California has passed stringent new rules to limit emissions from diesel-fueled locomotive engines, putting the state on track to implement the most ambitious regulations on high-polluting railways in the country.
The landmark step taken by the California Air Resources Board (Carb), which regulates California’s air quality, requires the phase-out of inefficient locomotive engines more than 23 years old by 2030, increase the use of zero-emissions technology to transport freight from ports and throughout rail yards, and bans diesel-spewing engines from idling for longer than 30 minutes.
In the hours before the unanimous vote, dozens of environmental justice advocates and community members spoke in support of the rules, highlighting the heartbreaking burden placed on frontline communities who have been left to grapple with higher rates of asthma, cancer and other devastating health effects, along with the relentless rumbling that shakes neighborhoods along the tracks.
“We are fighting for air,” Gemma Pena Zeragoza, a resident from San Bernardino, tearfully told the board. Others shared stories of children forced to share inhalers, a kindergartener who couldn’t physically keep up with her love of running and family members lost to respiratory illnesses.
According to California regulators, diesel emissions are responsible for some 70% of Californians’ cancer risk from toxic air pollution. The rule would curb emissions on a class of engines that annually release more than 640 tons of tiny pollutants that can enter deep into a person’s lungs and worsen asthma, along with nearly 30,000 tons of smog-forming emissions known as nitrogen oxides. Carb analysts project a 90% reduction in local cancer risks in the decades following implementation.
The rule would also drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions from locomotives by an amount akin to removing all heavy-duty trucks from the state by 2030.
“It’s going to be groundbreaking and it’s going to address the diesel crisis that’s been poisoning communities near railyards for literal decades,” said Yasmine Agelidis, a lawyer with environmental non-profit Earthjustice.
Still, some advocates had hoped for more. After years of pushing for stronger regulations, many emphasized that there’s more to be done, including narrowing the time locomotives can be left to idle and hastening the transition to cleaner railways.
“I wish we could do more – but this is a good first step,” said John Balmes, a board member, before the vote, calling the rule the biggest single thing that could be done for public health and the environment.
California also still has to get authorization from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to move forward with the rule, but regulators aren’t worried.
“We are talking to them and getting positive feedback from them that we are on the right path with this regulation,” said Hector De La Torre, another board member, during Thursday’s meeting.
Representatives of the rail industry who spoke before the board pushed back against the proposal, saying that the accelerated timeline wasn’t feasible.. “Currently there is no clear path to zero-emissions locomotives,” a spokesperson for Union Pacific said during the meeting, adding that infrastructure and capacity for the shift is inadequate. The company has given itself a longer runway to transition, aiming to achieve net-zero by 2050.
The Association of American Railroads, an organization that represents all major freight railroads across North America, echoed those concerns about mandating a swifter transition, saying in a statement that it “ignores the complexity and interconnected nature of railroad operations and the reality of where zero-emission locomotive technology and the supporting infrastructure stand”.
after newsletter promotion
The organization has also been outspoken about how essential and efficient freight railway is at transporting goods – especially as online orders continue to rise. “It would have taken approximately 3.5m additional trucks to handle the 63.8m tons of freight that originated by rail in California in 2021,” the organization said.
Wayne Winegarden, a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute, added the rule would be expensive for rail companies and increased costs will mean higher prices for many goods that move by rail.
But residents who live near railroads and have borne the brunt of breathing toxins say they have waited for clean air long enough.
Heidi Swillinger, who lives in a mobile home park in San Pablo, a small city in the San Francisco Bay Area, along the BNSF Railway, estimates that her home is just 20ft from the tracks. She said it’s not uncommon for diesel fumes to fill her house, resulting in a “thick, acrid, dirty smell”.
“Nobody wants to live next to a railroad track,” Swillinger said. “You move next to a railroad track because you don’t have other options.”
The Associated Press contributed to this story