacturer and parts distributor in North America. Ballard systems will power New Flyer 40-foot Xcelsior XHE40 fuel cell buses, which are planned to be delivered and in-service with AC Transit and OCTA by the end of 2018. The buses are to be supported by advanced hydrogen fueling infrastructure provided by The Linde Group. The New Flyer Xcelsior buses, powered by Ballard, have a range of approximately 500 kilometers (311 miles), can be refueled in less than 10 minutes without the need for overnight plug-in battery recharging, can replace conventional buses without compromising operational performance, and generate zero tailpipe emissions. Ballard has powered buses for more than a cumulative 10 million kilometers (6.2 million miles) in revenue service—more than any other fuel cell company—and New Flyer has been very active in the North American fuel cell electric bus market. These efforts have contributed to improving the durability and reliability of these buses while demonstrating fuel economy 1.4x higher than diesel buses and 1.9x higher than CNG buses, according to an NREL report. This Fuel Cell Electric Bus Commercialization Consortium is part of California Climate Investments, a statewide program that puts billions of cap-and-trade dollars to work reducing greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the economy and improving public health and the environment—particularly in disadvantaged communities.


SAE International is working to ensure that electric vehicle wireless power transfer systems from diverse manufacturers will interoperate seamlessly with each other to prepare for commercialization in 2020. The SAE TIR (Technical Information Report) J2954 provides guidance to ensure performance and safety of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) Systems provided from one vendor as well as interoperability when parts of the system are provided from different vendors. SAE International is engaged with the Idaho National Lab and US Department of Energy (DOE) in bench-testing of WPT 3 (11 kW) levels in 2017, said Jesse Schneider, chair of the SAE J2954 task force, in his presentation at the SAE 2017 Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Technologies Symposium last week in San Diego. In addition, eight OEMs have light-duty vehicle testing planned to begin in third quarter for WPT 1-3 which is scheduled to be completed in 2018. In December 2016, interoperability between the so-called Double D (DD) and Circular Topologies was demonstrated between 3.7 to 7.7 kW (WPT 1 and WPT 2 power levels) with efficiencies exceeding 85-90% under aligned conditions. (Earlier post.) The Recommended Practice SAE J2954 will also contain guidance for vehicle alignment methods and determine a common location for the wireless charging ground assembly. Currently, magnetic field alignment through triangulation using the existing coils and alignment using an auxiliary antenna are being evaluated for this decision. The goal is to provide one methodology to align in order to be able to charge with high efficiency all SAE J2954 stations. This is for both manual (self-parking) and autonomous (automated) alignment possibilities. It is important to know that the only way to charge an autonomous vehicle automatically is to use wireless charging and SAE J2954 Recommended Practice will standardize this. Further, SAE International has made a proposal to Electrify America to start a build-out of multiple hundreds of Light Duty Wireless Chargers starting in 2019 in public locations in California and ZEV states in three stages. The first stage, for light duty vehicles, creates an infrastructure based on J2954 (for example in malls, large workplaces, condominium complexes, etc). SAE also proposes 100 Heavy Duty Chargers in 2020 based on SAE J2954/2 (for example public transit agency, truck stops for anti-idling, etc.) in 2021 to create a wireless charging infrastructure with alignment communications for autonomous vehicles (for example, taxi fleets). This will also help independent organizations or government organizations to quantify how much wireless charging may increase the eVMT (electric Vehicle Miles Traveled) for wireless charging (inductive charging) vs. plug-in (conductive charging) electric vehicles. This could also be quantified in the form of a CO reduction potential by implementing wireless charging both in the home and in public locations. In addition, this could also provide some data to help to understand the potential of wireless charging to reduce the pulse in criteria pollutants emitted with the engine cold start of a range extender engine. (The last, noted Ryan Hart from the California Air Resources Board (ARB) in his talk at the SAE symposium, is not a negligible problem.) With a coordinated preliminary rollout of this technology, statistical information to gauge customer acceptance of both this new charging methodology as well as increased acceptance of the electric vehicle (for instance with convenience less or no range anxiety using wireless charging) can be gauged. Additionally, the heavy-duty wireless charging standardization initiative SAE J2954/2 is kicking off on 10 February in San Diego following the SAE symposium to standardize wireless power transfer at 50 kW-250 kW. This is to address opportunity charging at bus stops (similar to the Scania testing in Sweden, (earlier post). In addition, the meeting will launch an investigation of the optimized wireless charging power level to offset idling for HD trucks at truckstops (and address the anti-idling laws).


News Article | January 12, 2017
Site: www.techtimes.com

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has accused Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, or FCA, of installing a hidden software to purposefully let excess diesel emission go undetected, a practice that entails Clean Air Act violations. The accusation comes as the result of a probe stemming from regulators' investigation of Volkswagen, its rival. As per the EPA, specific vehicles releasing excess nitrogen oxide emissions are the "light-duty model year 2014, 2015, and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks with 3.0 liter diesel engines." FCA's alleged measures might have been bubbling under the surface for a while now — several class action lawsuits against the UK-based automaker suggest that some of its vehicles were utilizing defeat devices to manipulate emission tests. Only now has the federal government stepped into the narrative. It's yet to be determined whether the FCA did turn to defeat devices as an illegal subterfuge, but at this point, federal involvement spells potentially disastrous results for the company. Take Volkswagen's similar situation into account. After it was confirmed that the company was in fact engaged in widespread emission test cheating, it was handed down a whopping $4.3 billion draft settlement with U.S. regulators as a resolve, reportedly the largest given to a U.S. automaker. At this point, FCA's infractions seems to be a smaller affair than the Volkswagen's. The EPA alleges that the claim's scope included around 104,000 automobiles. By contrast, Volkswagen's covered nearly 500,000 — five times many as FCA's, at least as the record stands today. It's certainly possible that there could be more. Despite the disparity, the fact that an automaker has again opted to be mendacious about diesel emissions is rather troubling. The EPA is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, which has also accused FCA of the same violation. "Once again, a major automaker made the business decision to skirt the rules and got caught," said Mary D. Nichols, CARB's Chair. At present, FCA is denying the allegations and appears to be seeking help from the Trump administration. According to its statement posted by CNBC, FCA intends to work with the incoming administration to course-correct the matter and hope for a resolution. FCA wants to assure its customers and the EPA that its vehicles "meet all applicable regulatory requirements." For a bit of perspective, the Clean Air Act makes it mandatory for automakers to demonstrate to EPA that their vehicles follow applicable federal emission standards to control air pollution. Part of the certification process requires that automakers disclose and explain any software that's able to manipulate how vehicles emit air pollution. FCA intends to meet with the EPA and prove that its emission control measures are "properly justified" and are not defeat devices. Evidence against the automaker, however, seems convincingly solid — the EPA says that it has discovered at least eight pieces of emission-altering software, a clear violation of the Clean Air Act. Could this balloon into another Volkswagen-type fiasco? Feel free to sound off in the comments section below! © 2017 Tech Times, All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.


Exploiting surface albedo change has been proposed as a form of geoengineering to reduce the heating effect of anthropogenic increases in greenhouse gases (GHGs). Recent modeling experiments have projected significant negative radiative forcing from large-scale implementation of albedo reduction technologies ("cool" roofs and pavements). This paper complements such model studies with measurement-based calculations of the direct radiation balance impacts of replacement of conventional roofing with "cool" roof materials in California. This analysis uses, as a case study, the required changes to commercial buildings embodied in California's building energy efficiency regulations, representing a total of 4300 ha of roof area distributed over 16 climate zones. The estimated statewide mean radiative forcing per 0. 01 increase in albedo (here labeled RF01) is -1. 38 W/m 2. The resulting unit-roof-area mean annual radiative forcing impact of this regulation is -44. 2 W/m 2. This forcing is computed to counteract the positive radiative forcing of ambient atmospheric CO 2 at a rate of about 41 kg for each square meter of roof. Aggregated over the 4300 ha of cool roof estimated built in the first decade after adoption of the State regulation, this is comparable to removing about 1. 76 million metric tons (MMT) of CO 2 from the atmosphere. The point radiation data used in this study also provide perspective on the spatial variability of cool roof radiative forcing in California, with individual climate zone effectiveness ranging from -37 to -59 W/m 2 of roof. These "bottom-up" calculations validate the estimates reported for published "top down" modeling, highlight the large spatial diversity of the effects of albedo change within even a limited geographical area, and offer a potential methodology for regulatory agencies to account for the climate effects of "cool" roofing in addition to its well-known energy efficiency benefits. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.


News Article | February 15, 2017
Site: www.marketwired.com

Locus takes the lead in GHG verification services for California Air Resources Board AB32 Program SAN FRANCISCO, CA --(Marketwired - February 08, 2017) - Locus Technologies (Locus), the industry leader in multi-tenant SaaS environmental compliance and information management software, performed 74 verifications for the reporting year 2015 for the California Air Resources Board AB32 Program -- more than any other accredited verification body. With six full-time accredited verifiers, Locus has been providing verification services since 2010 for reporting entities across California. Even more notably, after completing hundreds of these verifications and complying with several routine audits by ARB, Locus has never had a single verification statement overturned. This means that facility operators using Locus' verification services have high confidence that their participation in the cap and trade program will not be affected by potential delays related to questions on their verification statement. The GHG verification services cover facilities in California that are regulated by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) under the Mandatory Reporting Rule (AB32). Locus is accredited as a verification body through CARB and has Lead Verifiers certified in all reporting sectors, including process emissions, oil and gas, and transactions. Over the past eight years, Locus staff have completed verifications for several industries and have become experts on reporting for most covered product types which translate into emission allowances under the cap and trade program. GHG emission reports are coming under increased scrutiny from regulators, stakeholders, and financial auditors. Choosing the right verifier plays a critical part in remaining compliant with these rapidly evolving requirements and regulations. Locus verifiers have noticed that many companies struggle with complex GHG calculations. Some 'black box' calculation tools in the market have not been sufficiently stress-tested and are generating errors that cause enterprises to fail their GHG verifications. Locus' calculation engine addresses these deficiencies and capitalizes on the architecture of the highly scalable Locus platform. All calculations performed by Locus SaaS are viewable and traceable through the tool to the original data inputs. "We are very pleased to lead the California verification program and that so many Fortune 500 firms selected Locus for verification services. Locus continues to expand its carbon practice at a rapid pace. Coupled with our software services and domain expertise in all three key AB32 reporting sectors, Locus is becoming a partner of choice for all companies wishing to be credible in their carbon reporting needs," said J. Wesley Hawthorne, President of Locus. "Our growth in this market has been largely fueled by referrals from existing customers, and it speaks volumes about the quality of our service that so many of our customers speak highly of Locus to their colleagues." Locus Technologies is a leading EHS and sustainability software company that has been helping companies achieve environmental and compliance business excellence since 1997. Public and private companies, such as Chevron, Honeywell, Monsanto, DuPont, and Los Alamos National Laboratory, rely on Locus to manage their water quality, air, and soil data to calculate emissions including greenhouse gases, discharges, and environmental impacts. Locus provides mobile and multi-tenant SaaS and PaaS (Software-as-a-Service/Platform-as-a-Service) software solutions to build end-user configurable solutions. For more information, visit www.locustec.com or email info@locustec.com.

Loading California Air Resources Board collaborators
Loading California Air Resources Board collaborators