State limits smog from boats, personal watercraft

State smog authorities netted one of California's last and largest unregulated polluters Thursday, imposing exhaust limits on new outboard boat motors and personal watercraft, such as Jet Skis, starting in 2001.

The new state Air Resources Board rules, adopted on an 8-0 vote, also would benefit water quality. Unspent fuel spewing from these aquatic engines pollutes lakes and reservoirs with the long-lived fuel additive MTBE.

The board also was expected late Thursday or today to approve tighter emission controls for motorcycles, which previously managed to dodge the ever-tightening smog controls applied to cars.

Earlier this fall, the air board adopted rules requiring sports utility vehicles, passenger pickup trucks and minivans to run as clean as cars, beginning in 2004. The popular family haulers currently emit 11/2 to three times more smog-forming pollutants than automobiles.

Together, the measures attacking recreation vehicles on land and water are projected to go a long way toward bringing smoggy California cities into compliance with federal clean-air standards by 2010 -- and maintaining healthy air thereafter as the number of tailpipes on highways and waterways keeps climbing, state air board officials said.

They also allow Gov. Pete Wilson to claim a legacy of slowing and perhaps reversing the scourge of smog.

The crackdown lessens the disparity in smog regulation between automobiles and the sports vehicles with pleasure craft in tow.

"It plays into equity," said Allan Hirsch, air board spokesman. "Autos have been made cleaner for 30 years, and over time these other vehicles and boats have not kept up in being cleaner. But technology for making them cleaner is here today."

4-stroke engines cleaner than 2-stroke 2-stroke engines, like those in personal watercraft, emit much more smog-forming pollutants than newer 4-stroke engines, like those found in cars. How pollutants escape 2 stroke-engine: Personal watercraft and most outboard engines Exhaust port always open: 20-30% of unburned fuel and oil exists the engine. 4-stroke engines: Some outboard engines Exhaust port closed during combustion. How dirty they are The cleanest 2-stroke engines are at least twice as dirty as the cleanest 4-stroke engines. Grams of pollutants per unit of engine power Best 4-stroke engine: 9 2-stroke engine: 20 Average 4-stroke engine: 23 2-stroke engine: 172 Worst 4-stroke engine: 58 2-stroke engine: 804 Source: Air Resource Control Board

Thursday's daylong hearing in Sacramento drew protests from many manufacturers and dealers of watercraft as well as marina operators and bass fishermen. They mainly opposed the most expensive controls, which would take effect in 2008, saying they would cause a drastic decline in sales.

Some manufacturers said they would have no trouble meeting any of the rules.

"We can state unequivocally that we can meet the air board's standards at a cost of currently made engines," said Tom Bingham, spokesman for Honda Motors, which has been making the cleaner four-stroke engines for the past 25 years.

Environmentalists said the boat rules don't go far enough, given the 10-year lead time on refining pollution-control technology already available.

Water suppliers, such as the giant Metropolitan Water District of Los Angeles and East Bay Municipal Utility District, also weighed in heavily with growing concerns about motorized craft fouling reservoirs tapped for drinking water.

In particular, boats with "two-stroke" piston engines and the popular Jet Skis are blamed for rising concentrations of the gasoline additive MTBE in lakes and reservoirs.

In addition to having no smog controls, these crafts allow as much as 30 percent of their fuel and oil to spew out the exhaust port and into the water unburned. MTBE -- methyl tertiary butyl ether -- is the most menacing of gasoline's ingredients because of its long life and ability to bypass conventional water purification.

The boat regulations are projected to reduce pollution from pleasure craft about 85 percent, from an average daily emission of 129 tons of smog-forming pollutants today to 19 tons a day by 2010, when the new rules take full effect, state air board officials said.

From the motorist's perspective, the pollution reduction of 110 tons a day is roughly the same benefit achieved by requiring regular smog checks for cars, air board officials said.

The smog restrictions apply only to new outboard motors and personal watercraft sold in California, which are projected to reach 1 million by 2010, state air officials said.

More than 500,000 of these vessels now ply the state's waters, and their number is growing. No retrofitting of today's boats would be required, and vessels with inboard engines are not affected.

The controls would be phased in from 2001 through 2008. The rules would put California five years ahead of the rest of the nation on boat engine controls scheduled under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rules.

Spokesmen for the National Marine Manufacturers Association said the industry can meet regulations in the early years. Many boat makers already are selling cleaner four-stroke engines in anticipation of the federal rules. Manufacturers of personal watercraft could clean up their engines by using direct injection rather than carburetors.

The boat makers strongly opposed the last jump in emission reductions scheduled for 2008, saying the cost is too high. Consumers would pay on average $6,933 more for a boat with an outboard engine with the rules' full set of controls, said David Harrison, an economic consultant for the boat association. State air officials, however, said the extra cost more likely would be between $150 and $2,300, depending on the engine's horsepower.

"The cost will be more than offset by the fuel savings achieved over the lifetime of the boat with these more efficient engines," said Hirsch.

Marc Del Pero, who polices water pollution as a member of the state Water Resources Control Board, challenged the industry's cost-benefit analysis on the smog regulations.

"I didn't hear once about the unbelievable cost borne by water agencies trying to get MTBE out of the water supply. . . . Did you account for the cost of MTBE cleanup?" Del Pero asked.

"Well, no," Harrison replied. "I actually don't know anything about that issue at all."