As Washington lawmakers debate whether to import California's tough new regulations curbing the chemicals that puff from new car tailpipes, the Golden State offers a glimpse into what the future may hold.

For the first time this year, automakers must meet new quotas for selling super-clean hybrids and other low-polluting cars in California.

And what do dealers there have to say?

"We live with it. It doesn't bother us at all," said John Durham, sales manager for Great Valley Chrysler, Jeep, Mazda, Isuzu in Sacramento. "When we start putting hybrids in, people will start buying hybrids."

Washington environmentalists point to comments like his as evidence that, contrary to complaints from the auto industry, the proposed emission regulations have few downsides.

They are running television and newspaper ads in Washington touting them as a pain-free way for drivers to save money on gas and reduce pollution.

"The cars you love, but near-zero emissions and cheaper on gas. California's got 'em. Want 'em?" the television ad intones.

But carmakers and Washington's auto-dealer association are more worried about this state adopting a second part of California's regulations: rules that would sharply curb emissions of carbon dioxide and other co-called "greenhouse" gases.

Those rules, say the auto industry, could boost car prices by thousands of dollars and make it harder for people to buy popular big sport-utility vehicles and trucks.

A radio ad playing statewide features a woman asking where she can get such a vehicle here in Washington.

"I'm afraid our supply is real limited since our state legislators passed those new California vehicle standards," a man responds.

House vote due

The legislation in Olympia, which has passed out of committees in both the House and Senate, would have Washington adopt California's approach to tackling smog and so-called "greenhouse gases." The House is expected to vote on it early this week.

New cars would need to be cleaner running, on average. Eventually, major auto companies would have to ensure up to 50 percent of new cars sold annually emit very little pollution, said Dennis McLerran, executive director of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.

The expected result would be a 4 to 11 percent reduction in vehicle-caused smog and toxic pollution in the state.

The lightning rod in the debate is the new, untested attempt to limit greenhouse gases. California's regulations, passed last year and set to take effect in 2009, are the first nationwide to try to limit how much of these gases come from new cars.

Advocates say it will force automakers to cut greenhouse emissions by 30 percent in new vehicles, with little or no effect on car supplies.

Carmakers have sued California, arguing the rule amounts to a de facto gas-mileage restriction that only the federal government can impose.

"We've noticed no inventory spikes or demand for rationing so far," said Peter Welch, president of the California Motor Car Dealers Association. But "once you get into the greenhouse gas and the carbon-dioxide regulations, I think that's a completely different ballgame."

California's effort to tackle car pollution has been marred by lawsuits and technical dead ends but also credited with significant improvements in the notoriously dirty air that has fouled some of its biggest cities.

California started setting its own car-emission regulations in the late 1960s, putting it on a different path than federal regulations that came later.

In the 1990s, the state also tried to force carmakers to sell electric-powered vehicles. That, however, was largely abandoned when the hype around electric cars failed to pan out.

As Washington lawmakers consider joining California, automakers and environmentalists have appealed to car buyers to bolster support.

Proponents say the new rules will give consumers more choice because carmakers will have to sell clean cars now confined to California and Northeast states. Many of those are familiar models fitted with special pollution-control equipment, such as the Toyota Camry, Volvos, Subaru station wagons, and the BMW 325i.

Future carbon-dioxide limits could be met with technological changes such as hybrid engines, which combine a gas-combustion engine with an electric battery, said Lisa Andrews, spokeswoman for Clean Cars for Washington, a coalition of environmental groups, local governments and corporations promoting the regulations.

"They can be met by every car on the road with the technology that exists. If people want to buy Suburbans, they can buy as many Suburbans as they want," said Andrews.

Under greenhouse-gas limits, carmakers would need to ensure that each year they sell vehicles meeting, on average, emission restrictions.

Those emissions are closely tied to gas mileage. Some cars could pollute more than the average, but that would need to be balanced with cars that pollute less.

California regulators estimate the $1,000 cost of the changes needed to a typical car's emission system will be more than offset by fuel savings.

But automakers counter that proponents are banking on unproven or nonexistent technology to increase fuel efficiency, particularly for big vehicles. The changes will drive up car costs by $3,000, according to a report produced for the Washington, D.C.-based Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

Carmakers might have to cut down on shipments of big SUVs and trucks if they aren't selling enough fuel-efficient models to meet the greenhouse-gas averages, said Charles Territo, spokesman for the alliance.

"The California regulations are so extreme that the only way manufacturers could meet those (greenhouse) regulations is by limiting the types of vehicles sold in the state. Certain vehicles because of their fuel economy would not meet the regulations," he said.

Washington officials counter that benefits would increase in later years, as people take older, dirtier cars off the road and replace them with new, cleaner cars.

By 2030, smog-causing pollution by all vehicles would be cut 7 to 11 percent, while toxic chemicals such as benzene would be cut 11 to 16 percent, according to the state Department of Ecology.

Suburban Republican lawmakers could be the key to whether the measure wins or loses in the Legislature. Nine Republicans, nearly all of them in the Seattle suburbs, have signed on as sponsors.

With Statehouse Democrats in the majority and many supporting the measure, backing from even a handful of Republicans could prove decisive.

One sponsor is Sen. Luke Esser, a Bellevue Republican and strong proponent of highway construction rarely favored by environmentalists.

"They made a particularly good case to me about smog-producing pollution, the thing that I think everyone agrees we want to reduce as much as possible," said Esser.

Though he is a sponsor, he is less enthusiastic about the greenhouse-gas regulations. He questions what impact changes in Washington cars would have on a global problem.

An amendment offering car buyers tax credits when they buy new, clean cars to offset the cost could make the whole package more palatable, he said.

Rep. Ed Murray, a Seattle Democrat and lead sponsor of the House bill, said votes seem to be splitting less on party lines than whether a lawmaker is from a rural or urban district.

"Environmental issues, clean air, clean cars is something that sells well in the suburbs," Murray said.

Sen. Tim Sheldon, a Mason County Democrat who represents rural southwest Washington, said he plans to vote against the bill because it could drive up costs of the big trucks and SUVs popular with his constituents.

"You can't get a Prius to pull a utility trailer," he said, referring to the small Toyota hybrid car.

Warren Cornwall: 206-464-2311 or wcornwall@seattletimes.com