General Motors And The Environment - InfoHouseinfohouse.p2ric.org/ref/27/26792.pdf · on a variety...

267 ?e f a f I "

Genera Motors And The Environment

MARK OF EXCELLENCE

April 1990

n April 22, and in the year U ahead, the 20th anniversary of Earth Day will be celebrated throughout the world. The people of General Motors join in this salute, proud of our 20 years of progress in bringing our products and manufacturing processes into harmony with the environment and pledging to continue our leadership in this area.

Twenty years ago, many people were just beginning to understand the special relationship we share with the planet on which we live. Today, concern for the future of the environment has become one of the most important issues on the public agenda. More importantly the issue has become a personal matter for the great majority of people who now classify themselves as “environmentalists.”

The special challenge for companies like General Motors is to do everything possible to minimize the negative effects of our products and processes on the environment. And GM is proud of its contributions to a cleaner environment, not only through basic research, but in the daily performance of today’s cars and trucks.

GM has pioneered development of the catalytic converter and the use of unleaded fuels to reduce engine exhaust emissions. Technology has been created to control assembly plant paint emissions, as well as emissions from coal-burning boilers and foundry operations. We continue to explore the use of many different fuels and power sources as potential alternatives to gasoline and diesel fuel GM is

intensifying its leadership role in finding substitutes for chlorofluorocarbons in air conditioners and cleaning operations. And for many years, GM has been recognized as a world leader in atmospheric research.

In the complex world of environmental chemistry and social policy, reasonable people may differ on goals, objectives and timetables. Throughout, GM has long stressed the need for a balance among many social goals in considering environmental public policy in order to achieve a cleaner environment while maintaining a strong economy

We are committed to continue our record of progress. This booklet describes many of the important challenges that remain and the efforts GM is making to overcome them.

Roger B. Smith Chairman

General Motors Corporation . Detroit, Michigan 48202

Contents Page

G m MOTORSAND ZME E N v j l R O N W

CLhAlVAIR An Economist's View of Economic Incentives For Controlling Pollution Acid Deposition Update Rejkeling Vapors and Gasoline Volatility Alternative Fuels STRATOSPHERIC OZONE DEPXETION

GLOBAL W"G Studies in Atmospheric Pbsics and Chemistry at General Motors W E : A New Dimension

3 4 5 8

10 12

16

20 21 24

28

on a variety of global issues. General Motors Corporation has

shared this concern for the environment since the mid-l920s, when engineers at the General Motors Research Laboratories (GMR) studied methods for reducing carbon monoxide in automobile exhausts. Their research intensi- fied in the late ’40s and early ’50s when the constituents of photochemical smog were identified in the LQS Angeles area.

Among the numerous important contributions GM has made to a cleaner environment are catalyuc control systems, definitive studies of the Denver brown cloud, and research on dispersion of pollutants near roadways.

Todax GM vigorously continues its efforts to reduce pollution locally and globab, and to gain a better understanding of the scientific phenomena involved.

In recognition of these efforts, in January 1989 GMR received an award fiom the American Meteorological Soci- ety for its “outstanding contribution to the understanding of the relationships between meteorology and air pollution by conducting pioneering research on air quality acid deposition, air-quality modeling, turbulent dispersion near a roadwax long-range transport, and visibility”

A N ” A T I O l U 4 L CIULLENGE There is no clear-cut line of attack on

environmental issues. The environment is too complex, the various issues too interrelated. Although many of the issues are local, others span the globe- pollution has no respect for national boundaries.

The challenge for national leaders, policymakers, and environmental organizations all over the world, as well as for multinational companies, is to develop innovative and cost-effective approaches to these global environmental issues - approaches that will not unnecessarily retard economic growth.

Signs of environmental awareness and a willingness to cooperate on an international level are increasing. A number of international conferences on environmental matters have been held and more are scheduled.

The science academies of the United States and the Soviet Union have formed a Joint Committee on Global Ecology Dr. Robert A. Frosch, vice president in charge OF the GM Research Laboratories, is a member of this committee. Frank Press, president of the US. National Academy of Sciences, has stated, “The special mission of the committee will be to provide for an early warning mechanism to identify long-range environmental and ecological problems and bring them to the attention of the US. and Soviet governments.”

- ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~

COh’l’lUBUTmG TO A C L E A A ? l ? R I 3 W l R O N m

Closer to home, since the Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970 and amended in 1977, significant reductions in air pollution have been achieved in the US. in spite of continued rapid economic growth. According to Environmental Protection Agency data, since 1977: ozone has been reduced 21%; carbon monoxide, 32%; sulfur dioxide, 37%; airborne lead, 87%; nitrogen dioxide, 14%; and dirt, dust, and particulates, 23%.

The American auto industry has made a major contribution to this improvement in air quality by reducing emissions fiom its vehicles and its plants, and General Motors has been in the forefiont of that activity GM is determined to continue to be a leader in this effort in the future.

The following sections of this report look more closely at a variety of environmental issues, what the Corporation is doing to contribute to a cleaner environment, and GMs position on the issues.

4

advances in understanding and controlling vehicle emissions.

ZElECLEANrllRACT The Clean Air Act of 1970 required

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set ambient air quality standards for sulfur dioxide (SOz), particulates, carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, nitrogen oxides (NO,), and lead. The Act required the states to establish plans for reaching the standards by specified deadlines. The deadlines have been extended several times by Congress because the technology for meeting the standards was determined to be un- available.

area of the country- except those counties in the Los Angeles air basin - meets the ozone standard over 99% of the time. Carbon monoxide presents a similar compliance picture.

less than 1% of the time represents substantial progress in emission reduction, many urban areas of the country, in addition to the Los Angeles area, are presently out of compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for one or more air pollutants under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 197% The potential penalties for nonattainment areas include construction bans and cuto& of federal highway funding and pollution-control assistance.

In 1990, major air-quality bills are being debated in the Senate and House of Representatives. Out of this effort,

Based on EPA monitoring data, every

While exceedance of the standard for

significant revisions to the Clean Air Act will probably emerge. Among the proposals that would have a major impact on the auto industry are stringent reductions in tailpipe emissions, mandated introduction of new fuels, possible installation of onboard canisters to control refueling vapors, and increased Federal permitting controls on stationary emission sources.

State Actidties

Resources Board proposed stringent emission standards to be phased in beginning in 1994. The proposal calls for three generations of new cars which become progressively cleaner. From 1994 to 1996, up to 10% of new cars and light trucks sold in California could emit no more than 0.125 grams per mile (gpm) of hydrocarbons (HC) - half of California’s 1993 Model Year 0.25 gram limit. Then, in 1997, the HC limit would be reduced to 0.075 gpm. One-quarter of the cars sold in 1997 would have to meet that limit. The proportion rises in each suc- ceeding year so that by 2000,98% of cars sold in California would have to meet the 1997 standards. A third generation of cars would be permitted to emit only 0.04 gpm of HC.

In August 1989, New York, New Jersey, and the six New England states agreed to begin efforts to adopt the current California tailpipe-emission standards by 1993, despite quite difkrent air-quality needs in the Northeast.

Internat.lOna1 Actidties

nity’s 12 member nations agreed to

In December 1989, the Califomia Air

In June 1989, the European Commu-

__

impose US.-style standards on all ~~ new ~~~ ~

cars, indudingthose With engines ~

under 1.4 liters displacement, as of July 1, 1992, and on other new cars six months - later. Anticipating these regulations, GM has been developing catalytic converters for Europe, based on its technology developed in North America over the past two decades. Ope1 has made the catalyuc systems standard on all its cars sold in the Federal Republic of Ger- many Vauxhall fits catalytic converters on its cars in the U.K.

West Germany and the Netherlands have tax incentives and lower registra- tion fees for cleaner cars. By October 1, 1990, all new cars sold in Denmark will have to meet US. emission standards. In the past year or two, American emission standards have also been introduced for all new cars in Austria, Sweden, Switzer- land, and Norway

The Soviet Union has, in principle, agreed to follow the timetable adopted by Westem Europe for introducing more stringent exhaust emission controls. Since unleaded gasoline will not be produced in the Soviet Union before 1995, however, any massive change to catalytic-converter-equipped cars by 1992 is not possible.

ECONOMIC INCEhTYKES The United States has made consider-

able progress in pollution control over the last decade or two by applymg a “command and control” approach, which identifies sources of pollution and specifies what emission levels they must not exceed. Often the technology and methods of control have also been specified.

Now, as costs of the command-and- control approach rise, some policymakers feel that a more innovative and cost- efkctive way to further reduce pollution is to rely on economic incentives. Under the economic-incentive approach, market - forces are used to encourage polluters to reduce the overall level of pollution

___

-~

ind to do so in the most cost-effective nanner.

iome innovative approaches to eco- iomic incentives. One is the bubble :oncept that treats each manufacturing h n t as a self-contained unit and allows h n t management the freedom to educe aggregate emissions with the nost cost-effective methods. Other ypes of economic incentives include radable permit systems, pollution :harges, removal of market barriers which promote inefficient use of esources, and removal of unwarranted ubsidies of environmentally destructive mivities.

A more detailed discussion of eco- iomic incentives for pollution reduction s presented in an interview with Dr. 2eorge C. Eads, GM vice president and :hief economist, beginning on this page.

AUTOMOBILE EWSSIONS Emissions from new passenger cars

lave been reduced substantially since :lean air regulations were first intro- iuced. HC and CO are down 96%, and

Because of auto industry advances, he situation will continue to improve. Xrrently, 85% of the pollution from iutos comes kiom the oldest 50% of the rehicles on the road. As older cars are -eplaced by new models with the latest -mission-control technolom, emissions will decline automatically at no incre- mental cost.

However, if tighter emission-control standards are legislated, they could slow fleet turnover by increasing the cost 3f new vehicles, adversely affecting 3rivability or restricting model availability. In that case, air-quality improvements could actually be slowed rather than accelerated.

Over the years, the EPA has pioneered

vox, 76%.

WISSIONS FROM GM PLANTS With regard to General Motors manu-

hcturing and assembly plants, two ongoing air-pollution issues are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from assembly plant paint systems, and SO2 and particulate emissions from boilers.

wonkr? Dr. Eads: With emissions

necessarily be focused on t ance costs would fall as

expansion of the currently limited practice of to date such programs have saved more than “with no adverse effect on air quality”

Emissions fees might be used as a s program of emissions trading. For example, firms cou to the state in which they operated instead of purchas reduction credits. Or, the state might levy a fee of a ton of emissions. One advantage of emissions fees disagreements among businesses ab0 program.

tbaa there used to be? Dr. Eads: The argument over fees ve very earliest days of environmental Even back then economists were let’s solve it through fees and inc were saying, “That won’t work, i

A lot of the propos early days, were fairly na dioxide tax assumed away t sions, as well as the fact that, where emissions occur as we policymakers tended to lean more heavily toward a sys and control regulation. Later, approaches like emission bles* developed as a means and control. * i?w bubble concept regad a pkznt, for example, as though it were c d b.r a bubble.

I Is tbere cc swmger t w to adopt ecoPwmk inc”

Compliance is based on the totalpollutantsproduced under the bubble, not on individual stack emissions It gives manufacturers&e&m to dectde where and how they use SmFEFion conhols under the bubble.

6

Paint-System Emissions General Motors is a leader in the

industry in technology for controlling assembly plant paint-system emissions. GM has invested billions of dollars to construct new facilities, modernize existing plants, and develop and install lower-emitting processes and emission- abatement technologies.

Paint-system emissions are VOCs fi-om the paint, primarily HC solvents, released into the atmosphere when spray painting vehicles. Current VOC- emission limits established by the EPA are stringent - typically requiring an 80% to 90% reduction from 1970’s baseline emission levels. The limits are based on an obsolete waterborne-paint technology These regulations are still in force, even though no manufacturer presently uses this coating technology

The current solvent-borne two-coat paint system consists of a basecoat of color over which is applied a heavier protective clearcoat to enhance the appearance and durability of the final finish. N o y with the help of paint suppliers, GM has developed coating technology to the point where the first coat, or prime coat, betters EPA standards.

plant in Oshawa, Ontario, GM has developed a new-generation waterborne- coating technology different from the waterborne-paint technology on which the EPA VOC-emission limits are based. It is the first high-production application of this technology in the North American industry As experience is gained with the new process, it may be introduced in other GM plants.

In addition, GM has greatly improved spray efficiency, which sharply reduces paint waste, solvent emissions, sludge- disposal loads, and booth-water treatment costs.

GM has worked closely with the EPA to develop a uniform method to determine how much paint is applied to the vehicle to establish compliance. The Corporation has been the industry leader in developing test parameters with the EPA and has implemented this procedure in a number of plants.

At its Chevrolet-Pontiac-GM of Canada

Boiler Emissions Other clean-air requirements relate to

emissions of SO2 and particulates from boiler stacks. GM’s efforts to reduce SO2 emissions from coal-burning boilers began in the mid-1960s and have involved several different chemical scrubbing technologies.

is a circulating fluidized bed boiler. Through this boiler a bed of ash, sand, coal, and limestone, suspended in a flow of air (fluidized), circulates. Chemi- cal reactions occur that convert the SO2 to sulfate particles. These particles, along with the ash, are filtered out of the gas stream before the gases are discharged from the smoke stack.

complex in Pontiac, Michigan has been operating a large circulating fluidized bed boiler since 1986. It is hnctioning very effectively, meeting all applicable stack-emission requirements.

To research and develop new boiler technology, GM continues to make major investments in both money and manpower. In order to contribute to the national effort to clean the atmosphere, General Motors shares its knowledge with other manufacturers.

The latest technology for SO2 removal

GM’s Chevrolet-Pontiac-GM of Canada

OKERSE4S In its overseas operations, too, GM

has put social responsibility and concern for the environment high on its agenda. For example, in Germany Opel has introduced asbestos- free brake and clutch linings, cadmium-fi-ee paints and components, and water-soluble paint processes. Opel is the first volume manufacturer to voluntarily make cat-

alytic systems standard on all its cars sold in the Federal Republic of Ger- many Vauxhall is a leader in fitting three-way catalytic converters on its cars in the United Kingdom. In addition, all Vauxhall gasoline-engine cars built in the last four years can run continuously on unleaded fuel. Vauxhall will make any necessary ignition adjustment at its own expense.

In December 1989, GM Espana was selected over 50 other entrants as the winner of the first National Award for Environmental Management from Spain‘s Ministry of Industry and Enera, The citation praised the Zaragoza plant for its contribution to the protection of the environment and for its recycling efforts.

P022WlXU HEALTHEFFECZT OF OZONE AND CARBON

MONOXIDE According to research at the General

Motors Research Laboratories (GMR) and reports of research by others, including EPAk criteria document on ozone, clinically significant health effects have not been shown to result solely from exposures to ozone concentrations below the National Ambient Air Quality Standard of 0.12 ppm.

A critical factor in ozone responsive- ness is a person’s level of exercise at the time of exposure. As physical exertion draws more air deeper into the lung, it draws in more ozone. In studies at the EPA Clinical Research Branch facilities in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, young healthy male volunteers were exposed to 0.12 ppm ozone for 6.6 hours in environmentally controlled chambers while undergoing exercise that far

~

111

JZMZIZING EMIssIoNs. Robotic clear- tpaint applicators in tbepaint dules at the Cbeumlet-Pontiac-GM 2anada Com’calBerettaplant in Wil- zgton, Dehwam, use bzgbly efficient ay bells to minimize emissions of atile olganic compounds.

7

:xceeded what most people could sustain for even a few hours. While the clata indicate variations in lung function .hat are statistically significant, the studies also showed that the effects are Fully reversible when exposure ceases. It s important to note that other similar studies demonstrate that such changes n lung hnction do not occur without ieavy exercise.

Studies at GMR and elsewhere show ittle evidence to suggest that age or ire-existing respiratory disease predis- ioses individuals to excess susceptibil- ty to ozone effects in today’s ambient mvironment. Research has also shown hat unless the day-to-day exposures to x o n e are higher than 0.5 ppm, inhala- ion produces minimal changes in lung Function, and e x n these minimal changes -apidly disappear when the exposure :eases. Ozone levels as high as 0.5 ppm clo not occur in metropolitan areas.

GM also devotes research effort to learning more about the health effects 3f CO. The data developed add to the scientific knowledge of this regulated 3ollutant. To clarify the health effect of EO at higher elevations, the Biomedical Science Department at GMR, in conjunc- tion with the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, ran a study in the fall of 1989 to determine the increase in car- boxyhemoglobin in non-smokmg human volunteers at sea level and at an eleva- tion of 11,500 feet. (CO combines with hemoglobin in the blood to form car- boxyhemoglobin, interfering with the ability of the blood to transport oxygen.) The study showed that, with no exposure at all- that is, in a pristine wilderness atmosphere - just going to higher elevations makes the carboxy- hemoglobin level in the blood increase 20% as a result of natural physiological processes that occur in the body

ADDING TOMVOWUZDGE Wide-ranging research devoted to

understanding the causes and effects of pollutants in the atmosphere has been carried on for many years at GMR. The effort continues today as determinedly as ever.

GMR’s Environmental Science Depart-

that EPAvge ’Rand that contrac;was that it Gopized the impossibility of choosing between the “relative worth” of the use of CFCs to sterilize hospital instruments, to clean electronic parts, to make foam for insulation, and so on. The kinds of judgements that would be required to write command and control regulations in an area like this were overwhelming. The EPA felt it had to resort to some sort of a market system.

ment participated in a massive coopera- tive industry/government study of air quality in Southern California in 1987. A recently completed GMR analysis of ozone formation fiom that study indicates that reducing emissions of HC is the most efficient ozone-control strategy in the Los Angeles area. In fact, reducing emissions of the other ozone precursor, NO,, along with HC can actually ofket some of the benefits of the HC reductions. The local Southem Califomia regulatory agency’s clean-air plan, which calls for equal reductions in HC and NO, over the next 20 years, was recently approved by the state and has been forwarded to the EPA for approval. The GMR analysis predicts that, while such a plan will result in reductions in ozone, the improvements will come more slowly than if the regulators concentrated only on HC reductions.

In December 1989, GMR, the Califor- nia Air Resources Board, and the South Coast (Calif) Air Quality Management District launched a three-month study to determine the cause of abnormally high CO levels in Lpwood, Calif, in the Los Angeles area. Lynwoods CO levels are sometimes double those of other nearby cities. In their contribution to the study GMR scientists employed two specially equipped cars to measure CO exhaust emissions under a variety of driving conditions. Results of the study are expected next year.

In another CO study GMR environmental scientists placed instrumentation next to a keeway ofiamp in Denver, Colorado, which videotaped the vehicles and their license plates while using an infiared beam across the road to analyze the exhaust fiom passing vehicles for relative concentrations of CO. Thousands of vehicles were analyzed and their emissions rates correlated with their age. Tne study clearly demonstrated that older vehicles are the major con- tributors to urban CO.

GM’S POSllTON Throughout the debate on air quality,

GM has encouraged legislative revisions to the Clean Air Act that would assure continued air quality improvement without causing undue economic disruption or compromises on the fuel economy, safety, hnction and/or utility of vehicles. GM is prepared to commit substantial additional engineering and capital resources to help reduce the incidences of nonattainment that are driving this legislation.

In order to meet any new emission standards, GM recommends inclusion of several key elements:

Standards must be technologically feasible; Adequate lead time to allow the orderly development of emission- control systems is necessary, Phase-in of the new standards should be over a three-year period to allow manufacturers to concentrate their engineering emission-control expertise and limited capital budgets to do the job right the first time; Temporary separation of certification and in-use standards is necessary to

allow time to fine tune the systems before the more stringent certification standards apply to in-use vehicles. (Certification standards are applied to new cars; in-use standards, to older cars that have undergone some deteri- oration of emission-control equipment in customer use.)

-

in’ is the popular name for a phenomenon that is

more properly called “acid deposition” because the acidic materials may be carried on particles and in gases as well as rain. It is caused by emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NO,) which undergo complex reactions in the atmosphere to form sulfuric and nitric acids.

Automobiles are responsible for a very small portion of the emissions associated with the phenomenon. Of the precipitation acidity detected in the northeastem United States, which lies downwind fiom midwestern coal-fired factories and utilities, and where experts

Among GMs many innovations contributing to clean air are:

B A positive crankcase venti- lation (PCV) technique, incorporating the well- known PCV valve, which controls almost all of the hydrocarbon emissions fiom the crankcase. This was the first smog-control system installed on American cars in the mid-’bOs.

pioneered by GM and Erst appearing on GM models in 1975. The Computer Command Control System introduced on GM models in 1981 to reduce vehicle emissions.

The catalytic converter

B A zirconia exhaust-gas oxygen sensor which is essential to effective operation of the catalysts in the converter. An exhaust-gas recirculation system which lowers combustion temperatures in the combustion chamber, and ~

thus reduces formation of nitrogen oxides,

B A sulhte experiment in the bll of 1975 at the Mibrd, Michigan Proving Ground to gain knowledge about the formation and distribution of sulfates fi-om 350 vehicles equipped with catalyuc converters.

~

__

say the heaviest doses occur, 70% is caused by sulfur-based, nonautomotive sources. The remaining 30% of acidity is from nitrogen-based emissions. These are split between utilities, industrial/ commercWresidential sources, and transportation sources. The transportation sources include emissions from aircraft, trains, and off-road vehicles, as well as autos and trucks. Passenger cars account for 5% of total wet acid deposition.

PUBLIC CONCERN C O “ U E 3 Public concern about acid deposition

is accelerating activity in the U.S. and worldwide on both the research and legislative fronts.

24 other industrial nations in signing a multilateral agreement to cap NO, emissions. At the end of 1994, the participating nations will limit NO, to the levels prevailing in 198% The EPA administrator who signed the agreement noted that the U.S. has already reduced NO, emissions under the Clean Air Act.

Many European countries are push- ing for greater coordination of their clean-air activities. Twenty nations have set targets for reducing SO2 emissions. In 1983, West Germany moved to reduce domestic production of SO2 65% by 1995 even though half the acid deposition in West Germany comes from other countries. And the United Kingdom is aiming for a 25% reduction of SO2 to satisfy Scandinavian countries downwind kom British power plants. By 1994, Canada plans to cut its SO2 emissions in half from 1980 levels.

On November 1, 1988, the US. joined

NAPAPRZPORT A ten-year National Acid Precipitation

Assessment Program (MAP), created by Congress in 1980, is responsible for assembling comprehensive scientific, technological, and economic inbrma- tion to assist the President and the

Do you know what reguhtlonsjbr clean aka tbe country? Dr. Eads: If you consider just very wasteful of the nation’s re

U.S. 0fEce of Tech

need to give serious thought to emissions from old cars. Maybe would encourage individual &kens wouldn’t pollute. One approach that “bounty” on old autos to get th

Other ef€ectiw approaches fuel volatility and reducing ru mat doyou see in tbejWurejbrpoUWm

Dr. Eads: The nation has made a lot of progress in ment, but there is still a way have been applied. From h answers. The traditional command deal effectively with the ever-more- from millions of older, h contamination, farm run0 nition, even within the simply won’t work.

If we’re to reduce world pollution, the most important step mental shift from the current adversarial nature of the environ debate. Environmentalis will all have to work together in a spirit of mutual trust.

The problems are substantial. So are the opportunities.

__ *The issues of reducinghel OOlatUity and running losses are d W w d in the ani& on refieling vapors andgasoline OolatUi& beginning on page 10.

IO

Congress in developing policies for controlling acid rain.

In the fall of 1989, NAPAP issued its preliminary report. The report indicates the final results of the study will be important in understanding the extent of the acid-deposition problem and the probable effectiveness of various proposals. For example, the preliminary report concludes that, even if nothing more were done to reduce acid deposition, the chemical status of lakes would stay approximately the same over the next 50 years.

The preliminary report also indicates that in six areas of the country- south- western Adirondacks, New England, the Atlantic coastal plain, parts of northern Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, the Appalachians, and the northern Florida highlands - acidification of lakes and streams is sufficient to merit special attention. However, some of this acidification may be due to natural differences in soil and vegetation. The final NMAP report will be issued later in 1990.

W A P promises to yield a great deal of insight into the nature and extent of the problems perceived to be associated with acid deposition. Many believe that to take legislative action in advance of considering the findings of W A P could produce misdirected “solutions” to problems that might not actually exist or have been inappropriately defined.

GMREWARCH Over many years the GM Research

Laboratories (GMR) has been investigating various aspects of acid deposition and is continuing this program.

has involved studies of acid deposition on trees, snowmelt acid shock, and acid deposition at high elevations. Scien- tists in the Environmental Science Department at GMR devised a cloud reactor which provides a laboratory method for studying how atmospheric contaminants react in clouds or fog. These are all steps along the way to understanding the chemistry of acid deposition.

Research at GMR in the past few years

A REASONED APPROACH Areas of scientific uncertainty about

acid deposition, such as the transport of air pollutants and the magnitude of the control costs, still remain. GM believes that a reasoned approach to acid deposition would evaluate the W M findings as a basis for scientifically sound action and apply cost-effective solutions to whatever problems are found to exist.

hen a car is refueled at a service station, gasoline vapors (hydro-

carbons) in the tank are displaced and - unless they are controlled - released into the atmosphere. In the presence of sunlight, the emitted hydrocarbons (HC) react with nitrogen oxides to form ozone.

Ozone is regulated by the Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA), and some areas of the country still do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone. Although refueling vapors account for less than 2% of the nation’s man-made hydrocarbon emissions, the EPA has been considering

ways to control the vapors. Two control systems are possible-a

system onboard the vehicle, and a system, called Stage 11, installed on the gasoline pump.

A third approach, which is important by itself or in combination with either of the two systems, is to reduce the volatility of the fuel so that it does not vaporize as readily This would also help reduce emissions of gasoline vapors from other sources.

COhTUOL SYSTEMS Proposed onboard control systems

would capture the v;lpors in I charcoi! canister on the vehicle and transfer them to the engine where they are burned. Stage I1 controls are installed on the gasoline pump to carry refueling vapors ~ ~

back into the underground storage tank. (Stage I control systems collect vapors released when the station‘s underground storage tanks are filled by delivery trucks.) Several areas - California, Massachusetts,

New Jersey, and the cities of St. Louis, NewYork, and Washington, D.C.-aka& have Stage I1 controls, and other areas are considering such controls.

__

-~

CLOLD REACTOR. A staff research engineer in the Environmental Science Department of GM’S Research Labora- tories examines the flow of water dmplets in a cloud reactor - a long, vertical glass tube covered with insulation. A mixture of gases, intmduced at the top of the reactor; fomzs a cloud thatflows down through the tube and is collected at the bottom. me cloud reactorp- vides a laboratory method for studying the reactions that occur in clouds and thus is a means of gaining knowledge of the mech- anisms involved in forming acid rain.

However, no satisfactory onboard control system has yet been developed despite years of effort. The areas of concern include increased safety risks. Also of concern is space availability for the canister, which would need to be much larger than the currently installed canister for evaporative-emission control. Further, actual in-use performance and the added complexity of the fuel system must be taken into account. In addition to the large storage canister and transfer hose, other complex fuel-system hardware would be required onboard the vehicle to capture and contain the vapors.

Since onboard controls would be installed only on new vehicles, it would be at least 15 to 20 years before onboard controls would have their full effect on reducing reheling emissions. It takes that long for new cars to replace the old ones in the nation’s fleet. In contrast, Stage I1 could be installed in as little as two to three years and would control

reftieling vapors hom all vehicles in the controlled areas.

In addition, ozone is a regional problem. The most cost-effective approach is to deal with it on a regional basis through installation of Stage I1 controls only in areas that do not meet the ozone standard. Onboard controls would have to be installed on all vehicles, many of which would be driven in areas with no ozone problem. Others of these vehicles would be driven in areas like California that already have Stage I1 controls, making the vehicle’s onboard control system redundant.

STUDYREPORT A study commissioned by the Motor

Vehicle Manufacturers Association (L. B. Lave, W E. Wecker, W S. Reis, and D. A. Ross, “Control of Hydrocarbon Emissions From Motor Vehicles:’ Report Draft, 5/31/89) concludes that Stage I1 and onboard controls each can achieve similar reductions in HC. Stage I1 is more cost effective, however, because it can be targeted at those regions with ozone problems. The report notes that “the air quality goals of a limited number of air quality control regions cannot justify the expense of a nationwide control strategy” The report also states that requiring onboard controls in addition to Stage I1 controls achieves virtually no additional HC reduction.

REDUCED FUEL VOLATILITY The volatility of a fuel is a measure of

the ease with which it evaporates. Many gasolines continue to exceed recom- mended volatility limits because they have been blended with low-cost butanes (relatively volatile hydrocarbons).

In March 1989, the EPA set standards requiring that the volatility of gasoline sold in most areas be reduced to a Reid vapor pressure of 10.5 pounds per square inch (psi) fi-om 11.5 psi during summer months. In some areas volatility will be held as low as 9.0 psi. The EPA also indicated its intention to consider even more stringent volatility control in the near future.

Fuel volatility is also an important factor in vehicle evaporative emissions, which may release more HC into the atmosphere than does refueling.

Evaporative emissions occur when the amount of vapor generated in the vehicle’s fuel system is so great as to overwhelm the ability of the vehicle’s evaporative control system to contain it. These emissions occur both when the vehicle is being driven and when it is at rest, with the engine on or oE

RULEAUKNG In January 1990, the EPA proposed a new rule that would change the Federal test procedure used to certify evaporative emissions systems by including a longer test cycle to measure losses which result from the diurnal cycle, one of several sources of evaporative emissions. Another source, running losses, would be addressed through a combination of changes. EPA concluded that the auto industry could compiy with the proposed rule by using a combination of an enlarged evaporative emissions canister and an enhanced canister purge system. The Agency has estimated that the proposal would add about $10 to the cost of each new vehicle, but said the additional cost would be offset by fuel savings over the life of the vehicle.

Prior to the issuance of this rulemaking, GM proposed a comprehensive environmentally based evaporative emissions test procedure to the EPA and the State of California. This procedure would substantially improve in-use emissions control hom vehicles in the next decade by accounting for all known types of evaporative emissions. In addition, the GM test procedure would permit manufacturers more flexibility in designing their products because it could be met by means other than larger canisters and/or enhanced purge systems. EPA has acknowledged the GM test procedure in its rulemaking and has asked for comments on it.

12

HEALWEFFECZS EROM GMULlNE VMORS

Current evidence indicates that low- level, short-term, intermittent exposure to gasoline refueling vapors will not affect human health.

Occupational health studies done for the American Petroleum Institute (API) have shown that male rats had an increased incidence of ludney tumors after exposure to whole gasoline. How- ever, research performed at the Bio- medical Science Department of the GM Research Laboratories (GMR) and elsewhere shows no link between refueling vapors and development of tumors in humans. While the rats in the API studies underwent long-term exposures to high concentrations of whole gasoline, humans are exposed only brietly to low levels of gasoline refueling vapors- and the heavier hydrocarbons which appear most directly related to the rat tumors are almost totally absent kom the refueling vapors.

Further research has shown that the male rat produces a protein that combines with a variety of compounds, including the heavier hydrocarbons found in gasoline. This reaction can cause ludney damage that leads to tumors in male rats exclusiveb More recent studies at GMR have verified that humans do not possess that particular protein and so face no risk of tumors caused by this mechanism.

GM’S POSITION GM agrees with the need to limit fuel

volatility during the summer when ozone levels are a concern. To minimize the cost of this alternative, one possibility might be to reduce gasoline volatility only in ozone nonattainment areas.

However, GM is opposed to forcing costly and complex onboard control systems on the whole nation, when ozone, the pollutant to be reduced, is a regional problem that can be handled in a regional way with the Stage I1 system and without the increased safety risk.

Requiring vehicle manufacturers to design and install onboard control systems for the wide range of gasoline-

fueled cars and trucks would demand a large investment of limited engineering and testing resources that could be more productively used in other areas, given the proven performance of Stage I1 systems. Moreover, all future car purchasers would have to pay for the system whether or not they lived in an area that needed control.

In addition, GM and other auto manufacturers are concerned about the safety factors of an onboard system. Agencies such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have warned that the onboard system would pose a significant fire hazard if it failed during normal driving or ruptured during a crash.

The auto industry has refined fuel systems over the years, and fires resulting from crashes have been reduced to very low levels. The substantial redesign required by the onboard system, for which there is no prior field experience, could pose a serious increased risk of post-crash fire. In addition, the onboard control system has the potential in a noncrash situation of releasing large amounts of combustible vapor as a result of component failure, tampering, or canister saturation prior to refueling. The vapor could collect in the engine com- partment or under the vehicle where ignition sources might cause a fire. More than just the canisters, there is concern about the safety of the entire system - fuel valves, special hoses, all of the additional hardware needed.

In contrast, Stage I1 controls have been successfully operated for many years and studies have shown that they have actually reduced the incidence of fires in service stations.

W E T Y A N D SOUiVD ECONOMIC ANYLYSIS

There is general agreement that additional reductions in hydrocarbon emissions are necessary to further reduce ozone levels in nonattainment areas. The strategies used to reduce hydrocarbon emissions must be based on sound economic analysis to assure the maximum improvement in air quality for a

given expenditure. Also, controls designed to reduce risks related to vehicle emissions should not give rise to unwarranted safety risks. Onboard controls, which introduce safety concerns and would cost the nation far more than regional Stage I1 controls, meet neither of these criteria.

ver the years, General Motors has emlored the use of manv

alternative fuek to extend or replace gasoline and diesel fuel. More recently, alternative fuels have been suggested as a way of reducing pollution kom motor vehicles in some areas that have failed to meet air-quality standards.

Two alternative fuels with possible future potential are hydrogen and natural gas. GM has investigated hydrogen as an automotive he1 and determined that it burns well in reciprocating engines. If it can be produced in large quantities, it could help address many pollution problems. The current GM program on natural-gas- fueled engines is focusing on emission characteristics. GM engineers are also looking at the use of compressed natural gas to fuel medium trucks.

Among other alternative fuels, the alcohols, ethanol and methanol, have received particular attention in recent years. Ethanol is made from agricultural crops; methanol, from natural gas or coal. Either of them can be used as fuel in neat (100%) or near-neat form, or as low-concentration blends with gasoline. Gasohol, for example, which has been sold in several states since the early 1980s, is a mix of 90% gasoline with 10% ethanol.

Recently, the use of blends of gasoline with methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) has been growing. MmE is an octane-improving agent made from methanol. It does not increase the fuel volatility when added to gasoline, it helps reduce carbon monoxide emissions, and it does not adversely affect fuel-system

materials. GM’s 1990 owners’ manuals -specifically mention it as an acceptable

gasoline blending agent. Another alternative fuel component is

ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE) made from ethanol. Although there is not much test data on ETBE at this point, it may possess the desirable characteristics of MTBE. Right now, supplies of ETBE are limited by a lack of large-scale production capacity

MElBXVOL GM has been giving methanol, used

alone or blended with gasoline, particular consideration for more than a decade.

Chalcenges

neers with technical challenges that must be met before it can come into widespread use, however. Some of the challenges are difficult, but engineers and scientists at GM and elsewhere are working on them and hope to overcome them in time.

For example, one challenge with methanol fuel is that it is less volatile than gasoline, which gives it poor starting characteristics in cold weather. Also, because of its low volatility, methanol can form a flammable mixture in fuel tanks at normal temperatures, and when it burns in an open area under bright sunlight, it does so with a nearly invisible flame. This raises safety concerns related to fires which cannot be seen.

Another challenge is that about twice as much methanol (by volume) as gasoline must be used to produce about the same amount of useful energy in the vehicle. This means that methanol vehicles must be refueled more often or be redesigned to accommodate larger fuel tanks. In addition, methanol can cause some elastomeric, plastic, and metal parts to deteriorate, thereby degrading vehicle performance and causing serious maintenance problems.

Although methanol’s hydrocarbon emissions are lower than those of

Methanol presents automotive engi-

gasoline, its emissions of unburned fuel and aldehydes are higher. So the air-quality benefit methanol provides depends on the degree to which these emissions can be controlled.

Fuel price is a factor. At present, methanol fuel is more expensive than gasoline or diesel fuel, on an energy basis. Today, most methanol is derived from natural gas because it is relatively cheap. It is more expensive to make it from coal, although that could be the prime source if natural gas supplies are insufficient.

A further consideration is that the methanol-fueling infrastructure is not in place so that some type of a transition vehicle is required, such as a variable- fuel vehicle (W) which can operate on any blend of methanol and gasoline.

GM Research Programs With an eye to the future, GM is

conducting numerous methanol programs to try to meet the challenges involved in converting to this alternative fuel. Emissions, drivability, and fuel economy of methanol-fueled vehicles are being evaluated, as well as cold starting, lubrication, engine wear, safety, and material compatibility

In one recent program, environmental scientists at the General Motors Research Laboratories (GMR) conducted a study to estimate the ozone-forming potential of the emissions from future gasoline- and methanol-fueled vehicles.

They first measured the composition of emissions from an experimental W developed at GMS Advanced Engineer- ing Staff. This vehicle has a unique capacitive fuel-composition sensor that monitors the amount of alcohol in the fuel and feeds the data to an onboard electronics system to maintain the proper &-fuel mixture and adjust engine operation without driver intervention. This W was tested on all blends of fuel from straight gasoline to pure methanol. They also measured the composition of emissions from experimental gasoline-fueled vehicles with advanced emission controls in a GM Current Prod- uct Engineering fleet.

The GMR scientists then used the data as input into an Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) atmospheric chemistry model to assess the effect on urban ozone of changing from gasoline-fueled to methanol-fueled vehicles. It has been known for some time that one important Edctor in the amount of ozone brmed in urban atmospheres is the ratio of total organic compounds to nitrogen oxides (NO,) in the atmosphere. The results of their work indicate that, for urban areas with low organic compound/ NO, ratios in the atmosphere, ozone will not be reduced significantly below levels achieved with the experimental gasoline- fueled vehicles unless the formaldehyde emission rate from the methanol-fueled vehicles can be lowered to that of the gasoline-fueled vehicles. In urban areas with higher organic compound/NO, ratios, the ozone levels remain about the same with methanol- or gasoline-fueled vehicles. That happens because, with a higher organic compound/NO, ratio, the ozone formation is limited by the availability of NO,, not the availability or composition of the organic compounds.

Therefore, based on this research, replacing gasoline-fueled vehicles with methanol-fueled vehicles will not provide ozone reductions in any urban areas unless aldehyde emissions are controlled, and even then, not in all urban areas. Methanol-fueled vehicles appear appropriate only as a limited local, not national, strategy for controlling ozone.

The Biomedical Science Department at GMR has been studying the health effects of methanol for several years. To aid in this research, the scientists developed a unique procedure that increased the sensitivity of rats to methanol, mimicking a humans reaction. And, as a further extension of this work, GMR scientists devised a new approach for determining how methanol is influencing the vision of the animals. Through these studies they have learned that methanol begins to degrade some parts of the nervous system in the eye at concentrations not

14

previously thought to be toxic. This research provides information that will contribute to the safe use of methanol.

Demonstration Program In California, General Motors is sup-

plymg 2,220 Chevrolet Corsica and Lumina W s for a major demonstration program.

The program is sponsored by the California Energy Commission and will be administered by it. GM will provide special service training and support for the methanol-fueled fleet.

Twenty variable-fueled Corsicas were shipped to California in 1989. They were equipped with 2.8-liter V6 engines, mod- iEed to burn any mixture of gasoline and methanol fiom 100% gasoline to a mixture of 15% gasoline with 85% methanol (M85). T m hundred 1991-model-year Luminas will be provided late in 1990, and another 2,000 Luminas ('92MY), in mid-1992. All of the Luminas will have modified 3.1-liter V6 engines. This 2,220- vehicle fleet will be one of the largest methanol-fueled fleets in the U.S.

This program allows GM to evaluate its component designs in use and to learn how customers react to this fuel. GM engineers have found that the gasoline fuel tanks corrode and hax replaced them with stainless steel tanks. (All fuel

CALTFORlMA TRKES D-Y Culi- j6rnia State Senator Wllthm Lwnami (seuted) and Chad& Imtmecht, chairman of the Cdfornth Energy Commission, partic@te in ce"- nies accompanying delivery of 20 variable-fieled Cheorolet Com'cas in Sacramento in June 1989. %se 20 Corsicas are thejirst of 2,220 GM varhble-fieled vehicles wbich will kzkepart in the californth Energy Commission's Methanol &el FleXi- ble Vehicle Lkmonstmtion Program. Tkse vehicles are modijied to burn any &tuw of gasoline and metha- nolfrom 1W? gasoline to a "? of 15% gasoline with 85% methanol. This Demonstration Pmgmm will allow GM to gain real-world fleet data on thepe@ormance of methanol as an alternative fuel.

a t e m components must be made of methanol-tolerant materials.) In addition, methanol's electrical conductivity has caused fuel-level sender units to galvani- cally corrode. The engineers have countered this problem by putting an electronic protection circuit on the sender units. Drivers have responded favorably to the 8% increase in VGs horsepower when operating on M85.

REFoRMuLATE.Ll GASOL&VE Reformulated gasoline is gasoline

with a carefully blended composition to reduce vehicle emissions. One important change is to lower vapor pressure, which helps reduce evaporative and tailpipe emissions from all gasoline-fueled vehicles. And because it is a modified gasoline, it can be used in existing vehicles and distributed through the existing fuel infrastructure. Thus reformulated gasoline could provide great leverage in improving air quality without demanding any immediate changes in the behavior or expectations of consumers.

lated gasoline for older cars that will replace leaded gasoline at its service stations in the Los Angeles area. The fuel can be used by cars built before 1975 and trucks built before 1980. It is expected to significantly reduce tailpipe emissions fiom those vehicles. The fuel, called EC-1, was produced by removing lead, reducing vapor pressure, decreas- ing aromatic content, and adding MTBE.

Two independent laboratories tested EC-1 in 16 Japanese and American cars from model years 1970 to 1978, and

In 1989, ARC0 introduced a reformu-

four Japanese and American pickups from model years 1975 to 1979. They found that evaporative emissions were reduced 21%, and exhaust emissions of CO were cut 9%, NO, 5%, and HC 4%.

JOIhTRI?SMMAND TIBTZVG PROGRAM

In October 1989, GM, together with Ford, Chrysler, and 14 major oil companies, announced a comprehensive joint research and testing program - the Auto/ Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program- to evaluate fuels for use in current and future model cars and

The initial phase of the program seeks to determine the emissions, air-quality effects, and cost effectiveness of various methanol fuels used in prototype vehicles, and of reformulated gasolines used in current as well as past model vehicles. During this phase, all types of vehicle emissions - exhaust, evaporative, and running losses-will be measured to determine the potential reductions in urban ozone from use of any of the tested fuels.

The second stage, slated to begin in 1990, will use data from the initial phase to conduct research on advanced technology alternative-fuel and gasoline- powered vehicles. Alternative fuels, such as compressed natural gas and neat or 100% alcohols, will be considered.

To ensure that the studies are unbiased, an advisory panel of academic researchers who are experts in air quality, combustion/emissions, statis- tics, economics, and public policy has been established. Appropriate government agencies have also been consulted regarding the program

light-duty trucks.

GO"ZT..Tm In February 1989, the EPA issued

exhaust and evaporative emission standards for methanol-fueled vehicles. The standards, which take effect in the 1990 model year, cover cars, light-duty trucks, heavy-duty vehicles, and motorcycles. They are almost identical to the rules for gasoline- and diesel-fueled vehicles. Sub. sequently the California Air Resources Board adopted the same requirements while adding a separate formaldehyde standard for methanol-fueled vehicles.

way promoting the use of alternative fuels, especially methanol, with a view to improving air quality; In 1988, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates air pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, started a five- year, $30.4 million program to fund methanol and natural-gas vehicle projects.

F m L Y COMMITTED General Motors remains firmly com-

mitted to the development of alternative- fuel vehicle technology But, it must be stressed that the transition to the wider use of altemative fuels must be carefully considered and managed. Consumer acceptance will be the crucial element in bringing about an orderly and successful transition.

Calibrnia has a major initiative under

16

and air conditioners, as industrial solvents, as blowing agents in manufacturing foam products, and as propellants for aerosol sprays. Since 1975 CFCs have not been used as aerosol propellants in the US.

CFCs were highly favored as industrial chemicals in the past because they are exceptionally stable, nontoxic, and non- flammable. In recent years, however, scientists have confirmed that the compounds destroy ozone in the stratosphere and are also greenhouse gases which could contribute to global warming. (For a discussion of global warming, see the following article.)

Because GM is concerned about CFCs used in some of its products and processes, it has spearheaded efforts to deal with the issue. The Corporation is working diligently to develop procedures for minimizing emissions of these compounds and to find safe substitutes for them.

331E PROBLEM CFCs are chemical compounds con-

sisting of chlorine, fluorine, and carbon atoms. Some CFCs also include hydrogen atoms. When CFCs are released into the air, their exceptional stability allows them to mix and rise slowly into the stratosphere - a layer of the atmosphere 6 to 30 miles above the earth -where they may remain for years. In the stratosphere, ultraviolet radiation breaks CFCs apart releasing very reactive chlorine atoms. These chlorine atoms react with ozone, 0 3 , converting it into ordinary oxygen, 0 2 . The chlorine can react over and over again, so a single CFC molecule

can lead to the destruction of thousands of molecules of ozone.

Ozone is considered a pollutant at ground level, where it may have harmful respiratory effects on humans when it is in high concentrations. So, why should anyone care if ozone is destroyed in the stratosphere?

ity Although it is undesirable at ground level, ozone is beneficial in the stratosphere where it shields the earth’s surface from ultraviolet light. The ordinary oxygen to which the ozone is converted by the CFCs lacks ozone’s ability to alter out ultraviolet light. Excessive exposure to this radiation may lead to skin cancer or cataracts, reduce the yield of some crops, and damage materials like vinyl plastics.

Not all CFCs cause problems. Those containing hydrogen atoms tend to react chemically in the lower atmosphere so they do not reach the stratosphere. Other similar compounds that do not contain chlorine atoms do not react chemically with the ozone, even if they reach the stratosphere.

Although CFCs get the most attention in ozone depletion because they are in such wide use, another class of compounds called Halons also destroy stratospheric ozone. They are bromine- containing compounds used in fire extinguishers. Bromine atoms may be detached from Halons in the stratosphere much as chlorine atoms are detached fiom CFCs. These bromine atoms also are efficient ozone destroyers.

Ozone has a Jekyll and Hyde personal-

SCIENTIFIC M T I G A T I O N S The CFC-ozone depletion phenom-

enon became apparent in 1985 when

___

pericdc Ozone rductionswere observed over the South Pole - the so-called “ozone hole.” Further study has established that the hole is a regular occurrence there for a few weeks every year in the late winter and early spring. To learn more about the phenomenon, the US. National Science Foundation has supported studies of the annual ozone depletion in Antarctica over the past few years.

port personnel from 19 organizations and four nations conducted the most extensive study yet, the Airborne Antarc- tic Ozone Experiment. The work was coordinated by the US. NationalAero- nautics and Space Administration (NASA). In March 1988, NASA released the report of the Ozone Trends Panel. It indicated that loss of stratospheric ozone over the South Pole may be more serious than they had thought. In the worst year to date, 1987,50% of the ozone over the South Pole was destroyed during the early spring. NASA noted that, on a global average, the stratospheric ozone layer has thinned about 2.5% over the past decade. Following this report, all of the major CFC producers in the US. announced that they would phase out production of CFCs as substitutes became available.

In April 1989, University of Chicago researchers studying the Antarctic ozone hole reported for the first time that they had observed an increase in ultraviolet radiation that can be attributed directly to stratospheric ozone depletion.

What about the North Pole? Early in 1988, scientists of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administratior! began studies ofpossible ozone depletion in the Arctic. They found some evidence of the potential for ozone depletion there.

early in 1989 by a team of 200 scientists called the Airborne Arctic Stratospheric Expedition. Participating scientists were - from the U.K, West Germany, Norway, and Denmark, as well as from US. federal agencies and universities. In addition, U.S.S.R. scientists shared data they gathered over Soviet air space. The $10-million expedition analyzed samples

~

-

In 1987, some 150 scientists and sup-

~

- Additional studies were undertaken ~

from Arctic ice clouds, measured rare molecules in the stratosphere, and studied weather patterns. Data from this investigation are still being analyzed.

It should be noted that, although CFCs appear to play a major role in ozone depletion, other factors, such as weather and atmospheric dynamics, are also involved. Scientists agree that the process is not well understood.

MONTREAL PROTOCOL The Montreal Protocol went into effect

in January 1989. It is an agreement signed by 31 nations in September 1987 to control CFC-11, -12, -113, -114, and -115, as well as Halons 1211,1301, and 2402. The US., U.S.S.R., Japan, and the Com- mon Market countries, which together account for 70% of global CFC use, were among the signatory nations.

The protocol requires dewloped nations to freeze consumption of the listed CFCs at 1986 levels by the middle of 1989, and to cut use 20% by mid-1993, and an additional 30% by mid-1998. This would put CFCs at 50% of their 1986 level. In addition, beginning in 1992, production and consumption of Halons would be frozen at 1986 levels.

The Montreal Protocol takes into account the problems of developing nations trying to catch up in basic technologies like refrigeration. It allows these nations to increase their use of CFCs 10% a year for ten years if it is vital to their economies. Few developing nations have signed and ratified the Protocol. The Soviet Union is permitted to finish CFC plants already under construction at the time of the agreement. As part of the agreement, the United

Nations will review all scientific data on ozone depletion every four years, beginning in 1990, to ensure that new data bearing on the problem are carefully considered.

scientists and policymakers in many nations to believe that the Montreal Protocol is not stringent enough. Early in March 1989, the 12 European Commu-

Growing concern about CFCs has led

nity countries announced a proposal to eliminate by the end of the century their production and use of chemicals that harm the stratospheric ozone layer. They also agreed to cut production and consumption of the chemicals by 85% as soon as possible. President Bush endorsed the proposal to phase out the chemicals by 2000 under an international agreement, if safe substitutes can be found. A few days later, representatives of 123 nations attended an environmental con- ference in London to consider ways to hasten the phaseout of CFCs. The con- ference ended without a timetable for a mrldwide ban on ozone-destrqing chem-

icals. Twenty of the attending countries agreed to sign or ratify the Montreal Protocol, however, and more than a dozen others said they would seriously consider signing.

Two international conferences were held in Helsinki, Finland, in April and May 1989 to strengthen the Montreal Protocol’s provisions and begin its imple- mentation.

US. LEGISLATION In this country, state and Federal legis-

lators have been active over the past year in introducing proposals and passing

A STEP ON lTlE WAY TO ARE€!UCEMEhTOF

engineer in the Fuekr and Lubricants Department of GMs Research Ldw- ratories is investigating the solubilily Of HFG13h in lubricunts. HFC-134a i s a p t e n t i a l m t f i x @GI2 as a re?gmnt in automotive ai? condi- tionem. Theapparatus consists of a glass vessel in wbich the oil and mfbgemnt are brought into thamodynumic equilibrium i%e amount of HFC-134a wbich dissolves in the oil is determined by the tem- pwatue,pssure, and volume of the system. The solubility of the wfhgemnt in the oil is important because it is a factor in bow effectively the oil lubricutes the air conditioning cotnpssoz

CFC-12. ZW research

17

laws aimed at reducing CFCs. The Omni- bus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 imposes a tax on sales and use of the five CFCs and three halons listed in the Montreal Protocol. This will encourage more rapid phaseout of the chemicals. The Clean Air Act is still being debated in Congress. What will finally be decided with regard to CFCs remains to be seen.

Hawaii, and Vermont have passed laws requiring the recycling of car air- conditioning refrigerant. Vermont bans the sale of automobiles with air conditioners that use CFCs beginning with the 1993 model year, and Maine in the 1994 model year.

At the state level, Connecticut, Oregon,

bNRACT OF CFC COhTUOL ON GM

In the motor vehicle industry, CFCs are used as refrigerants in mobile air conditioning systems, as cleaning solvents for electronic components, and as blowing agents in making foam for seats.

Because of its concern about CFC use and to meet the EPA deadlines based on the Montreal Protocol, GM is involved in a coordinated corporate effort to restrict CFC emissions and evaluate potential substitutes. GM has been working for more than three years with its material suppliers to develop workable alternatives.

The problem is that the currently known alternatives are inferior to CFCs in a number ofways, and methods for commercially producing the alternatives are either unknown or are more complicated and expensive than for CFCs.

GM’s Inland Division had been using CFC-11 as a blowing agent in manufacturing urethane foam for seat cushions. The division no longer makes its own foam but obtains it from outside suppliers. The suppliers are working on replacing CFC-blown foams with water-blown foams.

The Harrison Radiator Division uses CFC-12 as a refrigerant in automobile air conditioners. It has improved the performance of its air conditioning systems so that today the factory charge of CFC refiigerant is much less than it was in the 1970s. Leakage of the refrigerant has been significantly reduced by new

hose material, improved seals, hose couplings, and connections.

GM’s suppliers of mobile air conditioner refrigerants are aggressively explor- ing substitutes. One promising alternative is HFC-134a. It offers no threat to the ozone layer because it contains no chlorine.

At present, the compound is being tested for potential health effects by the producers. The Biomedical Science Department of the GM Research Labora- tories (GMR) is also doing toxicological screening to ensure the safety of the material. If HFC-134a proves viable, it will

take some time to redesign and test new air conditioning systems to use this refrigerant.

Also, because the new compound will not work with the lubricants used in existing air conditioning systems, a new lubricant must be developed. Harrison Radiator and the Fuels and Lubricants Department at GMR, as well as suppliers, are currently working on this problem. And GMRs Metallurgy Department and Fuels and Lubricants Department are studying the wear problems associated with the compressors using the new lubricants.

While work is progressing on develop ing new reftigerants and redesigning air-conditioning systems, GM is making CFC-12 recycling/recovery machines - called ACR-3 systems - available to its dealers beginning with the 1990 model year. The ACR-3 systems will be required service equipment in the 1991 model year in all GM dealerships, assembly plants, and fleet garages where air- conditioner repairs are performed. The ACR-3 system assures that venting of CFCs into the air is minimal during servicing or disposal of the mobile air conditioning system. It features a

continuous-loop recycling process that purifies the reftigerant so that it can be reused.

and adopting alternatives to CFC use, GM is focusing on methods of assuring an orderly phaseout of CFCs on a reasonable time schedule. Since vehicles with CFC-based air conditioning systems will be on the roads for some years, it is necessary to maintain supplies for recharging these systems.

for CFC solvents. Several GM divisions use CFC-113 as a parts-cleaning agent in

Along with the progress in identifylng

It is proving difficult to find substitutes

applications where no alternatives are currently available. Harrison Radiator has an active program to introduce water- based solvent solutions. They are looking at alternatives but have not yet discovered a suitable non-CFC solvent. Efforts now are focused on better con- tainment so that less CFCs are released into the environment.

GM’SPOSITION ONCFCs There is no longer any question that

CFCs are depleting the ozone in the stratosphere. Replacing them with chemicals that can do the jobs of CFCs without adverse safety or health efkcts- not an easy task- is vital to environmental integrity General Motors is determined to lead in the effort to contain CFCs and to find and phase in safe substitutes for CFCs in its products and processes.

However, unilateral action by the U.S. to further restrict CFC production and use would have only a limited impact on global emissions. For example, the US. banned CFCs in aerosols more than ten years ago. However, because most other nations did not follow suit, global CFC emissions h-om aerosols continue to be significant.

HEUZHEFFECTS OFA CFCSVBS7T- TUlE A biomedical scientist a t the GenmlMotm Research Laboratories (GMR) is exposing cell cultures to HFC-134a in a standard test to determine the compoundspotential toxicity It ispart of a series of toxkohgid test3 GMR is u m n g to ensure the safety of HFC-134a ifit is used as a substitute for CFC-12.

19

20

cause a significant enough increase in the greenhouse effect to result in global warming. Because General Motors cares about the environment and climatic events that may affect it, the GM Research Laboratories (GMR) has followed this issue for a number of years.

m T I S 2XI.E GMENHOUSE mFECT?

Certain atmospheric gases allow sunlight to reach the earth’s surface but prevent the resulting heat fi-om escaping back into space. Because these gases function somewhat like the panes of glass in a greenhouse, the phenomenon is called the “greenhouse effect” -and the gases, “greenhouse gases.”

The greenhouse effect, recognized since the 19th century, is an important part of the natural scheme of things. Without it, our planet would have an average temperature of -2OF instead of the present 60°E However, industrial and other human activities, along with an expanding population, have increased production of greenhouse gases over the last century Scientists are question- ing whether this may change the earth’s heat balance, resulting in a warming planet. Although the four warmest years of the last century have occurred in the 1980s, most scientists agree that there is no strong evidence for a cause-effect relationship between the four warm years and the increased emission of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

Greenhouse Gases Excluding water vapor, carbon dioxide

(C02) is the major greenhouse gas, and estimated to be responsible for about 50% of any potential global warming impact. C02 is the natural by-product of

all combustion of fossil fuels - coal, petroleum, and natural gas - and wood and other vegetation. Today, the US. is responsible for about 25% of worldwide fossil fuel C 0 2 emissions. However, this percentage has been declining over several decades and is expected to continue to decline as economic growth accelerates in other parts of the world. The other important greenhouse gases and their respective contributions to forecast global warming are: methane (18%), chlorofluorocarbons (13%), upper- troposphere ozone (8%), and nitrous oxide (5%) . Many other gases are involved to a lesser degree.

CLIMATE CHANGEPREDICTIONS Climatologists use mathematical mod-

els for their predictions of any climate change that may be caused by the increased emission of greenhouse gases. The chatologists do not agree on what the changes may be because their climate models are only approximations of a very complex system invohg the atmosphere, the earth’s land mass and oceans, and the living organisms on the planet.

There are interactions, or feedbacks, that are as yet unaccounted for in the models. One important area that is inad- equately treated is the effect of the oceans on climate. Oceans, which cover 71% ofthe earth’s surface, have an enormous impact on weather. Most models that predict global warming look at only the upper layers of ocean although water currents move up and down pull- ing heat fi-om the surface down into the depths. In addition, the models do not take into account factors like horizontal currents or salinity differences.

When ocean temperature increases, as it would if global warming occurred,

water vapor would be released. This will tend to increase the greenhouse effect because water vapor functions like a greenhouse gas. But water vapor could also increase cloudiness. Clouds act both to reflect short-wave radiation from the sun, and thus cool the earth, and to reradiate long-wave radiation from their surface and warm the earth. The uncertainties of these interactions with their on-again-off-again effects - and water vapor released by oceans is only one example - make questionable any predictions of climate change, especially on a regional or seasonal basis.

THE ROLE OFMOTOR KEHICLb!%!i Passenger cars account for 13% of the

US. emissions of C02, trucks and buses account for 10%. On a worldwide basis, however, US. cars, trucks, and buses contribute about 5% of the total C02 emissions. Because C 0 2 contributes to half of any forecast man-made greenhouse contribution, only about 2.5% of the total of any predicted effect worldwide is associated with the C 0 2 emissions fiom US. vehicles.

As previously noted, CFCs are also greenhouse gases. The auto industry uses CFCs as refi-igerants in mobile air conditioners, as industrial solvents, and in the manufacture of foam products. Under an international agreement - the Montreal Protocol - CFCs are being phased down over the next ten years. Although the concern that led to the Protocol was based on the effect of CFCs in reducing stratospheric ozone, the Protocol will also address the global-warming issue because CFCs have a much greater greenhouse effect than does C02. One pound of CFCs is equivalent in greenhouse effect to several thousand pounds of C02. (For detail on the effect of CFCs on stratospheric ozone, see the article beginning on page 16.)

PROPOSALS Most of the proposals for dealing with

the possibility of global warming involve reducing the emission of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. But, because these gases are the by-products of fundamental human needs and activities, reducing them without adversely

c - ii L

affecting economic growth would not be easy

For example, improving energy efficiency and converting to fuels that produce less C02 would reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. To produce the same amount of energy, natural gas creates only 70% as much C02 as does oil, and 60% as much as coal. However, the lower CO2 emissions with natural gas as fuel will have to be balanced against the higher methane emissions that would result.

In addition, it is important to note that the contribution of various fuels to the greenhouse effect involves more than the C02 emitted when they are burned by the fuel consumer. At every step along the way in reaching that consumer - mining, conversion, distribution, as well as end use - C02 is emitted to a greater or lesser degree. So, in evaluating the contribution of various fuels or power sources to the greenhouse effect, the point to be considered is the total C02 emitted along the whole chain of events.

global warming is the use of alternative sources of energy that do not rely on combustion of fossil fuels. Among the candidates under consideration are nuclear and solar energy

Another approach proposed by some is to accelerate energy- conservation practices - improve building insulation, for example, or develop more energy efficient manufacturing processes.

Still a third approach stresses development of innovative strategies for adapting to global warming, if it occurs, such as developing new strains of crops, improving irrigation methods, and developing techniques for protecting low-lying coastal areas.

One approach to dealing with possible

NEWSTUDID Meanwhile, research continues and new studies in the past year shed more light on global warming. Reginald Newell, Jane Hsiung, and Wu Zhongxiang, climatologists at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, published a report of worldwide ocean temperatures since 1850 in MIT’s Technology Review (NOW Dec. 1989). They concluded that there has been “no appreciable difference”

between temperatures in 1856 and 1986. And researchers who have analyzed their data conclude that there has been little or no overall warming.

On the other hand, Sergej Lebedeff of ”s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, whose group is analyzing temperature data from hundreds of land stations since the 1880s, reported that the global average temperature in 1989 was 0.2OC above the 30-year mean for 1951 through 1980. That makes 1989 the seventh warmest year on record.

Scientists at the University of Chicago have confirmed for the first time that water vapor from the oceans can amplify global warming caused by man-made gases. V Ramanathan, a professor of geophysical sciences, and his student, Ameet Raval, used temperature and radiation measurements from satellites, buoys, and ships to confirm computer models indicating that as more water vapor accumulates, more energy is trapped on earth. He observed that the measurements are consistent with predictions that the planet’s temperature will rise two to three degrees Fahrenheit in the next 50 years from increasing greenhouse-gas emissions. He also cau- tioned that this does not mean global warming is a certainty Although the theory and the models have passed an important observational test, they must pass several more tests.

US. LEGISLATIW? ACTNITY Legislators are proposing bills that

severely restrict greenhouse gases. The auto industry is concerned because automobiles emit CO,.

An important factor in this legislative activity is the reality that, as noted above, CO, from all sources is responsible for about 50% of any impact from man-made greenhouse gases. On a worldwide basis, US. cars, trucks, and buses contribute

about 5% of the total CO, emissions. So, CO, emissions from US. vehicles account for only 2.5% of the global impact from these greenhouse gases.

cosn A study by A. S. Manne (Stanford Uni-

versity) and R. G. Richels (Electric Power Research Institute) (“CO, Emission Limits An Economic Analysis for the Uw” July 1989) places the total cost of cutting

EMISSIONS OF CARBON DIOmDE IN THE UMTELl STATEX (1986). Gars, trucks, and buses account for 23% of US. C02 emissions. Other US. transportation sources are responsible for an additional 7% of C02 emissions. Worldwide, US. cam, trucks, and buses account for 5.1%. Source of data: US. Department of Energy

US. CO, emissions by 20%, and then Ereezing them at those levels throughout the 21st Century, at between $800 billion and $3.6 trillion. The Council of Economic Advisors referred to these data in their Annual Report.

ONGOING WORKAT GM GM is investigating a number of

approaches to reduce all emissions, including CO,, from motor vehicles. As well as maintaining a continuing com- mitment to he1 efficiency, General Motors is currently engaged in programs in advanced battery and fuel-cell technologies, as well as solar and electric vehicle programs.

Electric Vebkks General Motors has long been involved

in electric vehicle research and development. One of the appeals of these cars is that they involve no emissions as long as they are powered by electricity from generating plants, such as nuclear power plants, that do not use fossil fuels.

To demonstrate its latest advances, GM unveiled the Impact, a two-passenger electric concept vehicle, in January 1990. A number of GM staffs-Advanced Engi- neering Staff had overall responsibility -and divisions were involved in developing the vehicle along with the primary contractor, AeroVironment, Inc. Impact has a maximum range of 120 miles between charges and quicker acceleration than many sports cars. It is powered by 32 ten-volt lead-acid batteries and takes three hours to recharge. In normal use, the batteries have to be replaced every 20,000 miles at a cost of $1,500, but advances in technology should extend battery life to 50,000 miles within the next three years. The battery pack feeds two alternating-current induction motors which power the fiont wheels.

ECi7UC CAR. GM has developed 2 electric vebicle, called the Impact, at achieves a range of 120 miles average bigbway speed of 55 ilesper houl: Atpsent , it is not bmduction vebicle, but GM is vestigating the feasibility of oducing it.

24

FUEL CELL REYEARW. A senior staff meurch scientist in the Pbysical C.?wmkt?y Department of GMs Research Luboratories (GMR) adjusts a connector in a fuel cell. Fuel cells are one of s& alternative enetgy sources under investigation at GMR. Fuel cellsproduce electricity directly by an electrochemical redction rather than combustion. One of the advantages they offw is that, when they are run on afuel like bydmgen, they ab not generate catfwn dioxide, a g m h o u s e gas. Although thepractical applicution of fuel cells as a source ofpower for electric vehicles is some distance in thefuture, research on them continues at GMR.

The Impact achieves its remarkable perbrmance through new dewlopments in electronics, motor design, structural materials, tires, and batteries, coupled

with careful attention to weight and aerodynamic and rolling design efficien- cies. GM is appiymg for nearly a dozen patents on various innovations in the

car. Impact includes heating and air conditioning, as well as other driver- passenger conveniences.

1

Impact has one of the slipperiest drag i

CME: A NmDIMENSION he Corporate Average Fuel (Ti Economy requirement, or

CAFE, was introduced in 1975 with the goal of conserving petroleum. In recent months, concern about global warming (discussed in the accompanying article) has added a new dimension to the debate about CAFE.

CAFE Over the Years CAFE is the average annual fuel

economy of a manufacturer‘s full line of vehicles. In 1975, the passenger car standard was set by Congress at 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg) for 1985 and later model years. The Depart- ment of Transportation has the authority to amend the standard if the need arises. Through the ’70s and early O OS, when gas prices and availability were of great concern to consumers, GM met or exceeded the CAFE standards.

However, in recent years with lower fuel prices, many customers’ prefer- ences have shifted to larger, family-

~

size vehicles and better-performing engines. This has slowed the rate of improvement in GM’s CAFE, making consistent achiewment of the orig- inal CAFE goals m a e d&cult.

The current 1990 law and regulations set the standard for all passenger- car manufacturers at 27.5 mpg and at 20.0 mpg for light trucks.

considered in Congress involve fuel economy One, introduced by Sena- tor Richard Bryan (D-Nev), proposes to increase the he1 economy average for each manufacturer by a fixed percentage over his CAFE level in the 1988 model year. The percentages included in the bill call for an increase of 20% by 1995 and 40% by 2000. The Bryan bill would raise GM’s CAFE averages to over 33 mpg in 1995 and nearly 40 mpg by 2001. Light trucks would undergo’propor- tionally similar increases. To meet these CAFE numbers, GM would have to shift production to its smallest vehicles, away fiom the family-size cars that many consumers want.

A number of bills now being

GM: Commitm’ent GM currently faces CAFE difficulties

in spite of a continuing record of product improvements. In particular, the Corporation has played a leadership role in this country in introducing fiont-wheel drive, which has allowed it to downsize its vehicles to improve fuel economy without reducing interior space.

for more fuel-efficient vehicles, GM has maintained an ongoing commit- ment to fuel-economy improvement across the full range of its products since before the Mideast oil embargo in 1973. Since 1979 alone, GM has spent over $50 billion for the new products, plants, and equipment to provide the capacity and the capability to build a full range of fuel- efficient cars.

Fuel-saving technologies incor- porated by GM in its fleet include electronic fuel injection, electronic spark control, roller valve lifters, low fiiction pistons, tires with reduced rolling resistance, low-viscosity oils,

Responding to its customers’ desire

.

I

i 1 L

f i

coefficients ever recorded in the GM wind tunnel. This finely tuned aerodynamic efficiency translates to energy efficiency It is capable of normal highway speeds. It accelerates fkom 0 to 60 mph in eight seconds and has a pro- jected top speed of over 100 mph. In early test runs at GM’s Mesa Proving Ground, Impact beat a Nissan 300% and a Mazda Miata in 0 to 60 mph acceleration tests.

With current battery technology, the Impact would cost about twice as much to operate compared to a gasoline- powered car in the Los Angeles area. But with further advances in battery life, Impact operating costs could become more competitive with those of gasoline- powered cars.

GM is studying the feasibility of future production of the vehicle.

Fuel Ce& Fuel cells are also a potential source

of power for electric vehicles, but require technical breakthroughs in sev-

and aerodynamic improvements. In addition, GM has made many important powertrain advances, and established aggressive technological goals, which continue to challenge GM’s engineers. As a result, most of today’s family-size cars achieve fuel economy that is better than that of many com- pact models in 1975. Indeed, the average fuel economy of the fleet of GM vehicles has increased 130% since the mid-’70s. The principal h m r driving these changes has been customer demand for greater fuel efficiency

Impact of CAFE on the Amerkan Auto Industry

CAFE gives some foreign auto manufacturers a competitive advantage over full-line American manufacturers. Traditionally Asian producers have specialized in small cars. N m , however, several Asian manufacturers are offering, or plan to ofkr, larger luxury and mid-size cars with V8 and performance V6 engines providing direct

competition in the market segments in which US. automakers have been partic- ularly strong. They can do so without concern for CAFE standards because they have built up a large base of small cars to average with their larger, less- fuel-efficient vehicles.

CAFE Assumptions Obsolete Dr. Marina xN. Whitman, General

Motors vice president and group executive, said in Congressional testimony last year:

behind the CAFE law, each of which b out of touch with the economic and competitive realities of 1989 me assumptions were: filst, that US. oil prices would continue to be controlled below world market levek, which would encourage overconsumption; second, that world petroleum prices would keqb on k ing into the 80s and beyond, reJlecting growing scarcity ofpetroleum- basedfiek; and third that the US. auto industy would be able to dictate what consumers would buy i%t tk, ifmud& less-power-l, more fuel-eficientcars

“mere were three basic assumptions

were what the US industry was directed to build by CAFe that? what industy could force the U S consumer to buy and drive, like it or not.

today, if they ever dd. US. oilprices have long since been decontrolled and world oilprices have declined in real terms, rejkcting an increase in the number of st.@&m, available production and resultant excess capacity Finally, consumers do have a c h o i c e m among a r e c d number of m&kprodw;ed by a large number of manufacturers..”

Is CAFE Really Necessary? Most economists and energy ana-

lysts say the CAFE law does little to save petroleum. Gasoline consumption is most influenced by changes in prices. When petroleum prices rose, as they did fkom 1978 to 1981, overall fuel economy rose. When gasoline prices declined, consumer interest in fuel efficiency did the same.

be to try to use CAFE to force

“None of those assumptions holds true

An idea of how expensive it might

eral areas before they become economi- TiiIjZSfeaSible. Fuel cells produce electricity directly by an electrochemical reaction rather than through a combustion process. The reaction involves a fuel- often hydrogen, although it may be a reactive metal, such as aluminum or zinc, or a number of other gases, liquids, or solids-and an oxidant, which is generally oxygen fiom the air.

GMR is involved in research on fuel cells. It is also looking at fuel-cell electrodes with the aim of reducing the cost by developing new materials to provide the high p m r needed for vehicle propulsion. Various electrolytes are under investigation including a polymer electrolyte membrane. This GMR program is concentrating on the elements of the cell that require more study if the fuel cell is to become a power source for transportation.

Solar-Powered Cars

way in the future, but this has not kept Practical solar-powered cars are a long

GM from evaluating their potential. A solar-powered car developed by GM won the first World Solar Challenge race in Australia in November 1987. This car, called the Sunraycer, has since been retired and placed on display at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C.

tion, its Chevrolet Division, the US. Department of Energy, and the Society of Automotive Engineers are sponsoring an 1,800-mile solar-powered car race for university and college teams. The race, called “GM Sunrayce USA- 1990: will be run by 32 teams fiom the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. To begin work on their cars each of the teams received $5,000 from GM and $2,000 fiom the Department of Energy GM will sponsor the three winning teams in the World Solar Challenge Race in Australia in November 1990.

General Motors-Holden’s Automotive in Australia will provide financial and vehicle support to Australian schools in

In July 1990, General Motors Corpora-

I_

the 1990 World Solar Challenge, the transcontinental solar car race from Darwin to Adelaide. The company will o E r each school up to $5,000 toward building its entry as well as two support vehicles during the running of the race next November.

Natural-Gas-Fueled Engims Engineers and scientists at GMR are

also investigating the potential of natural- gas-fueled engines for lower emissions of greenhouse gases. They will also explore the impact of such vehicles on urban smog, and are investigating the use of compressed natural gas to fuel medium trucks.

-

GM’S POSITION ON THE G B O U S E ERFECT

Because the global-warming issue has long-term implications with many scientific uncertainties, GM believes strongly that realism, responsibility, and reason must prevail in considering its implications for public policy The policy ques-

consumers into cars they do not really want is provided by research conducted by Andrew Kleit of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Economics. Kleit selects a particular year, assumes that CAFE is binding on manufacturers during that year, and then calculates what happens if manufacturers must alter the prices they charge for their cars to try and force consumers into a fleet having a higher CAFE. He takes account of the ability of consumers to o&et this by substituting Japanese cars for domestic cars. His model shows Japanese fkms benefiting while American firms lose sales and their workers lose jobs. Kleit finds that for some levels of CAFE increase even the energy impact is the opposite of the intended direction, due to CAFE’S well-documented ten- dency to cause some potential car

purchasers to hold onto their older and less fuel-efficient cars for a longer time. For those ranges where CAFE might result in some net gasoline savings, it does so, in Kleit‘s words, “at an exorbitant cost to the economy” Kleit’s analysis did not include the ability of consumers to shift from cars to light-duty trucks. Including this additional element of consumer choice would surely have increased the costs.

Even without CAFE, as older, less- fuel-efficient vehicles are replaced with newer, increasingly efficient ones, the average fuel economy of the U.S. passenger car fleet will increase by a minimum of 30% by the late 1990s.

returns, as CAFE (mpg) is increased from the current standard, fuel consumption (gallons/100 miles) would not decrease as much (for a given increase in mpg) as it did at lower CAFE levels.

In addition, because of diminishing

Todax GM has a greater capability to provide a broad array of fuel- efficient engines across a number of products than ever before, and it has ample capacity for smaller vehicles if consumer demand shifts. This gives the Corporation the potential to match changes in consumer demand, thereby dramatically improving its response time. Thus, GM is better prepared to handle the future market conditions that may result from a variety of changes that affect the - marketplace, including gasoline prices and/or availability. ~

Moreover, for the intermediate term, GM has extensive research efforts focused on improving the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, including, for example, two- cycle engines and direct-injection diesel engines. Over the longer term, GM is active in research and development of nonfossil-fuel energy sources.

_g

27

tion at this point is whether - and what kinds of- “insurance” against global warming might be reasonable. In evaluating &&rent policy options, GM beliews that decisions should be based on three criteria: effectiveness, efficiency (least cost), and fairness in terms of their impact on different income groups, different geographic regions, and different kinds of economic activities.

In addition to encouraging the research necessary to reduce the scientific uncertainties, GM supports the ongoing search for a practical multilateral approach already begun under the auspices of the United Nations. The global scope of the issue makes this essential. Actions taken by the United States alone will be marginally effective in slowing the increase in global C 0 2 emissions and could result in economic and competitive disadvantages for US. goods and services in world markets.

Beyond this, it is inefficient, unhr, and unnecessarily disruptive to focus attention virtually exclusively on one

particular activity like the auto industry in responding to concern about the impact of burning fossil fuels and emissions of CO2. It would be more logical to consider incentives to induce all emitting sources to reduce their emissions. For example, a number of environmental experts, including the staff of the Environmental Protection Agency in a draft policy paper, have suggested a “greenhouse” or carbon fee. Because C02 is a by-product of all types of fossil fuel combustion, a fee structure tied to the level of carbon content of various fossil fuels would be a fairer approach, as well as much more effective.

accompanying article on CAFE, increasing passenger car and truck fuel-economy standards is unfair and would be far more economically disruptive because it would place the efficiency burden on only one fuel and one fuel use. Such policies would, to the extent that they had the desired effect, generate very high costs and could, in fact, detract

By contrast, as discussed in the

fiom the search for effective and less disruptive measures.

Another effective approach to the global warming issue is reducing CFCs because they are so much more potent in their contribution to the greenhouse efkct. CFCs are in the process of being phased out of industrial products and processes. (See the article on stratospheric ozone depletion for a discussion of the phaseout of CFCs.)

ANUiVCERTm WORLD Among scientists, there is no dispute

that the greenhouse gases have been increasing in concentration in the atmosphere over the last century Haw these gases may affect global warming, however, is very uncertain, involving a great many variables and a great many complex mathematical models.

The only certainty at this time is that global warming is a global issue requiring a coordinated worldwide approach to understand both the science and the policy implications.

In this regard, some have pointed to exotic experimental vehicles at GM and elsewhere as evidence that cost-effective technology exists and is not being introduced. While certain highly optimized experimental sub- compacts have attained very high fuel economy values, such vehicles do not have many of the utility and performance characteristics demanded by an overwhelming majority of consumers. There are attractively priced subcompact models on the market today that exceed 50 mpg (EPA composite), including the GM Geo Metro. However, such models repre- sented barely 1% of US. sales in 1989.

GMk Position GM believes that any government

regulatory program should meet three

tests - it should be effective, it should be efficient, and it should be fair. CAFE does not meet any of these tests.

Concerning effectiveness, independent research as well as GM’s own experience demonstrates conclusively that actual and/or anticipated increases in gasoline prices and perceived availabilia not CAFE, is what has driven consumer choice regarding the characteristics of the cars they have purchased. This implies that it has been the path of fuel prices, not CAFE, that has been overwhelmingly responsible for the improvements in motor vehicle fuel economy experi- enced over the last couple of decades. Currently, with fuel prices lower and less unstable, the effect of CAFE is simply to cause customers to move among manufacturers, rather than to increase overall fuel efficiency

research has shown that a CAFE standard level that would actually

Concerning efficiency, independent

increase automotive fuel economy, would do so only at a very high cost to the public.

Concerning fairness, CAFE affects only a single use of energy and, to the extent that emissions of so-called “greenhouse gases” are of concern, CAFE targets the source of a remark- ably small share of these gases on a worldwide basis. Moreover, CAFE has an unfair and unfavorable impact OT. a particular subset of vehicle producers - domestic full-line manufacturers like GM-and, therefore, on American jobs and competitiveness, while it creates an artificial opportunity and incentive for Asian competi- tors to produce larger cars. In some cases, these Asian cars actually get poorer fuel economy than GM cars against which they directly compete.

28

hazardous. Mindful of its ethical and legal responsibilities with regard to the management of wastes and the correc- tion of problems caused by waste disposal and recycling, the Corporation makes every effort to manage waste materials and minimize waste generation in an efficient, responsible way to avoid any detrimental efkcts to human health or the environment.

The first GM manual dealing with the handling and disposing of waste materials in the workplace was published in 1953. Procedures for handling waste materials have been held to increasingly rigorous standards since that time.

W m l l i - W A G - LEGISLATION

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) governs waste management. This law has been amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HWA). The law regulates transport, storage, and treatment of hazardous wastes and other solid wastes, underground storage tanks, and resource recovery Further, HWA requires corrective action for releases, or suspected releases, of hazardous wastes or hazardous waste constituents, such as chemicals like benzene or metals like chromium or lead, fiom solid-waste management units. The law is expected to be amended and reauthorized in 1990.

The federal law governing cleanup of hazardous wastes is the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compen- sation, and Liability Act of 1980, com- monly called Superfund. Superfund was amended and reauthorized in 1986 and further revisions and reauthoriza-

tions are expected in 1991. The liability under Superfund is strict

any owner, operator, transporter, or generator can be held liable for cleanup costs, regardless of fault. The Superfund liability has been interpreted to be joint and several, except in those rare cases when responsible parties can demonstrate that their liabilities are divisible. Thus, one or a few responsible parties may be held liable for the total cleanup of a site. The law imposes retroactive liability without time limitation. As a result, GM and other companies, as well as government-owned facilities, can incur liability for past waste-disposal activities that were not in conflict with any statute in effect at the time of waste disposal.

Under Superfund, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies sites for cleanup in the National Priority List (NPL). Although EPA places high priority on listed sites, it may also initiate cleanup action for sites not listed on the NPL. EPA identifies potentially responsible parties for each site and gives them opportunities to take cleanup action. If they fail to do so, EPA uses Superfund money for cleanup and seeks to recover its costs fiom the responsible parties.

The EPA has identified GM as a “potentially responsible party” for past activities at a number of Superfund sites involving others. However, only one GM facility- Central Foundry-Massena (N.Y) - is on the NPL.

Considerable criticism has been lev- eled at Superfund in recent years. Representative Bob Traxler (D.-Mich.), chairman of the Committee on Appro- priations’ Subcommittee on Housing and Urban Development, has released

~

a report stating that “Superhnd has taken on a ‘public works’ flavor-with EPA relymg primarily on national contractors paid with [Superfund] trust fund dollars.” The Traxler report also points out that, at the present funding level of $8.5 billion over a five-year period, the Super- fund program will be able to address problems at only 300 to 400 sites. The EPA currently lists over 1,200 sites as priority targets for cleanup.

Assessment (OTA) background paper entitled, “Assessing Contractor Use in Superfund,” reports that a too-heavy reliance on private contractors may be working “at odds with the environmental mission of the program.” OTA states that there is no database to determine whether so much contracting is cost effective and urges an independent study to gather the data. In addition, OTA notes that there are no data on the effectiveness of cleanups performed by government contractors or by private parties.

In 1986, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) was passed. Title I11 of SARA requires public disclosure by industry of chemicals and chemical hazards in their operations. This means that virtually all GM facilities are required to file annually with the EPA and state agencies comprehensive reports estimating the amount of specific chemicals released to the air, water, and land.

T”ES OF WASTE The majority of wastes generated by

GM results fiom air and water pollution control activities. About one-third of GM wastes are sludges generated fiom wastewater-treatment operations. Other GM wastes include painting and plating wastes, waste soknts, alkalies, and acids. GM generates about 0.6 million tons of hazardous wastes fiom about 150 facilities in the US. Approximately 60% of this is indbstrial wastewater treated on-site prior to discharging to municipal sewers or surface waters.

GM has always sought to be in compliance with state and local wastewater pretreatment standards in each munici- pality in which its plants are located.

~

A Congressional Office of Technology

~

__

In the early 1980s, however, federal pretreatment standards were mandated, at the same time that many state and local standards were made more stringent. As a result, GM’s Argonaut Architecture, Engineering and Construction Division undertook an Industrial Wastewater Pretreatment Program (IWPP) which installed new or modified waste-water treatment facilities in 24 GM assembly plants at a cost of $240 million.

ment process that could be sized to fit individual plants and could be used across the Corporation to remove metals, oils, and other industrial wastes hom the waste water before it is discharged into municipal sewer systems. The removed wastes are disposed of in licensed landfills. To ensure proper operation of the wastewater treatment facilities, WF’P includes a training program involving videotapes, training manuals, and periodic three-day instruc- tion sessions at each plant.

GM’S ORGANIZATION FOR WASTEMANAGEMENT

A number of GM’s staffs are involved in corporate initiatives with respect to waste management. The GM Research

Argonaut developed a “generic” treat-

Laboratories conducts research to imprm waste and groundwater treatment processes. The Materials Management Staff coordinates corporate contracts for waste management services. The Environmen- tal Activities Staff (EAS) develops corporate environmental policies that are consistent with scientific knowledge, with the intelligent application of technology and with public expectations. Govern- ment initiatives are coordinated by Industry Government Relations.

GM operating units, groups, divisions, and plants are responsible for their own waste management and control, as well as for local cleanup programs for their facilities. Because Super- fund cleanup actions hequently involve complicated legal as well as scientific/ engineering negotiations, they are coordinated at the corporate level by GM’s Legal Staff and EAS.

The Waste Management Committee, established in 1979, is chaired by an EAS representative. The members are key environmental personnel hom plants, divisions, groups, and staffs. This committee is a working-level forum for sharing regulatory and technical information and for developing solutions to day-to-day problems.

Cleanup Programs

ing up past industrial waste-disposal sites in which disposal was originally handled in a proper and legal manner, but which later, because of changing conditions - new legislation, new dis- coveries about the hazardous nature of materials, etc. -was determined to be unacceptable.

GM was involved in one of the first NPL sites (in Seymour, Indiana) identified for cleanup under Superfund. Between 1981 and 1984, GM and 23 other companies funded and managed the cleanup of the Seymour site. This involved removing to EPA-approved sites about 100 tanks and more than 45,000 drums, as well as contaminated soil.

To date, GM has participated in more than 60 site-cleanup actions (including needed studies for developing cleanup plans) with other companies.

For example, the Berlin and Farro Liquid Incineration Site located near Flint, Michigan, received wastes hom most of GMS facilities in Michigan during the late 1960s and early 1970s. GM led in developing and implementing a $14 million project (GM’s share was about $8 million) that removed

GM has played a major role in clean-

COhTROL ROOM. The boilerplunt and wastewater treatmentpro- cess at GMs Orion (Michigan) assembly plunt is monitored and controlled from these panels.

30

75,000 tons of wastes and contaminated soil and about one million gallons of liquids. Eighty-three companies and municipalities participated in this project. But the work did not end there. In 1986, GM again played a leadership role in implementing a Remedial Investiga- tion and Feasibility Study to determine whether additional cleanup work would be necessary for the remaining soils at the site and groundwater under the site. That work is still in progress.

Another example is the Harvey and Knotts Drum Site near Wilmington, Delaware, which operated from 1962 to 1969 for drum disposal. GM’s Wilming- ton assembly plant was a major user of the site. In 1985, EPA completed a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study and issued a Record of Decision identifylng cleanup technology including waste removal, soil flushing of contaminants, and groundwater treatment. GM initiated negotiation with EPA and the State of Delaware for an industrial cleanup and developed a Remedial Action Work Plan. Since no other potentially responsible parties had chosen to participate, the EPA agreed with GM to use Superfund’s “Mixed Funding” option for the fist time. Under this option, GM will be reimbursed by the government for about one-third of the $!+million cleanup cost. The government is seeking to recover this amount from other responsible parties.

For any site involving GM as one of many potentially responsible parties, GM will aim to contribute a fair share to cleanup costs by participating in a multiparty settlement with the government. As of the end of 1989, GM had spent about $35.6 million in various settlements. The foreseeable financial liability is estimated at about $97 million.

Plant Closings In any transaction involving industrial

property, both the buyer and seller must consider the potential liability under RCRA and Superfund and related state laws for hazardous materials on the property The parties involved are well advised to subject the property to an extensive audit so that it is possible to distinguish the liabilities of the old

versus the new owners, and to determine whether any cleanup should, or must, be undertaken.

Some state laws also require environmental cleanup prior to property transfer. For example, the New Jersey Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act requires the property owner to submit to the state either a cleanup plan or a negative declaration indicating a cleanup is not needed before transfer- ring an industrial property

A number of GM plants have been closed in recent years as the Corpora- tion has modernized manufacturing facilities and adjusted production plans. Late in 1986, GM formed the Corporate Community Transition Team for developing and coordinating plant-closing activities relating to employes, communities, and state and federal governments. The Environmental Transition Team, part of the Corporate Community Transition Team, is responsible for addressing environmental concerns and determining an appropriate approach to protect GM from future environmental liability

Tracking Wmte Information GM has been tracking hazardous waste

management information since late 1980 when the definition of “hazardous waste” was first established in federal regulations. More recently, EAS and GMS Electronic Data Systems subsidiary developed a computerized Waste Infor- mation Management System (WIMS) to facilitate compliance with environmental record-keeping and reporting requirements, control the transport of wastes, and restrict waste disposal to approved sites. WIMS was pilot tested in 1988 and made available for plant use on a limited basis early in 1989. All US. units have the capability of participating in the system.

The first phase of WIMS provides a mainframe computer database for plant use in the preparation of waste manifests for off-site disposal. The system collects information as waste manifests are generated, including data on waste

types, quantities, and disposal sites. The information is collected and organized

personnel to assess GM’s patterns of waste minimization, waste generation, and disposal-facility usage at any time. WIMS will provide a mechanism to limit the selection of waste-disposal facilities to only those that have been evaluated and approved for GM use.

WIMS’ second phase provides the capability to complete annual and bien- nial reports on waste generation as required by regulations. WIMS will produce these reports from the manifest data automatically for each GM waste generator. Bulletins and advisories from EAS will be distributed on-line through WIMS.

Employe Training After “hazardous waste” was first

defined in federal regulations, the EAS in September 1980 conducted five hazardous-waste-compliance workshops for all GM salaried environmental personnel in the US. In 1986, EAS formalized continuing environmental training through the development of two training programs - an environmental engineer certification program and a modular training program.

The certification program has been designed to maintain the professional- ism of environmental engineers throughout the Corporation. A full week of courses at Purdue University covers laws, regulations, permit requirements, environmental monitoring, pollution- control technologies, legal responsibilities, and public concerns in areas including air emission, wastewater discharge, and waste management. Nearly 500 GM engineers have attended as of February 1990. This is a continuing program.

A modular training program is aimed at teaching workers to handle waste materials properly More than 20 modular short courses, developed by EAS with consultants, were field-tested and put into practice at the end of 1988. Trainers at GM plants are instructed on how to use these modular courses to conduct local classes. Examples of the modules are: waste manifest prepara-

in “real time” allowing various levels of -

-

__

T M F H . These tanks are typical of those used in pretreatment of waste water at GMs assembly plants to remove industrial wastes before the water is discbalged into the community sewer system,

tion, hazardous material shipping paper preparation, hazardous materials identification, and drum handling. If the need arises as new regulations are issued, the programs can be modified.

Emplqye Healtb and Safety

for the protection of employe health and safety, such as the Hazardous Materials Control Committees (HMCCs) at GM facilities, are coordinated by the Industrial Relations StaE Each HMCC coordinates and reviews local use of waste materials and procedures for preventing and responding to chemical incidents. Local Health and Safety Com- mittees (comprised of the local union health and safety representatives and their management counterparts) also participate in HMCC activities. Especially noteworthy has been the joint leadership of the UAW-GM Health and Safety Center in coordinating and providing training on hazardous materials for over 300,000 GM employes at 150 locations.

GM Studies GM has evaluated many technologies

related to waste, including biotechnology This approach involves exposing fish or other aquatic nrganisms to samples of industrial or municipal effluents to determine both short-term (acute) and long- term (chronic) adverse effects. The results of the tests are used along with chemical data to determine appropriate monitoring and control requirements for a specific discharge.

of biomonitoring programs in several states. Because the tests used by state agencies are often time consuming and expensive, EAS has actively investigated alternative test procedures. One test of interest to EAS, which can be carried

Hazardous-material control programs

GM has assisted in the development

out in less than an hour, uses lumines- cent bacteria to determine acute toxicity EAS is continuing to study other biomonitoring systems.

Scientists in the Environmental Sci- ence Department of the GM Research Laboratories are conducting experi- ments to further their understanding of underground contamination. They are focusing on methods for physical and chemical treatment of underground contamination, methods for enhancing the natural bacterial biodegradation of petroleum products underground, and theoretical modeling to predict the migration of contaminants through the subsurface.

Engineers at GM’s Advanced Engineer- ing Staff are developing a process for waste management of plastic composite panels from vehicles. The process, called pyrolysis, is an old technology that involves decomposing materials under extreme heat in the absence of oxygen. The engineers are applying the process to sheet molding compound (SMC), which is used for the large exterior panels of GM’s new line of minivans. Materials recovered from the process can be recycled. So h, results are encouraging, but further testing and evaluation are required before the process can he considered a viable means of waste management for SMC.

GM’S Disposal Control GM’s disposal activities are controlled

to minimize future liability The sites are evaluated paying particular attention to permit-compliance status and oper- ational practices at the site.

ported by the Waste Management Services Group, EAS, Legal, and Finan- cial (Risk Management) Staffs, selects,

The Materials Management Staff, sup-

negotiates, and finalizes corporate contracts with only those waste-management firms that meet GM criteria. An adequate number of qualified sites and firms were evaluated by mid-1989 and, since December 1989, all GM plants in the US. requiring off-site disposal of wastes are using only sites covered by corporate contracts.

Wmte Minimizatiore An important objective in designing

and operating manufacturing processes is to maximize the cost-effective use of materials and energy resources, thereby minimizing waste generation. Since 1980, increased waste-disposal costs and Superfund liability have added impetus to corporate efforts to reduce waste generated by manufacturing processes. Further, waste minimization is a legal requirement under HSWA because the law mandates reduction of toxicity and/or volume of waste at the source of generation.

Manufacturing changes that reduce the quantity or toxicity of waste include substitution of raw materials with less toxic materials (e.g., low-lead paint), improvements in material-use efficien- cies to reduce losses of waste substances (e.g., improved paint-transfer efficiency), and materials recovery or recycling from waste streams (e.g., solvent recovery).

zation are: improved de-watering of sludges, reduction of fluoride use in certain foundries, installation of energy- recovery waste incinerators (Baltimore (Md), k e d s (Mo), and Lordstom- (Ohio) plants), and improved drum- management programs including replacement of drums with bulk containers.

A Clean Environment General Motors has a firm commit-

ment to minimizing and controlling waste that it generates and any hazardous materials that it uses. These efforts will continue unabated in the future.

Other examples of GM waste minimi-

32

Corporation. Dr. Ancker-Johnson’s doc- torate is in experimental physics from Tuebingen University, Germany Her B.A. degree in physics is from Wellesley College. She was engaged in research at RCA, GTE, and Boeing. Dr. Ancker- Johnson’s assignments at Boeing included managing Advanced Energy Systems. She was also an A€filiate Pro- fessor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Washington for six years. Her executive positions in government included Director of Physical Research at Argonne National Laboratory and Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology at the US. Department of Commerce.

W When was the Environmental Activities S&@ formed? Dr. Ancker-Johnson: GM has been deeply involved in environmental and safety issues for many years. EAS was started back in February 1971 when it became obvious to GM that it needed a staff to deal with product safety and environmental regulatory matters. I joined the Corporation as vice president in 1979. Since that time, the number and complexity of rules and regulations has escalated enormously Pioneering in office automation has helped us keep our heads above water and continues to do so.

How tk the stqflorganized? Dr. Ancker-Johnson: EAS is GM’s central resource for information, policies, and actions concerning the environment - that‘s obvious from our name - but we’re also a resource for he1 economy and vehicle safety We are the principal spokesperson for the Cor-

poration on engineerindscientific matters to local, state, and federal agencies.

If I were to characterize the mission

i f the various EAS departments in one word for each, I’d say that Safety Engi- leering’s mission is uduocucy They are iur advocates on safety matters within he Corporation and with government igencies. Emission Control’s mission is ;oordination of auto emission and fuel :conomy regulatory activity in the Cor- >oration. International Regulations 5umonizes regulations. That means Norking to eliminate nontariff trade bar- lers associated with dissimilar regula- ions among countries. Their technical iaison with officials of foreign govern- nents is aimed at encouraging these :ountries to issue new regulations that ire both technically sound and cost :ffective.

n the sense that it helps people in the Ilants to meet air and water regula- ions and safely dispose of wastes. rhese engineers and scientists work ery hard to make certain that our plants Ire knowledgeable about environmental aws and regulations, as well as human :oncerns, of the communities in which hey’re located. Environmental laws on >lant emissions and discharges aren’t dentical across the country. Our plant mvironment people recognize the dif- erences and ensure that every plant is iware of the federal, state, and local ules of its own community

Plant Environment’s mission is control

,

Technical Services, like Automotive Emission Control, has a coordinating mission. They’re a support group for the staff, but they also do an immense amount of work for the Corporation in areas like developing copy for automobile owners’ manuals. They coordinated the development of a new laser- etching method for putting bar codes on vehicle identification number, or VIN, plates for 1990 vehicles. The change was made in response to California Air Resources Board regulations requiring machine-readable bar codes for vehicle emissions inspections. These bar codes also help GM in tracking operations in the plants and in logistics checks between the plants and dealers.

departments are involved in much more than a one-word characterization sug- gests, but it‘s a handy way to think of them.

I ought to add that all of the

Internuti& Regulations is a broad term. What does that department do? Dr. Ancker-Johnson: They do a lot of what the other product-oriented departments do, but on an international basis. I mentioned harmonization of regulations as a key activity of theirs. But another significant activity is homologa- tion - a buzz word for what this department does to help the divisions sell North American vehicles overseas. Start- ing with the vehicle in the clay model

MICHIGAN AIR POLLUTION CON- TROL COMMISSION MEElTNG. The Assistant Director for Air and Water Pbllution Control (seated in front of tbe flag) in EAS Plant Environment Departmentbusbeenamemberof tbe Michgan Air Pollution Control Commission for many yeam. He was named to the commission as a representative of indushy by the Governor of Michgan. In matters inmlving General Motors, be ab- stainsmmpartic@ation. The commission reviews and approves environmental regulations andpermits for air emission sources. It is one of many federal, state, or local activities to which EAS engineers and scientists contribute their eaprtise in dealing with safety and environmental concerns.

stage, they follow the entire development and engineering process, making sure that it accommodates overseas regulations. When the vehicle is ready for sale, the International Regulations team handles what‘s called the “general type approval” process to get the vehicles approved by overseas governments. They coordinate vehicle testing with foreign officials who actually witness the tests. They prepare docu- mentation to show that the vehicle meets the requirements of a particular country and can be approved for sale.

To aid in these efforts, the Interna- tional Regulations department has cata- loged the world’s automotive safety and environmental regulations in a computer database that is available to corporate users. To explain foreign regulations requires incorporating a lot of graphics. That makes it a little harder to computerize. Thanks to EAS’ sophisti- cated computer systems, International Regulations has been able to take these data, including the graphics, and store them electronically GM is the only auto manufacturer to computerize these data. That gives us a considerable competitive advantage.

W How does EAS interact with others in the Corporation? Dr. Ancker-Johnson: We cut across the whole Corporation because regulations affect GM everywhere, from our

34

products to our processes to our plants. We’re deeply involved with the vehicle from the beginning of the design through engineering and manufacturing, to the service and warranty of the fin- ished product. In the beginning of a new design, for example, our safety people work with designers to assure that the final product will meet the regulations. We have someone in liaison with each of the car platforms looking at the safety issues.

We work with Legal Staff in routine regulatory activities and assist them in dealing with court cases involving regulatory matters. Because the Industry-Government Relations Staff also interacts with elected and other government officials, we’re in close contact with them on all technology-based matters.

These corporation-wide activities improve GMs effectiveness by helping it remain in compliance with government regulations and thus avoid fines, recalls, or other penalties. Occasionally, EAS’ participation in the team effort to employ environmentally beneficial technologies pays handsome dividends. One example is the GM paint solvent emission compliance strategy for high- volume spray paint systems, which depends heavily on highly efficient spray equipment that saves hundreds of millions of dollars per year in material cost.

How do you interact with people outside the Corporation? Dr. AnckerJohnson We’re continu- ally communicating and negotiating

with regulatory agencies and explaining regulatory matters to the public. Our experts are often interviewed or asked to provide the news media with information on events at our plants or involving our products. We meet frequently with environmental advocates to explain our positions and listen to theirs.

PLANTEWVTRONMENEU R E I T . . W envimn- mental auditors” EAS’ Plant Audit Group are collecting information so tbey can determine wbetber a prticularplant location is being operated in an environmentally com- pliant manner: Thepor- tabcecorryncterisusedto call uppertinent regulations. % Plant Audit

divisional, andplant management with an evaluution of actual e n ” e n t a l a m d i m at each manufacturing facility % auditors’ work! involves reoieur‘ng plant “ds,pmcedum, and test data, in &i- tion to obseruing actual plant opnzting situations.

EAS staff members give testimony in Congress and participate in hearings by regulatory agencies. In addition, we’re constantly in contact with the scientific community in this country and abroad. We meet with experts in our own dis- ciplines, present papers at engineering,‘ scientific society meetings, participate

The following laws and related regulations which involve four departments of the Environmental Activities Staff are an indication of the variety and scope of regulatory matters they deal with.

AUTOMOTILZ SAFETY I3VG-G

US. National Traffic and Motor Vehicle

Safety Act (1966) Motor Vehicle Information and Cost

Savings Act (1972) Federal Boat Safety Act ( 1971 ) Consumer Product Safety Act ( 1971 ) Federal Hazardous Substances Act

Flammable Fabrics Act (1953) Poison Prevention Packaging Act

Refrigerator Safety Act (1956) Radiation Control for Health and

(1960)

(1970)

Safety Act (1968)

Calzada Motor Vehicle Safety Act (1970) Motor Vehicle Tire Safety Act (1977)

AUTOMOTILZ EMISSION C0”OL

US. Energy Policy and Conservation Act

’The National Energy Conservation

The Automobile Fuel Efficiency Act

Energy Tax Act (1978) Clean Air Act (1968) California Health & safety Code (1966) Inspection Maintenance (California, -

Oxygenated Fuel (Arizona, Colorado,

Stage I1 (California, 1973) Fuel Volatility (California, 1986 -

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone

(1975)

Policy Act (1978)

(1980) __

1968 -Federal, 1972)

1985 )

Northeastern States, 1989)

(1988)

in a wide variety of US. government 3oards and studies, and so forth.

I H o w does the regulatoryprocess work? Dr. Ancke!~Johnson Initially the reg- ilatory agency issues an Advance \Totice of Proposed Rule Making, or WRM. This is only a proposal to con- ;ider a rule and to collect technological acts. It will give some rationale for the ule and request comments fi-om inter- :sted parties. At EAS, we study the WRM, talk to others around the Zorporation who have an interest in it, md develop a GM position on it. We ;end our comments to the originating igenq The agency digests our com- nene and those fi-om others concerned vith the rule. Then they may issue mother ANPRM, but they're more likely o issue a Notice of Proposed Rule vlaking, or NPRM. That provides a spe- :ific proposed regulation. If the matter s controversial, the agency may hold

hearings to which we send our experts to testify;

Almost as important to us as the actual wording of a proposed rule are the test procedures used to determine compliance. It's vital that everyone understands the correct test procedures and follows them accurately So we expend a lot of effort with the government agency to define test procedures. Although the process I just described refers to the US., we follow a similar procedure in handling foreign rulemaking activities.

How doyou handle recat%? Dr. AnckerJohnson Recalls are used by government agencies primarily as an incentive to assure that manufacturers design and build vehicles that meet standards in customer service. An important part of our job is to expedite a recall if it's justified and try avoid one if we think it's not justified.

There is a point of ethics here that I

want to emphasize in connection with emission recalls. That's the cost to society Often the cost of emission recalls,' in terms of dollars, safety risk, and inconvenience to the vehicle owner, outweighs any benefit to the atmosphere. In emissions cases, where technical non-compliance can be a matter of an incredibly small deviation fi-om the standard, costly litigation often arises. That happens because recalls are the only alternative. The stage is set for confi-on- tation. That's why we urge regulators to consider all the hctors involved - engineering factors, ethics, and common sense - before resorting to an emission recall.

Over the years, EAS has investigated and developed several alternatives to emission recalls. In 1986, for example, GM settled a recall dispute with the Environmental Protection Agency by agreeing to give New York City the use of six methanol-fueled buses for three years and to sell up to 26 more to the

Zanudu :lean Air Act (1979) bluntary Fuel Economy Targets ( 1978)

PLAh'TEIIWROh5lf.ENT KS. iARA (Superfund Amendments and

;afe Drinking Water (1974/1986) bbestos Hazard Emergency Response

(1986 Title 11) :ERCL4 (Comprehensive Environ-

mental Response, Compensa- tion, and Liability Act - 1980)

iolid Waste Disposal (1965/1980) lazardous Materials Transportation Act tesource Conservation and Recovery

Act :lean Air Act :lean Water Act bxic Substances Control Act (1978) Joise (Hearing Conservation) hergy Conservation Act Wild and Scenic Rivers Act lndangered Species Act :ederal Insecticide Fungicide and

Rodenticide Act

Reauthorization Act)

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Coastal Zone Management Act Global Greenhouse Warming Preven-

Water Resources Planning Act Marine Protection, Research and

National Global Change Act (1988) National Historic Preservation Act

OSHA (Occupational Safety and

Canada Occupational Health and Safety Act Environmental Assessment Act Consolidated Hearings Act Clean Air Act Ontario Water Resources Act Canadian Environmental Protection

Canada Water Act Dangerous Goods Transportation Act Gasoline Handling Act Municipal Act (Nuisance, Noise, Litter,

and Garbage) Environmental Contaminants Act Fisheries Act

tion Act (1988)

Sanctuaries Act

(1966)

Health Act)

Act

INT..ATIONAL REGULATIONS

International Japanese Ministry of Transport (MOT)

Standards. 42 Vehicle Standards GCC (Gulf Co-operation Council)

Standard (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain). 25 Vehicle Standards

Saudi Arabia Standards Organization (SASO). 31 Vehicle Standards

Economic Commission for Europe (ECE). 49 Regulations

European Economic Commission (EEC). 70 Directives

European National Regulations. 1,455 Regulations

US. Noise Control Act (1972) FCC Rules & Regulations Part 15

Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard

CMVSS 1106 -Noise Department of Communications

Radio Act

35

New York Transit Authority at the price of similar diesel buses.

W How do you see your rok in ERT? Dr. Ancker;Johnson: The high level of competence in this Staff means that I don’t have to spend time looking over people’s shoulders. They know their jobs and they do them well. That frees me to deal with broader issues.

Part of my job is to increase GM’s credibility on environmental and safety matters. I want the world to see GM as the company it is: one with integrity and an earnest desire for a quality global environment. In pursuit of this goal, I work through a number of professional organizations, government organizations, environmental groups, industry groups, and the like.

An organization of particular interest to me right now is the World Environ- ment Center In May 1?88J I was mmed chairman of its board of directors. The goal of the center is to help developing nations with their industrial growth in a way that does not damage the environment. A number of multinational corpo- rations belong to it. We meet with officials of developing nations to talk over problems and consider solutions The center also sends industrial and consulting volunteers to work on specific environmental concerns at the request of the host nation. You might call it an industrial Peace Corps.

A CATALOG OF THE WORLDSAUTOMOZTE

MEhZ2.C REGULATIONS. ERS’Intemationul Rela- tions Department (IR) has m t e d an electronic database of the rules, regulations and laws throughout the world that affect automotive design andpe$m“?ace. With this database, IR personnel can respond quickly and accurately to any regulatory concerns of design-respon- siblepeople tbmughout GM.

W E T Y A N D EVWRON-

Another recent overseas activity involved my appointment to serve on the United States Antarctic Program Safety Review Panel in 1987. The panel, which was under the direction of the National Science Foundation, undertook a comprehensive safety and environmental review of US. Antarctic operations. Our panel was made up of seven experts in science, space, medicine and the environment. I was the only representative from industry We made two trips to the Antarctic, one in December 1987 and the other in February 1988. We wanted to look at the environment at the South Pole and other US. Antarctic stations because more than 1,200 Americans work there each year in the US. Antarctic Program. That‘s bound to have an impact on a fkagile environment. Our report on the results of the study included a number of environmental suggestions. The latter were all accepted by the director of the National Science Foundation and funding to implement them was apprwd by the Office of Management and Budget.

The NSF director asked me to join him in meeting with representatives from several environmentalist groups that had special concerns about the Antarctic. We explained to them what the situation was there and what we hoped could be done about it. This

was a useful encounter because it gave me an opportunity to sit down with people who are often critical of GM and to interact with them in a dikrent way

H What are your goals for b e .future of EAS? Dr. AnckerJohnson: EAS will continue to work diligently making every effort to see that we get the best regulations possible. And by “best” regulations, I mean best from the viewpoint of society- regulations that will provide a benefit in terms of the health and safety of people and improvement of the environment, and at a reasonable cost. And we will continue to he4 all parts of GM to comply with those regulations.

In our activities outside GM, we will continue to work on reducing the adversarial relationships that have developed in this country in the regulatory arena. It seems to me that people from government, environmental groups, and industry ought to be able to sit dawn together and talk about environmental issues of major importance in a nonad- versarial atmosphere. One reason for my optimism is that the leaders of the so-called “Big Ten Environmental Groups” are highly educated, sophisti- cated people. And, a lot of bright young engineers and scientists who care about the environment are being graduated from our universities. I believe that if you bring together experts to discuss a subject in a public forum, there’ll be good give and take. They have to understand our problems better - if we don’t make a profit, a lot of people may lose jobs - and we need to understand their major concerns better. We don’t need to be adversaries.

What EAS does affects the way that governments and people- here and abroad-look at General Motors. One major goal of EAS is to help them see GM as a corporation that sincerely cares about safety and the environment.

-

~

-

'RINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

~ I N T E o

us.+.

Earth Day 1990: General Motors Marks 20 Years

of Environmental Progress

At General Motors, we recognize the effects that cars and their manufacture have on the environment. We understand the relationship better than any other carmaker in the world.

Science, technology, and engineering are the tools of our business. In recent decades, GM has brought all these resources to bear on the environment, to the benefit of the planet and our current and our future customers.

Since clean air became a national goal, we have substantially reduced exhaust emissions from our cars and trucks- hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide are down by 96%’ nitrogen oxides by 76%.

The fuel economy of GM cars has increased 130% since the mid-’70s-average weight has been reduced by 27%, aerodynamic efficiency improved by one-third, and the rolling resistance of tires cut by half.

GM’s Impact concept car is the highest- performing electric vehicle in existence, and it is the first with the potential to meet the safety standards for a production vehicle.

Our solar-powered Sunraycer won the 1,950-mile World Solar Challenge in Australia, and we are sponsoring Sunrayce USA to further academic investigation into solar energy

GM sponsored the Methanol Marathon to promote study of alternative fuels in colleges and universities in the U.S. and Canada; we are currently operating a test fleet of methanol-powered cars in California.

Today’s GM cars and trucks are far more compatible with the environment than their predecessors were twenty years ago. Throughout the corporation, research is

under way to make our next generation of vehicles even better: to increase battery power and endurance, to improve catalysts, to reduce weight and raise fuel efficiency.

Our dedication to environmental improvement has been applied with similar success to the process of building GM cars and trucks.

We have reduced plant emissions and made more efficient use of energy in all of our facilities. J We are using electrical energy more efficiently

in our plants-since 1972, we’ve reduced usage by 44% per vehicle produced.

rf The use of new paints has lowered hydrocarbon emissions a t our assembly plants by 70% since 1977. GM is committed to using non-CFC air conditioners in all our vehicles by 1996, and we are eliminating CFCs from manufacturing processes as quickly as possible.

Around the world, GM people are using their talents to advance our understanding of the complex interac- tion between man and nature, to identify problems and develop solutions. J In December 1989, GM Espana received the

first National Award for Environmental Man- agement from Spain’s Ministry of Industry and Energy

J GM’s Ope1 division was the first manufacturer to put catalytic converters on all its cars sold in Germany

J In the U. K., GM is leading the effort to promote the use of unleaded gasoline.

This year, people throughout GM-in our plants, our offices, and our laboratories - are showing their support for Earth Day 1990.

__

Chevrol e t Pontiac Oldsmobile Buick Cadillac GMC Truck

General Motors And The Environment - InfoHouseinfohouse.p2ric.org/ref/27/26792.pdf · on a variety...

Documents

Transcript of General Motors And The Environment - InfoHouseinfohouse.p2ric.org/ref/27/26792.pdf · on a variety...