California’s latest plan to fight climate change is now fully on the road. The state is moving forward with its Replacement Tire Efficiency Program.
That program sets minimum efficiency standards for replacement tires sold in the state to reduce fuel and electricity use while saving drivers money.
“The new rules are going to mean that when people replace the tires when they get older, or they get a flat tire, they’re going to get options that are going to all be a lot more fuel efficient,” Laura Deehan, state director for Environment California, told Straight Arrow.
Some of the tire industry has pushed back on this plan. Especially Goodyear, which said these new rules could eliminate 70% of replacement tire models currently manufactured.
Download the Straight Arrow app today to get the stories that matter free from manipulation, bias or agenda.™
Point phone camera here
New plan
The goal of this plan is to put more energy-efficient tires on the roughly 35 million cars driving the streets of the Golden State.
“Right now, it’s really very difficult or impossible even for consumers to know how the energy efficiency of their tires will be when buying them,” Brian Fadie, senior state policy manager with the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, told Straight Arrow. “There’s no rating system. There’s no public database.”
The California Energy Commission (CEC) estimates drivers will save $179 in fuel costs over a four-year lifespan of replacement tires. Those savings would come from using less gas.
With electric vehicles, the new mandate will help reduce the state’s electricity demand, which is the highest in the country.
“This is a low-hanging fruit policy to help address a little bit of the strain on the electric grid by making electric vehicles more efficient and reducing how much electricity they need to consume,” Fadie said.
The CEC also estimates that each replacement set of tires will cost approximately $26 more per set, with average net savings of more than $150.
That means that higher upfront cost would pay for itself in about half a year.
Beyond the consumer benefits, it’ll also benefit the environment in a state known for smog.
“It’s going to reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and also air pollution, the equivalent of about 400,000 gasoline cars,” Deehan said. “It’s like taking 400,000 gasoline cars off the road. So really, quite dramatic improvements.”
When it comes to winter tires designed for more grip on snow or icy roads, they are exempt from this new plan as are motorcycle tires and tires made especially for emergency vehicles.
Industry pushback
While most tire manufacturers acknowledged the good intentions behind this move from California, most have also shared their concerns.
Goodyear’s Bret Gladfelty spoke directly to the CEC and warned that the cost of these new, more efficient tires could actually be much higher than what the commission estimated. He said it could be hundreds of dollars more.
That goes along with potentially eliminating a large number of tires on the market. The CEC did not dispute that claim.
The U.S. Tire Manufacturers Association also shared their concerns directly with the CEC. Their issues largely centered on testing and technical problems, especially for light truck tires.
Dunlop Tires North America also put out a lengthy statement on the plan, sharing their concerns. They explained tire design isn’t based on just one performance characteristic.
“Depending on the application, a tire is engineered to include a balance of rolling resistance, traction, tread life, durability, handling, load capability, weather performance, ride, noise and cost,” the statement read.
Other large manufacturers like Bridgestone and Michelin have been somewhat supportive but shared concerns about how these rules will be enforced and how to ensure they don’t create an uneven playing field.
“California’s direction is consistent with Michelin’s all-sustainable and holistic approach to reducing the impact of tires at every stage of the life cycle without compromising safety or other performance attributes that are important to consumers,” Michelin said in a statement to Straight Arrow.
Despite some pushback, most manufacturers aren’t outright pushing back, rather asking for modifications. They worked directly with the CEC on a way to implement the program.
“They took a bunch of amendments to make it easier for them to implement it,” Deehan said. “And there was a lot of support from many of the tire manufacturers. I think there was still some concern, some opposition, as there often is to any change, but overall, it’s pretty clearly a win-win.”
Requests for comment from the USTMA and other major tire manufacturers from Straight Arrow went unanswered.
What’s next?
As part of helping the manufacturers implement this plan, the CEC gave them some time. The first phase of this plan does not take effect until 2029.
Phase two will not take effect until 2033.
“It’s not asking manufacturers to do something brand new,” Fadie said. “It’s a technology that’s already being implemented in tires today.”
When it comes to the consumers themselves, experts said they’ve most seen positive reactions. But what happens when a driver sees a higher price on a set of replacement tires.
There’s the potential for going the way of other higher-priced products in California and that’s heading to a nearby state to make the purchase. That’s been happening with items like cigarettes for some time.
However, experts aren’t too worried about that because that may end up costing people more in the long run.
“I don’t think that’s a practical concern, it’s a tiny amount,” Deehan said. “It would cost a lot more in gasoline to drive all the way to the border to replace your tires.”
For those of you reading this outside of California, there’s certainly a chance this could end up impacting your tire choices one day as well.
California is one of the largest markets in the country for most products so when manufacturers need to make changes for that state, sometimes it just becomes easier, and cheaper, to make those changes across the country. It’s known as the California effect.
“It’s something that will be interesting in seeing if other states are interested in adopting a similar standard, so that they can guarantee that their consumers will see the same savings, rather than just sort of leaving it to chance or market dynamics that can take much longer to reach other states and other markets,” Fadie said.
Round out your reading
- All your questions about napping, answered.
- Trump’s $5,000 promise echoes past payouts that never materialized.
- Inside the effort to make data centers pay their share of electricity costs.
- Why did the Feds seize the ’largest Martian meteorite on Earth’?
- Photos and video show exactly where and when Trump visited Ground Zero after 9/11.
