Nearly 24% of all new cars sold here during the first three months of the year were zero-emission electric vehicles, known as ZEVs, according to new data from the California Energy Commission.

By comparison, just 7.5% of cars sold nationwide were ZEVs, according to the California New Car Dealers Association, which represents auto dealers.

“The EV transition is in full swing, with nearly one in four California car shoppers choosing to go electric over the last year, resulting in record sales,” David Hochschild, chair of the California Energy Commission, said in a statement. “This is good news for all Californians, as our success delivers cleaner air statewide and drives significant investment in our emerging zero-emission vehicle industry.”

EVs or ZEV’s are battery electric vehicles that emit zero emissions from their power source.

In the first quarter of 2024, Californians purchased 102,507 ZEVs. That’s the highest number for a first quarter of any year, according to the California Energy Commission. Total sales also increased from the previous quarter.

For John W. Crittenden, a retired attorney from Los Altos, comfort was a driving force in his decision to purchase an EV, but reducing his carbon footprint also played a part when he went looking to buy a new vehicle.

“We wanted something that had comfortable seats with good thigh and lumbar support, and that is hard to come by unless you go with a more expensive car,’’ said Crittenden, 67. After test driving EVs made by Mercedes Benz, VW, Jaguar and Audi, Crittenden purchased a blue Mercedes EQB 300 in May of last year. He liked it so much that four months later, he and his wife leased a second one.

“We love our EVs — they’re quiet, fun to drive and cost little or nothing with electricity from our solar panels to fuel,” he said. “We will never go back to gasoline-powered cars.”

While comfort and style were important, the couple also considered the environmental impact of purchasing another gas-powered car. “It’s so important,’’ he said. “You are thinking, ‘I’ve contributed so much damage to the environment, and I want to make amends at this point.’ ”

In the last week, California surpassed both its zero-emission truck sales and vehicle sales goals — two years ahead of schedule — and surpassed its goal of installing 10,000 fast EV chargers, more than a year ahead of schedule.

With 60 ZEV manufacturers based in California, according to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office, including Lucid Motors in Newark, the success of the state’s programs has led to ZEVs becoming a top export and has spurred major advances in manufacturing and job creation.

Although a record 1.2 million U.S. vehicle buyers went electric last year, according to estimates from Kelley Blue Book, new national survey data from AAA shows that interest in buying a ZEV is waning.

Just 18% of people polled across the nation said they would be “likely” or “very likely” to buy a used or new EV, a drop from the 23% the same survey found a year earlier.

“Early adopters who wanted an EV already have one,” Greg Brannon, AAA’s director of automotive research, said in a statement.

The survey, conducted in April, included more than 1,100 interviews with American adults. AAA said the survey provides sample coverage of approximately 95% of the U.S. household population.

The survey said Americans are passing up EVs for several reasons, including higher purchase prices. Sixty percent of those surveyed said price was the largest single reason for preferring gas-powered vehicles. Infrastructure was another reason, with 54% of respondents saying that a lack of convenient places to charge kept them from buying an EV. Maintenance costs were also a factor with more than 57% of those polled saying the cost of battery repair or replacement was a sticking point.

But in the Golden State, it’s a different story, and it starts with the weather.

“EVs do really well in moderate temperatures,’’ said Kelley Blue Book auto-industry analyst Brian Moody. “When it’s very cold, well below freezing, the cars take longer to charge, and they don’t hold a charge as much.”

California is also making it easier to charge electric vehicles.

The California Energy Commission in April approved $1.9 billion to build 40,000 new public EV chargers statewide and other ZEV infrastructure across California.

The investments are part of Newsom’s $10 billion budget for ZEVs, which is bolstered by billions of dollars for clean transportation from the Biden-Harris Administration.

In recent decades, California has continued to face significant pollution and climate challenges. In fact, the state includes seven of the 10 worst areas for ozone pollution in the country and six of the 10 worst areas for small particulate matter, according to Newsom’s office.

The state also faces increasing risks from record-setting fires, heat waves, storm surges, sea-level rise, water supply shortages and extreme heat. And these conditions are made worse by climate change.

However, California has emission rules set to slow climate change and reduce pollution. Starting in 2035, the state’s rules will require that all new cars sold in California be EVs. What’s more, the Clean Air Act allows the state to set motor vehicle emissions standards that are at least as or more stringent than national standards pursuant to a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency, according to the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund.

Last year, California was challenged on those rules by oil and gas companies and 17 Republican-led states that wanted to deny the state’s authority to set clear car standards as guaranteed by federal law.

In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the challenge to the constitutionality of the Clean Air Act provision allowing California to continue to set its own clean cars standards, which, given the size of the Golden State’s economy, can pave the way for other states to follow suit.

“The clean vehicle transition is already here — it’s where the industry is going, the major automakers support our standards, and California is hitting our goals years ahead of schedule,’’ Newsom said in a statement. “We won’t stop fighting to protect our communities from pollution and the climate crisis.”

Caltrans wants to know the answers to these and countless other road-related questions and they are getting some much-needed help from generative artificial intelligence, better known as GenAI.

The pilot program is part of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s efforts to use the power of new technologies to improve the state’s public services.

Newsom touts California as a world leader in GenAI innovation with 35 of the world’s top 50 AI companies located in the state, including many right here in Silicon Valley. He signed an executive order last year to study the development, use, and risks of AI technology and to establish a responsible process for evaluation and deployment of AI within state government.

“From our perspective, GenAI is a new opportunity,’’ said David Man, division chief of traffic operations for Caltrans. “It’s unknown for state governments as a whole. We wanted to learn about its potential uses, bring in new ideas and innovations, study it and, at our option, consider procuring the technology.”

Caltrans says the sheer volume of data generated from traffic sensors and cameras — coupled with the continuous velocity of data generation and the variety of videos, images, log files, third-party data streams and guidance — poses significant challenges for human beings to digest and utilize.

To help with that, the state is focused on transportation-related contracts in two areas:

In the first, Deloitte Consulting and INRIX Inc., a transportation analysis company, will develop GenAI tools that would investigate near misses of injuries and deaths on California roads to identify hazardous areas and then allow workers to brainstorm ideas to better protect those outside vehicles — pedestrians and bikers.

In the second, Deloitte and Accenture, a global professional services company, will develop tools to improve traffic analysis, reduce bottlenecks, and bolster the state’s ability to reduce crashes and monitor the often mind-boggling traffic in both the south and north areas of the state.

Each company will be paid $1 to develop and test potential AI tools in a secure environment during a six-month pilot program. The companies will work with Caltrans during the testing window to evaluate whether the tools are working or make changes. Under state law Caltrans must pay at least $1 to enter into contracts with vendors.

Gen AI is a branch of artificial intelligence that can create text, audio and photos in response to prompts. It’s the technology behind ChatGPT, the controversial and often inaccurate writing tool started by Microsoft-backed OpenAI.

The companies developing the GenAI tools for Caltrans will use technologies developed by OpenAI as well as Google- and Amazon-backed Anthropic.

Right now the state transportation agency relies on a continuous data stream from more than 39,000 in-ground detectors, thousands of digital message signs and vehicle detection stations and at least 3,000 cameras along California’s highway system. That information is meshed with more data about infrastructure projects, weather, and transit and traffic engineering.

Collecting and housing all that data is “quite complex,” and Caltrans is often strapped by human limitations and time constraints in its efforts to get a clear picture about what’s happening on the roads and why, Caltrans officials say.

That’s where AI comes in.

“We really want to use and explore the potential benefits of AI, but it’s not intended to be a replacement for our own judgment,’’ said Caltrans’ Chief Safety Officer Rachel Carpenter.

Caltrans officials say the big benefit of the technology is that it has the potential to assist state workers in more quickly and accurately analyzing millions of data points to make more immediate decisions about roadway safety. Officials say AI tools won’t interact with confidential data or personal information.

In addition to the Caltrans project, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, which administers 40 programs, is also looking to create new ways to help Californians understand their business tax requirements by swiftly searching expansive reference materials and providing responses for staff to share with taxpayers by telephone and live chat.

AI tools could also help the state’s Health and Human Services Agency assist non-English speakers in obtaining timely access to information about public benefits and public programs. And the California Department of Public Health is exploring using AI to improve health care facility inspections.

But some GenAI experts are worried that having California become such a high-tech global hub comes with big risks.

“Generative AI generates sounds, text or images, including for good and for bad. You can make your own art and make deep fakes, you can generate music or songs and deep fake someone’s voice,’’ said Irina Raicu, who directs the Internet Ethics program at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.

Raicu, who said she has worked with companies developing “responsible AI policies and processes,” said the immediate need to safeguard GenAI can’t be overstated.

“My concern is that they could give totally wrong information,” she said, citing an example in New York City in which an AI-powered chatbot created by the city to help small businesses doled out false guidance and advised companies to violate the law. The rapidly growing technology has also raised concerns about job losses, misinformation, privacy and automation bias.

Caltrans says its framework allows potential GenAI solutions to be developed and evaluated in a calculated method with close oversight from qualified engineers and data experts.

“We know that GenAI tools generally lack the ability for engineering judgment or to consider any factual inconsistencies of the data used to train itself,’’ said Caltrans’ Carpenter in an email. “The Caltrans’ pilots are testing in a closed ‘sandbox,’ a controlled environment, using trusted and validated data sources so that any potential solution can be tested first under regulatory supervision.”

Caltrans wants to know the answers to these and countless other road-related questions and they are getting some much-needed help from generative artificial intelligence, better known as GenAI.

The pilot program is part of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s efforts to use the power of new technologies to improve the state’s public services.

Newsom touts California as a world leader in GenAI innovation with 35 of the world’s top 50 AI companies located in the state, including many right here in Silicon Valley. He signed an executive order last year to study the development, use, and risks of AI technology and to establish a responsible process for evaluation and deployment of AI within state government.

“From our perspective, GenAI is a new opportunity,’’ said David Man, division chief of traffic operations for Caltrans. “It’s unknown for state governments as a whole. We wanted to learn about its potential uses, bring in new ideas and innovations, study it and, at our option, consider procuring the technology.”

Caltrans says the sheer volume of data generated from traffic sensors and cameras — coupled with the continuous velocity of data generation and the variety of videos, images, log files, third-party data streams and guidance — poses significant challenges for human beings to digest and utilize.

To help with that, the state is focused on transportation-related contracts in two areas:

In the first, Deloitte Consulting and INRIX Inc., a transportation analysis company, will develop GenAI tools that would investigate near misses of injuries and deaths on California roads to identify hazardous areas and then allow workers to brainstorm ideas to better protect those outside vehicles — pedestrians and bikers.

In the second, Deloitte and Accenture, a global professional services company, will develop tools to improve traffic analysis, reduce bottlenecks, and bolster the state’s ability to reduce crashes and monitor the often mind-boggling traffic in both the south and north areas of the state.

Each company will be paid $1 to develop and test potential AI tools in a secure environment during a six-month pilot program. The companies will work with Caltrans during the testing window to evaluate whether the tools are working or make changes. Under state law Caltrans must pay at least $1 to enter into contracts with vendors.

Gen AI is a branch of artificial intelligence that can create text, audio and photos in response to prompts. It’s the technology behind ChatGPT, the controversial and often inaccurate writing tool started by Microsoft-backed OpenAI.

The companies developing the GenAI tools for Caltrans will use technologies developed by OpenAI as well as Google- and Amazon-backed Anthropic.

Right now the state transportation agency relies on a continuous data stream from more than 39,000 in-ground detectors, thousands of digital message signs and vehicle detection stations and at least 3,000 cameras along California’s highway system. That information is meshed with more data about infrastructure projects, weather, and transit and traffic engineering.

Collecting and housing all that data is “quite complex,” and Caltrans is often strapped by human limitations and time constraints in its efforts to get a clear picture about what’s happening on the roads and why, Caltrans officials say.

That’s where AI comes in.

“We really want to use and explore the potential benefits of AI, but it’s not intended to be a replacement for our own judgment,’’ said Caltrans’ Chief Safety Officer Rachel Carpenter.

Caltrans officials say the big benefit of the technology is that it has the potential to assist state workers in more quickly and accurately analyzing millions of data points to make more immediate decisions about roadway safety. Officials say AI tools won’t interact with confidential data or personal information.

In addition to the Caltrans project, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, which administers 40 programs, is also looking to create new ways to help Californians understand their business tax requirements by swiftly searching expansive reference materials and providing responses for staff to share with taxpayers by telephone and live chat.

AI tools could also help the state’s Health and Human Services Agency assist non-English speakers in obtaining timely access to information about public benefits and public programs. And the California Department of Public Health is exploring using AI to improve health care facility inspections.

But some GenAI experts are worried that having California become such a high-tech global hub comes with big risks.

“Generative AI generates sounds, text or images, including for good and for bad. You can make your own art and make deep fakes, you can generate music or songs and deep fake someone’s voice,’’ said Irina Raicu, who directs the Internet Ethics program at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.

Raicu, who said she has worked with companies developing “responsible AI policies and processes,” said the immediate need to safeguard GenAI can’t be overstated.

“My concern is that they could give totally wrong information,” she said, citing an example in New York City in which an AI-powered chatbot created by the city to help small businesses doled out false guidance and advised companies to violate the law. The rapidly growing technology has also raised concerns about job losses, misinformation, privacy and automation bias.

Caltrans says its framework allows potential GenAI solutions to be developed and evaluated in a calculated method with close oversight from qualified engineers and data experts.

“We know that GenAI tools generally lack the ability for engineering judgment or to consider any factual inconsistencies of the data used to train itself,’’ said Caltrans’ Carpenter in an email. “The Caltrans’ pilots are testing in a closed ‘sandbox,’ a controlled environment, using trusted and validated data sources so that any potential solution can be tested first under regulatory supervision.”

If you are one of the millions of Californians loading up the car and hitting the highway on Memorial Day weekend, be prepared for lots of company.

AAA says more people will travel for the holiday weekend than in nearly two decades. They’ll flock to sunny vineyards in the Napa Valley, rollicking theme parks in Southern California and busy entertainment venues in Las Vegas and New York, according to the auto association.

“Ever since COVID restrictions were lifted, we’ve seen record after record travel numbers,’’ said AAA spokesperson John Treanor. “There’s been a real hunger for many Americans to get out and take the trips they weren’t able to take before. This year, in particular, we are seeing amusement parks at the top of the destination list.”

AAA says 2024 will finish narrowly behind 2005 as the busiest Memorial Day travel weekend since the company began keeping track in 2000. An estimated 5.6 million Californians will head out for the holiday, with about 80% of those folks taking a trip by car.

In the South Bay, California’s Great America is offering entrance to its South Bay Shores waterpark in addition to the rides and rollercoasters, and there will be fireworks on Sunday night as the holiday weekend comes to a close. Disneyland too has some special promotions and packages for the holiday weekend.

Dave Kallal, who lives on the Central California coast, will be one of those hitting the road for the long holiday weekend, making a trip in his Glampervan. The Oakland-based company sells vans equipped with a queen size bed, kitchen, roof deck and plenty of room for storage.

“We basically travel every weekend and surf and camp, and we’ll be going to Hobson Beach Park in Ventura for Memorial Day,” he said.

He said he’s not worried about traffic because he’s riding in style.

“The drive down there is easy and beautiful,’’ Kallal said. At the beach “you basically open up the back doors of the van, and you can lay in bed and look at the ocean drinking your coffee in the morning.”

Those traveling by car will see some relief at the pump for the holiday as the wholesale price of gasoline is just fractions away from falling to its lowest point since February, said Patrick De Haan, head petroleum analyst for GasBuddy, in a social media post.

“With gas prices now nearing a 10-cent drop to the high we saw a few weeks ago, the future looks good as we get closer to Memorial Day,” De Haan said in a statement on GasBuddy, which uses crowdsourcing to track gas prices.

In California, where gas prices are the highest in the nation, regular gas was sitting at $5.22 a gallon Friday. Last year at this time, drivers paid an average of $4.79 a gallon for regular gasoline.

AAA says Interstate 80 between San Francisco and Napa will be the busiest Bay Area route as people head out of town Friday morning, but there are plenty of other places to visit in California in any direction.

Visit California says a drive down historic Highway 1 is a top pick for travelers yearning to see dramatic cliffs, towering redwoods and breathtaking water views. Part of the highway near the Rocky Creek Bridge that was closed since late March reopened Friday.

The tourism group also recommends taking Highway 49 to the Sierra foothills for a combination of scenery, history, outdoor adventure and the Strawberry Music Festival in Grass Valley.

Those looking for a high-energy weekend can check out Palm Springs for desert hiking, Los Angeles for urban nightlife and Santa Barbara County and Santa Ynez for some Pinot Noir tasting and lounging at sun-glazed Gaviota State Park.

But before you hit the road, Chris Pyle, a long-time car mechanic and current automotive specialist with San Francisco-based Just Answer, has some advice.

“All too often a car owner forgets to look at everything about the car. People get in a habit of only looking at things in the driver’s seat,” Pyle said. “For someone who is going out of town, they need to look outside the box and check every single thing on a car checklist.”

That means checking the lights, seatbelts, tire pressure, fluids and brakes and making certain the car’s spare tire is inflated and in good working order, Pyle said. And once they hit the road, Pyle also suggests slowing down for better gas mileage. Sixty-two miles per hour is the sweet spot, he said.

Those opting to fly out of town for the holiday weekend should also take extra precautions and arrive at the airport at least two hours in advance for domestic flights and three hours early for international trips.

AAA expects this will be the most crowded Memorial Day weekend at the nation’s airports since 2005 with 3.51 million air travelers, an increase of nearly 5% over last year.

The newly renamed San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport expects more than 130,000 passengers during the long weekend. That’s roughly the same number as last year but still more than 30,000 fewer passengers than pre-pandemic. And San Francisco International Airport says it expects 147,000 passengers to come through the airport between Friday and Monday. That’s about 33,000 fewer passengers than before the pandemic.

San José Mineta International Airport didn’t provide forecasts for the number of passengers expected to pass through the airport during the long holiday weekend but said airlines will have roughly 188,000 seats available during the time period.

Residents of the Golden State won’t be alone on the roads and in the sky.

AAA says more than 43.8 million Americans are projected to travel over the Memorial Day holiday weekend. That’s 4% higher than last year and comes close to matching 2005’s record of 44 million Memorial Day travelers.

“We’re expecting Memorial Day weekend numbers like we haven’t seen in almost 20 years,” said Brian Ng, senior vice president of Membership and Travel Marketing for AAA Northern California, in a statement. “It’s not just a return to pre-pandemic levels but also foreshadows the robust summer travel season ahead.”

The station’s arrival comes just a year after California air regulators approved first-in-the-nation rules to ban the sale of new diesel big rig trucks statewide by 2036, the latest step in the slow but steady phase-out of fossil fuels in the Golden State. The rule will affect 1.8 million trucks in California — everything from 18-wheeled semis to delivery vans, garbage trucks and so-called drayage trucks that move shipping containers at ports like Oakland’s.

While most of the attention on transitioning the commercial fleets to clean technology has focused on electric vehicles, some say that hydrogen fuel offers many benefits that big rigs powered by heavy electric batteries cannot.

Mary Nichols, the former chair of the California Air Resources Board, said hydrogen-fueled trucks can carry more cargo and heavier loads.

“Overall the efficiency is good and you don’t have to keeping charging all the time,” said Nichols. “It’s been a policy for a long time to try and support this type of change.”

There are fewer than 2,000 zero emission medium and heavy-duty vehicles on the road in California, according to the California Energy Commission. Of those, 1,369 are school and city buses, 306 are trucks and 268 are delivery trucks.

One nagging problem in the move to cleaner trucks is the lack of refueling stations that enable fleets to travel long distances. A typical EV big rig has a 200-300 mile range. A rig powered by a hydrogen fuel cell can more than double that range before refueling.

Some help may be on the way. California is on track to build the nation’s largest clean hydrogen hub by 2030. The $12 billion project will include pipelines, trucks and buses, fueling stations and liquefaction facilities, according to the University of California, a project partner.

The new ecosystem is expected to reduce up to 2 million metric tons of carbon emissions a year and create 220,000 green jobs, UC officials said. Federal, state and industry money is earmarked for the project, which is expected to generate $2.95 billion a year in economic value, including healthcare savings from reduced pollution, officials said.

Truckers in the Bay Area, however, won’t have to wait until the state builds its hydrogen network.

FirstElement Fuel station, just three miles from the Port of Oakland, will initially deploy 30 Hyundai hydrogen-powered trucks operated by Global Expedited Transportation Freight, an Atlanta-based corporation that will hire the truck drivers. The station will eventually have the capacity to fuel up to 200 hydrogen trucks and roughly 400 cars a day.

The $53 million project was funded with grants from the California Air Resources Board and the California Energy Commission.

“The reason this project is so important for the public is the number one source of air pollution that kills people is trucks,” said Oakland Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan. “Cleaning up the emissions from the trucks is one of the most important things in terms of human health impact, it is the cause of asthma, cancer and even premature birth in these disproportionately impacted communities.”

West Oakland residents who live near the Port of Oakland and the I-880 freeway are exposed to air concentrations of diesel pollution that are almost three times higher than average background levels in the Bay Area, and 71% of that comes from truck traffic, according to a health risk assessment by the air board.

And while trucks represent just 7% of vehicles on California roads, they emit 80% of the diesel soot and 70% of nitrogen oxides, a key component of smog from vehicles.

“Aside from the climate benefits, the greatest impact will be to the local communities by reducing the harmful diesel emissions from trucking in their neighborhoods,” said Shane Stephens, co-founder and chief development officer of True Zero, a FirstElement Fuel brand.

Stephens said his company has a commitment from Nikola to provide more hydrogen trucks, and that other companies, such as Toyota, and Honda are developing hydrogen fuel cell products as well.

He said the number of trucks using the station will be modest for the first year but should increase as more fleets transition to hydrogen fuel. Stephens added that a hydrogen fueling station in Kettleman City, along Interstate 5 on the way to Los Angeles, is already in the works.

Still, not everyone believes hydrogen is the answer to replacing dirty diesel fuels.

David Cebon, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Cambridge in England who studies hydrogen-powered long haul freight transport with The Hydrogen Science Coalition, said hydrogen-powered trucks are more expensive to buy and three times more costly to run.

For example, a diesel truck costs an average of $70,000 to $200,000 while electric semi trucks can sell for $365,000 to $435,000 before incentives, according to TEC equipment, although Tesla has been advertising $180,000 for its 500-mile electric semi, according to the International Council on Clean Transportation.

Meanwhile, U.S.-based zero-emission automaker Nikola Motors — which also manufacturers EV trucks, is currently selling its new hydrogen trucks for about $350,000 after incentives, according to Hydrogen Insight.

Daimler and and Volvo electric trucks report going about 200-300 miles on a single charge, while Tesla reports that its new electric big rig can travel up to 500 miles on a single charge, according to the company.

The Nikola hydrogen fueled semis have a 500-mile range, but the high cost of hydrogen adds up when it comes to refueling — by some reports as much as $1,800 to fill the tank. Then again, the refueling is quick — 10-20 minutes, whereas electric recharging can take a minimum of 45-90 minutes to recharge.

Cebon’s coalition maintains that given the large amount of energy needed to produce, transport and store, hydrogen it is a very inefficient energy carrier.

It’s likely that the future of clean trucking will include both options and already there are examples of both methods being used.

A new EV fueling station for large food trucks just opened in Gilroy. Shell continues to run three hydrogen stations in California for industry and heavy-duty vehicles, according to a report by Autoblog. That report also said Shell will continue allotting $1 billion annually toward heavy duty hydrogen as well as atmospheric carbon capture and storage. Shell did not return emails or calls seeking comment.

West Oakland climate activist Margaret Gordon, a founding member of the West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project, said she has been advocating for a fuel change for trucks that use the Port of Oakland for the last 17 years.

“This is the first time that a collection of various institutions, regulatory agencies and community activists came together to help impact the community,” she said.

Passengers who pay a premium for a first-class ticket board and deplane first, get bigger more comfortable seats, and are offered gourmet meals and cocktails served by flight attendants who address them by name.

But even travelers in the cheap seats are increasingly looking to dodge long security lines, paying extra to shorten their slog through airport screening, either to the Transportation Security Administration itself through its “PreCheck” service, or private companies such as CLEAR, which use biometric screening to vouch for passenger identification.

That last perk isn’t sitting so well with some California lawmakers.

A state bill would put a first-in-the-nation lid on private security screening services like CLEAR. The New York-based company operates at nine California airports, including San Jose, Oakland and San Francisco International. Customers who pay CLEAR $189 a year get their ID verified at the terminal by a fingerprint or iris scan then get escorted to the front of the TSA line.

“Standing in line waiting for my turn to go through the TSA screening process, I became aware over time at how frustrated people would get,” said state Sen. Josh Newman, a Fullerton Democrat who introduced SB 1372. “Doesn’t everybody deserve the same fair treatment?

Newman said he travels by air at least twice a week, spending a good deal of time standing in those long lines. And it was in one of them that he watched passengers enrolled in the CLEAR program cut to the front, frustrating him and other fliers.

Newman’s bill would mandate that CLEAR and other third-party screening services operate through separate TSA lines for subscribers, eliminating the friction and frustration created by the current system and, he said, improving security. 

At least a few Bay Area travelers think Newman’s got a point.

“Now that the TSA lines are so long, it is kind of annoying,” said Walnut Creek resident Angie Reposa, who travels four times a month on business and was headed out of Oakland last week for Chicago with a friend.

Breana Lee of San Francisco, also traveling out of Oakland, agreed. “It seems kind of weird to have an outside company doing this service,” Lee said.

The legislative analyst noted that the state doesn’t control the TSA or its budget for extra security staff, but added that the legislation might give CLEAR, which incorporated and became publicly traded in 2021, “strong motivation to push for more TSA funding.”

CLEAR was acquired out of bankruptcy in 2010 by Caryn Seidman-Becker, now the CEO, and Ken Cornick, the co-founder.

The bill is backed by the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1230 and the Association of Flight Attendants.

Opposed are CLEAR, several business groups including the California Chamber of Commerce and Bay Area Council, and airlines including United, Southwest, Hawaiian, Delta and Jetblue. Even the airports are in the CLEAR camp.

Sen. Roger W. Niello, a Republican representing Fair Oaks and the vice chair of the Senate Transportation Committee, said CLEAR is beneficial because there is an need for the service and the company provides jobs to scores of Californians.

He said he does not support Newman’s argument that the CLEAR screening process leads to traveler frustration.

“I don’t see that we should be cutting the CLEAR people out just because they are not convenient  to us and it annoys us when those people get to go in front of the line,” he said during the committee hearing.

The legislative analyst noted in a report that airports oppose the bill because they earn fees from leasing their space to CLEAR, which reports it paid California airports a total of $13 million in 2023.

“Were airports to lose the Clear revenue they would make it up by charging other customers, such as rental car companies, other concessionaires, or airlines,” the analyst report said.

Newman, along with the bill’s flight attendant and government union backers, also questioned whether CLEAR provides adequate security.

TSA PreCheck requires a background check, fingerprints, photo identification and verified travel documents. CLEAR uses either a traveler’s eyes or their fingerprint to verify identity, replacing the need for a TSA agent to manually check a traveler’s passport or photo identification.

“Clear is not the TSA,” said Kristie Rivera, a veteran flight attendant and the president of the Association of Flight Attendants. “CLEAR does not add any enhanced layer of security to airport operations. CLEAR is just a pay-for-play way to cut the screening line.”

Gilbert Galam with the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1230 representing 1,200 TSA screening officers in Northern California, called the service a “headache” that “adds no value to security or efficiency for the traveling public.”

Galam said the line-jumping has led to fights among passengers and extra stress for security screeners.

Galam and Newman said CLEAR had two security breaches last year, including one in which a passenger carrying ammunition in his bag was led to the front of the screening line. Another flyer used a boarding pass found in the garbage to skip the line.

Ng lauded the fact that CLEAR has successfully verified 167 million identities and is in operation in 56 aviation hubs nationwide.

Jim Lites with the California Airports Council, whose group represents 31 commercial airports, said having a dedicated TSA officer to screen CLEAR customers in a separate line would be costly and impact revenue at California airports where the service is available.

The bill, which passed out of the Senate Transportation Committee last month, now moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee. It would need approval by the Senate and Assembly to head to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.

Gas prices are spiking again in the Bay Area — as much as 20 to 30 cents a gallon higher than the California average and at least $2 a gallon more than the rest of the country, according to the latest data from the American Automobile Association (AAA).

The national average on Friday was $3.67 a gallon, compared to the Golden State’s $5.45, the highest in the U.S., according to AAA.

Bay Area drivers who are sometimes stuck paying close to $6 a gallon said they are suffering and finding alternate ways to get around.

Frank Auguston filled his tank at a Chevron gas station in Danville where prices spilled over $6 a gallon Wednesday.

“Gas is stupid expensive,” he said.

Linda Franklin was similarly annoyed.

“I’m seriously thinking about buying an EV,” she said while putting gas in her Mazda at a Chevron station in San Jose on Wednesday. “I can’t afford these prices with my commute to Walnut Creek.”

But why does opening your wallet at the gas station become more painful during certain times of the year, and what is driving the recent fuel spike?

“Gasoline prices tend to rise in the spring, just like they dip in the fall and the winter, usually due to demand. As the weather gets nicer and the days longer in the spring heading into summer, gasoline prices tend to rise as more people hit the road,” said Andrew Gross, AAA spokesperson in an email.

Gross said spring is also the time where gasoline is switched from winter blend to summer blend, which is more expensive to refine but helps keep air quality cleaner.

“And then you have to take into account location. The West Coast is what many consider an oil island in that it is far from the main oil production centers of Texas, Oklahoma and the Gulf Coast and those mega refineries down there as well,” Gross said.  “And west of the Rockies it’s more challenging to build pipelines, so you tend to move product by rail and truck more than say east of the Rockies. So you also have higher distribution cost that factor in as well.”

While California saw record gas prices in the fall of 2022 when the state average was $6.42 a gallon, the California Energy Commission said the price of crude oil, which is the biggest driver of gas prices, is higher than at any other point this year.

But there’s more to the story.

Tom Klosa, the head of energy analysis at the Oil Price Information Service, said the Bay Area is ground zero when it comes to supply and demand, which has been impacted by recent refinery closures.

In 2020, Marathon closed its refinery in the Bay Area, and over the last year Phillips 66 stopped processing crude oil at Arroyo Grande in San Luis Obispo and Rodeo in Contra Costa County, Klosa said.

“Both companies idled their refineries and are concentrating on supplying renewable fuels such as renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel. Neither is making gasoline, and that leaves the area without a safety net. Should one of the remaining refineries (Chevron Richmond, Valero Benicia or PBF Martinez) have issues, supply can become very challenging,” Klosa said.

Another component of high fuel prices is the state’s high gas tax.

The state also has a cap-and-trade program and low-carbon fuel standard that adds roughly another 46 cents a gallon, according to the group.

Last spring, the state promised Californians some protection at the pump when the California Gas Price Gouging and Transparency Law was signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The governor said it would protect Californians from gas price gouging by creating an independent watchdog to root out potential gouging and authorizing the California Energy Commission to penalize the oil industry for wrongdoings.

Newsom in November accused “Big Oil” of raking in “huge profits” last summer while gas prices spiked and said that “we’re continuing to hold them accountable with the new tools from our gas price gouging law.” But it remains to be seen how the new Division of Petroleum Market Oversight will affect gas prices.

California Energy Commission spokeswoman Lindsay Buckley said the division is investigating market activity and refinery maintenance schedules and that the commission this year will consider a profit cap to moderate price spikes. She attributed recent gas price spikes to refinery maintenance and spot market activity.

San Jose resident Moses Jackson, who was walking near San Jose’s Rose Garden on Wednesday, said that he now does his errands on foot because fueling up his Chevy truck is just too costly.

“I walk two to three miles a day because of high gas prices,” he said. “When is it going to end? People are hurting. I’m hurting.”

Staff photographer Jane Tyska contributed to this story. 

A whole lot more than Oakland Port officials bargained on when they decided to change the name of Oakland International Airport to something a little more regional and a little less, well, Oakland.

And it turns out there is no shortage of people who say they have a personal stake or vested interest in the issue. Public opinion so far appears weighted toward the “nay.”

That outpouring of opposition was evident in person and in written comments at the Thursday meeting where Oakland officials voted in favor of changing the name of the city’s airport to San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport: San Francisco tourism and hospitality interests, the director of the San Francisco International Airport, travelers, and even California legislators all said it is a bad idea. The city of San Francisco has even threatened a lawsuit over what it says is a trademark violation.

Why change the name at all? More than 11 million passengers passed through Oakland’s airport last year, still shy of pre-pandemic levels but rising every year. But Oakland airport officials lobbied for the change, claiming travelers unfamiliar with the region fly into SFO even if their destination is closer to the Oakland airport. Changing the name to San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport will change that, they claim.

Many don’t see it that way and say an airport name change degrades Oakland, its image, history and people.

The Oakland branch of the NAACP, in a letter to airport officials, said a name change could potentially impact Oakland’s identity and rich civil rights history.

“While some officials may see the renaming as a simple rebranding effort, we view it as a reflection of ongoing gentrification in Oakland,’’ said the letter from Cynthia Adams, NAACP Oakland branch president. “The concerns raised by residents about the erasure of Oakland’s history and identity are valid and indicate the need for a more thoughtful approach to renaming such a significant landmark.”

Oakland airport, like SFO and many U.S. airports, is still struggling following the pandemic and looking for ways to rebound. Oakland’s passenger totals for 2023 were 16% below pre-pandemic numbers when the East Bay aviation center handled more than 13 million passengers. A rebranding, airport officials say, could entice travelers and help pump money into the airport.

Not so fast, say SFO officials and their allies.

John Hutar, the president and CEO of the San Mateo County/Silicon Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, said a renaming would negatively impact travel-related industries. The airport generated $6.34 billion for San Mateo County in 2021 and employs at least 10,000 people, according to SFO’s latest available data.

And why should they care? SFO is actually located in San Mateo County and officials estimate the county earned around $98 million in taxes from the airport that year.

San Mateo County Supervisor Dave Pine said a name change has the potential to confuse travelers and hurt businesses that have products delivered by plane.

“The concern is that it would cause confusion where passengers would accidentally book a ticket to Oakland when they meant to book a ticket to SFO,” Pine said.

SFO airport Director Ivan C. Satero said that is not far-fetched. He shared a story to drive home his point.

“Several years ago, an international low-cost airline launched service at Oakland International Airport but marketed itself as an airline serving San Francisco,’’ he wrote in a recent Mercury News editorial. “We saw several passengers for this airline arrive every day at San Francisco International Airport to check in for their flight, only to learn that their airline was operating in Oakland. Many missed their flight as a result. For this reason, among others, this airline eventually relocated its operations to SFO.”

Bay Area resident Tom Bowman said he applauds the motivation for the name change plans but condemns the proposed name.

“Changing to ‘San Francisco Bay’ only highlights insecurity and creates a perception that (Oakland airport) is trying to fool the public or be something it isn’t,’’ he wrote in a letter to Oakland airport officials.

But Port Commission President Barbara Leslie said the name change is a positive way to stand up for Oakland and the East Bay.

“This name will make it clear that (Oakland airport) is the closest major airport, for 4.1 million people, three national laboratories, the top public university in the country, and California’s Wine Country,’’ Leslie said in a statement after the unanimous vote, according to the Associated Press.

Passengers at the Oakland airport Friday said they didn’t see what all the fuss is about.

Robert and Christine Guimbarda of St. Louis made a stop in Oakland on their way to Hawaii. The couple lived in the Bay Area for a decade and said they don’t see a problem with changing the airport’s name.

“People who want to go to SFO know where they are going,’’ Robert Guimbarda said. “I don’t get the feeling of offense over the name.”

Traveler Charles Yamarone, who uses the Oakland airport when he comes up north from Los Angeles, said he too is not opposed to a new airport name.

“I think it’s good,” he said. “I think it accurately describes the Oakland airport’s ability to serve the entire Bay Area.”

Oakland airport isn’t the first Bay Area airport to face objections over a proposed name change. In 2011, San Jose officials considered adding “Silicon Valley” to Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport to give it more cachet and boost business amid rising debt from a $1.3 billion airport makeover.

Some leaders proposed dropping the word Mineta from the name altogether while others said it was important to honor the former San Jose mayor, congressman and U.S. transportation secretary.

In the end, city leaders scrapped the idea altogether, vowing to revisit the angst-ridden naming process if an international airline wanted to create a joint marketing effort that required changing its name to include the words “Silicon Valley.”

A second vote for final approval of San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport as Oakland airport’s new name is scheduled for May 9.

He knows a thing or two about building design after earning a bachelor’s degree in architecture from UC Berkeley.

So when the San Ramon financial adviser heard that BART was awarding decommissioned legacy train cars to people and organizations with ideas for re-use, he rolled out a proposal to land an old car. And he won.

“It’s always been a dream of mine to build something fun for my family, and for this BART train we’re going for a cozy, woodsy cabin crossed with a space-age modern aesthetic,’’ said Lin, one of eight winners.

It appears that Lin is not alone in his desire to get his hands on one of the dingy, obsolete train cars that the transit agency is officially retiring this month — a half century after they first hit the rails.

Legacy cars also will be repurposed as a bike shop, community event space and entertainment venues. The Hayward Fire Department already is using one as a training facility, while three other cars are headed to a Northern California museum.

Lin has designs for the 700-square foot car that will be hauled to the Sierra foothills for a makeover this summer. He plans to upgrade the lighting, remove some safety bars and decorate the inside of the car with BART memorabilia, old train photos and used BART tickets.

“What was once a vehicle meant for rapid transit is now going to become a place for people to slow down and stay, and I love that idea,’’ he said, adding that he plans to rent out the car as a vacation spot too.

The final run of legacy trains begins at 1 p.m., Saturday, April 20, at Oakland’s MacArthur station.

BART said people can board a legacy train and ride from MacArthur to the Fremont station — the same route BART traveled when it first opened on Sept. 11, 1972. It’s a 45-minute trip along about 24 miles of the original section of tracks. Every rider will need to pay for the ride with a Clipper card.

“These train cars are part of the history of the Bay Area,” said Bob Powers, BART’s general manager in a statement. “While we are excited to modernize the system, we recognize the profound cultural importance of these cars, and we want to celebrate their rich history and give them a proper send off.”

Last September, BART began running only new “fleet of the future” cars for its base schedule. All 55 trains are made up of new cars, with 20 additional cars slated for delivery each month, BART officials said. The new cars are a far cry from the agency’s original models that featured carpeting and cloth seats that were replaced about a decade ago after endless complaints of smells, grime and germs.

“Our new cars are cleaner, require less maintenance, have better quality surveillance cameras and offer a better customer experience with automated next-stop displays and announcements,” said Alicia Trost, BART communications officer.

While the legacy cars are retiring from transit service, people will have opportunities to see the historic cars in their new homes.

In June, three legacy cars are headed to the Western Railway Museum in Suisun City. They will be the only legacy fleet cars on display at a museum.

BART officials said the Original Scraper Bike Team in Oakland was awarded a legacy car that will be divided into a bike shop offering free repairs for children and a clubhouse for community events and the organization’s mentorship program.

The Hayward Fire Department positioned a car on an elevated track to train firefighters on rescues and medical emergencies, such as freeing people in cars or under the trains.

“Being able to see in a training environment, all of the intricacies of the car gets us familiar with what we will need in real-life scenarios,’’ said Capt. Don Nichelson, the fire department’s public information officer.

San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu sent a letter Monday to the Oakland Board of Port Commissioners demanding that they scrap a proposal to rename the airport “San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport.” The Port of Oakland operates the airport.

“In addition to the immense confusion and chaos the renaming would cause for travelers and consumers generally, this proposal also infringes on SFO’s trademark,” Chiu said in a statement.

SFO Airport Director Ivar C. Satero said the airport supports a legal challenge, if necessary.

“I urge the Port of Oakland not to proceed with this proposal and hope they will work to find a solution that provides clarity, not confusion, for the travelers visiting the Bay Area,’’ Satero said in a statement.

The naming tug-of-war is raising friction between two of the Bay Area’s three major airports — neither of which are located in San Francisco. San Francisco International Airport — owned and operated by the city and county of San Francisco — is on the bay in San Mateo County, nestled next to the cities of San Bruno and Millbrae.

A poll conducted by Oakland’s FM3 Research last summer and released Monday shows that 27% of respondents in Alameda and Contra Costa counties said they were “very comfortable” with a name change. The number was slightly higher for those polled in Oakland. The poll data is the result of about 1,400 online interviews with registered voters conducted between May and August.

The surveys also showed that 64% of respondents said it is either “extremely important” or “very important” to expand Oakland airport’s flight offerings, and are comfortable with a name change as part of that effort.

But San Francisco city officials said the renaming plan appears intentionally designed to divert travelers who may be unfamiliar with Bay Area geography and lead them to believe the Oakland airport has a business relationship with SFO, which it does not.

Officials said the proposed renaming would be particularly challenging for international travelers who may not speak or read English—an “important segment of SFO’s customer base.”

The Port of Oakland said in a statement Monday that “the proposed name modification will clarify, not confuse.’’

“The new name identifies where (the Oakland airport) is actually located, which is on the San Francisco Bay. If the proposed name modification is approved by the Board, the Port will take all appropriate measures to defend its right to use this accurate geographic identifier,’’ the statement said.

The possible name change is part of a broader effort by the Oakland airport to attract more domestic and international flights, improve the passenger experience at the aviation complex, including an upgrade of the Terminal 1 check-in lobby, and the addition of new concessions and restaurants.

The Port of Oakland Commission is slated to consider the name change at a meeting at 3:30 p.m. Thursday. The airport will retain its aviation code of OAK, regardless of the fate of the proposed name change.