You are here

electric vehicles

ASLEF: Bang Goes the Government’s Green Agenda!

By Keith Richmond - Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen, May 10, 2023

ASLEF, the train drivers’ union, has slammed the government’s decision to approve the use of longer lorries on Britain’s roads.

Mick Whelan, ASLEF’s general secretary, said: ‘There goes this government’s green agenda! We need to move more goods – as well as more people – off Britain’s roads and onto electrified rail if we are to have any hope of hitting our CO2 targets.

‘To encourage the use of longer, heavier, lorries will only mean more emissions, more deadly particles in the air that we breathe, and more danger – with the six extra feet, deadly tail swing, and a bigger area at the rear end when the truck is turning – for pedestrians, cyclists, and people in cars. It will mean more accidents, more injuries, and more deaths on our roads.

‘The government – which always bends its knee to the road lobby – claims it will mean more goods can be transported by fewer vehicles. In fact it will mean the same number of heavy goods vehicles on our roads – just longer, heavier, and more dangerous HGVs.’

Mick added: ‘This is, I’m afraid, a regressive, rather than progressive, measure. A retrograde step. Rather than permitting longer, and more dangerous, lorries, the government should be encouraging more freight to move to rail which we all know is a more efficient, safer, cleaner, and more environmentally friendly alternative.

‘Each freight train removes 129 lorries from our roads. We need more freight hubs right across the country so we let the train take the strain for the long haul, and then switch the goods to shorter, and more modern, electric vehicles for the last few miles. That’s the sort of forward-thinking, integrated, green transport system we need for the 21st century.’

RMT slams government plans for longer lorries

By staff - National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, May 10, 2023

LOGISTICS UNION RMT slammed the government over plans to permit longer lorries to travel on UK roads despite the climate emergency and the managed decline of rail. There have also been widespread warnings that the move will increase the number of fatal road accidents.

Under government plans the lorries will be a maximum of 2.05 metres longer than the current standard sized trailer meaning lorries over 18.5 metres in length. 

The longer lorries have been trialled since 2011 and there are about 3,000 already on the roads, but from May 31 any business in England, Scotland or Wales will be able to use them.

RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said that it was completely baffling that the government had made the announcement on longer lorries despite the fact that the climate emergency was accelerating and the increasingly obvious managed decline of the rail including the freight sector. 

“Rail freight is the most sustainable and environmentally friendly way to move freight but instead over recent years what we are seeing on our railways is cutting investment, slashing services and staff numbers, scrapping and downgrading vital infrastructure projects and rewarding failed private train operators with lucrative contract extensions. 

“If this government was serious about tackling the climate emergency, they would recognise the critical importance of rail freight to reducing carbon emissions and commit to a historic mass investment in this sector to ensure the UK meets its legally binding climate targets,” he said.

Building a Democratic Energy Future: Lithium Extractivism and North-South Inequalities

The “Electrify Everything” Movement’s Consumption Problem

By Amy Westervelt - The Intercept, May 8, 2023

In 2019, Thea Riofrancos was splitting her time between researching the social and environmental impacts of lithium mining in Chile and organizing for a rapid energy transition away from fossil fuels in the United States. A political science professor at Providence College and member of the Climate and Community Project, Riofrancos was struck by the contrast: Lithium is essential to the batteries that make electric vehicles and renewable energy work, but mining inflicts its own environmental damage. “Here I am in Chile, in the Atacama Desert, seeing these mining-related harms, and then there I go in the U.S. advocating for a rapid transition. How do I align these two goals?” Riofrancos said. “And is there a way to have a less extractive energy transition?”

When she went looking for research that would help answer that question, she found none, at least not for the transportation sector, which was her area of focus. “I saw forecast after forecast that assumed basically a binary of the future,” she said. “Either we stay with the fossil fuel status quo and the existential crisis that that is causing for the planet and all of its people. Or we transition to an electrified, renewably powered future, but that doesn’t really change anything about how these sectors or economic activities are organized.”

Riofrancos wanted to look at multiple ways to design an electrified future and understand what the costs and impacts of different scenarios might be. So she linked up with other Climate and Community Project researchers and put together a report mapping out four potential pathways to electrification for the transportation sector. Titled “Achieving Zero Emissions With More Mobility and Less Mining,” the report concluded that even relatively small, easy-to-achieve shifts like reducing the size of cars and their batteries could deliver big returns: a 42 percent reduction in the amount of lithium needed in the U.S., even if the number of cars on the road and the frequency with which people drive stayed the same.

It’s the sort of thing politicians and electrification advocates need to think through now, when decisions can be made to guide the energy transition in one direction or another. It’s also critical to an underdiscussed component of climate action: demand for products and services and the role energy plays in fulfilling those demands. Which connects right up to another topic that American politicians don’t want to touch with a 10-foot pole: consumption.

UAW Holds Off on Endorsing Biden in Bid to Secure Just EV Transition

By Kenny Stancil - Common Dreams, May 4, 2023

"We need to get our members organized behind a pro-worker, pro-climate, and pro-democracy political program that can deliver for the working class," says a memo from the union's new president.

The United Auto Workers is withholding its endorsement of U.S. President Joe Biden in the early stages of the 2024 race in an attempt to extract concessions that would ensure the nascent transition to all-electric vehicles benefits labor as well as the environment.

"We need to get our members organized behind a pro-worker, pro-climate, and pro-democracy political program that can deliver for the working class," says a memo written by UAW president Shawn Fain and shared internally on Tuesday.

Fain, an electrician from Indiana, won a March runoff election to lead the Detroit-based union, defeating incumbent Ray Curry of the powerful Administration Caucus in a major upset. Fain's victory, one of several in which challengers from the insurgent Members United slate prevailed, gave reformers control of UAW's direction. The new president quickly promised a more confrontational approach, decrying "give-back unionism" and vowing to "put the members back in the driver's seat, regain the trust of the rank and file, and put the companies on notice."

A reinvigorated UAW is also putting Biden on notice by holding onto its coveted endorsement. With 400,000 active members and a heavy presence in the battleground state of Michigan, the union remains a significant political force. Its goal is to pressure Biden into improving federal policies related to electric vehicle (EV) manufacturing.

"The federal government is pouring billions into the electric vehicle transition, with no strings attached and no commitment to workers," Fain wrote in his new memo. "The EV transition is at serious risk of becoming a race to the bottom. We want to see national leadership have our back on this before we make any commitments."

As The New York Timesreported Wednesday:

In April, the Biden administration proposed the nation's most ambitious climate regulations yet, which would ensure that two-thirds of new passenger cars are all-electric by 2032—up from just 5.8% today. The rules, if enacted, could sharply lower planet-warming pollution from vehicle tailpipes, the nation's largest source of greenhouse emissions. But they come with costs for autoworkers, because it takes fewer than half the laborers to assemble an all-electric vehicle as it does to build a gasoline-powered car.

But it's not just potential job losses that are of concern to UAW leaders. They also want to see higher wages and better benefits for workers at EV facilities.

Why do Alabama politicians want to PUNISH you for having an electric car?

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Implementation Guide

By staff - Blue Green Alliance, April 24, 2023

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act together provide billions of dollars to states, local governments, and private entities to support transportation decarbonization through the installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, or EV supply equipment (EVSE). States—even when not the direct grantees or program administrators—have the capability to shape what these historic EV charging infrastructure provisions mean for the workers and communities impacted by the infrastructure, manufacturing facilities, and new job opportunities that come with them.

This guide supports states seeking to maximize the employment and economic benefits that can accompany EV charging infrastructure provisions in the BIL and Inflation Reduction Act.

Download a copy of this publication here (link).

Employment Creation through Green Locomotive Manufacturing at Wabtec’s Erie, Pennsylvania Facility

By Gregor Semieniuk and Robert Pollin - Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), April 2023

This report estimates the prospects for job creation through expanding green locomotive manufacturing at the Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies (Wabtec) Corporation’s Lawrence Park facility in Erie, Pennsylvania. We consider the employment effects of three types of green locomotive manufacturing activities at Wabtec’s Lawrence Park site: 1) Tier 4 diesel-electric locomotives; 2) battery-electric locomotives without onsite battery production and 3) battery electric manufacturing with onsite battery production.

We estimate employment creation under 2 scenarios: an initial Phase 1, in which Wabtec produces 500 green locomotives per year at Lawrence Park and a Phase 2 in which production at Lawrence Park expands to 1,000 green locomotives per year. As of 2008, Wabtec had been producing locomotives at the Phase 2 level of about 1,000 locomotives per year. Phase 2 would therefore just return the Lawrence Plant facility to its earlier level of manufacturing activity.

We estimate that by producing 1,000 green locomotives per year at Lawrence Park, employment creation would range as follows, depending on which specific locomotive production activities are operating at the plant:

  • 3,400 – 5,100 jobs at Lawrence Park itself;
  • 3,060 – 5,100 jobs in Erie County outside of Lawrence Park;
  • 9,860 – 14,960 in the U.S. economy overall.

About 800 people are currently employed at Lawrence Park directly involved in locomotive production. Expanding production to 1,000 locomotives per year would therefore produce a net increase in employment at the facility by between roughly 2,600 – 4,300 workers.

Expanding green locomotive manufacturing production at Wabtec’s Lawrence Park facility will produce major gains in employment conditions in Erie County. This will be true both through the increase in the number of job opportunities relative to the 126,000 people that currently comprise the area’s labor market, and through the relatively high compensation levels associated with jobs at the Lawrence Park facility itself.

Download a copy of this publication here (PDF).

The Lithium Problem: An Interview with Thea Riofrancos

By Alyssa Battistoni and Thea Riofrancos - Dissent, Spring 2023

Can we rapidly reduce carbon emissions while minimizing the damage caused by resource extraction?

After years of outright climate denial and political intransigence, the development of renewable energy is finally underway. When it comes to transportation—the number one source of U.S. carbon emissions—the strategy for decarbonization has focused heavily on replacing gas-powered cars with rechargeable electric vehicles. The Inflation Reduction Act offers billions of dollars of subsidies for both producers and consumers of EVs, including a $7,500 tax credit for buying new EVs made in the United States. The infrastructure bill passed in late 2021 included $5 billion to help states build a network of EV recharging stations. New York and California have announced bans on the sale of vehicles with internal combustion engines beginning in 2035. Half of this year’s Superbowl car ads touted electric vehicles. By 2030, it is estimated that electric vehicles will make up half of U.S. car sales.

For our reliance on privatized transportation to remain the same, everything else will have to change. We’re already seeing concerns about shortages of “critical minerals” necessary for batteries and other renewable technologies. Based on current consumption patterns, for example, U.S. demand for the lithium used in batteries would require three times the existing global supply—which comes primarily from Australia, Latin America, and China—by 2050. In anticipation of booming demand, a flurry of new mining operations has begun around the world—and so have protests by those worried that mines will disturb ecosystems, contaminate water supplies, generate toxic waste, and disrupt local livelihoods.

What does the current trajectory of the “green energy transition” mean for global environmental justice? What other options are there? Is it possible to rapidly reduce carbon emissions while also minimizing extraction and maintaining—or even increasing—people’s ability to move freely and safely?

A new report from the think tank Climate and Community Project presents the data behind different visions of the green future. A scenario in which the United States reduces car dependency by improving public transit options, density, and walkability could see a 66 percent decrease in lithium demand compared to a business-as-usual model. Even just reducing the size of U.S. vehicles and batteries could potentially reduce lithium use by as much as 42 percent in 2050. In other words, the choices Americans make about domestic transportation, housing, and development matter worldwide. In this interview, the report’s lead author, political scientist Thea Riofrancos, explains the implications of its findings for climate and environmental politics in the United States and around the planet.

We Uncovered the Gory Truth Behind Elon Musk's Texas Takeover

Pages

The Fine Print I:

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.

Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.

The Fine Print II:

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.

It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.