Hartford — The Connecticut House of Representatives has passed a sweeping climate-change mitigation bill meant to reduce emissions and expand the use of electric vehicles in the state.

The bill passed by a vote of 95-52 on Friday afternoon, with four people absent or not voting. The vote was partisan, with Democrats supporting the bill and Republicans against it. The bill now goes to Gov. Ned Lamont, who is expected to sign it.

The state Senate had approved Senate Bill 4, a transportation bill that also focuses on air quality, on Tuesday with a 24-11 vote along partisan lines.

On Friday, Republicans posed a lot of the same arguments their Senate counterparts had, most of which had to do with the bill’s financial impact.

State Rep. Holly Cheeseman, R-East Lyme, took exception to the fiscal note on SB 4 refusing “to state a cost for replacing our state fleet.” She said she suspects the reason is that replacing 3,600 vehicles in the state fleet with zero-emission battery vehicles, which at the moment cost $63,000 each, would amount to a more than $220 million cost.

But Democrats said Friday that with the help of federal funding and programs, costs of electric vehicles and related infrastructure go down, whether it’s the state’s public transit and school buses, commercial trucks or people’s personal vehicles. They argued those costs also will decrease as the state and country start moving toward an electric future.

Senate Bill 4 was amended in the Senate on Tuesday to include House Bill 5039, which aims to limit pollution from the state’s biggest vehicle polluters, such as buses and diesel trucks. This measure would institute stricter emissions rules by adopting California's standards.

Republicans argued that the state shouldn’t be beholden to another state’s standards, while Democrats said the state should keep up with the strictest emissions standards in the country.

Senate Bill 4, according to the bill’s joint favorable report, is meant to launch the state toward its clean air goals by “setting dates at which Connecticut’s fleet of cars and light duty trucks” must be composed of 50%, 75% and 100% battery electric vehicles.

Among other actions, the bill calls for the installation of electric vehicle charging stations throughout the state, aims to make electric vehicles more affordable to people, municipalities and businesses and would create regulations for transportation projects in order to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions that cause global climate change.

State Rep. Christine Palm, D-Chester, said in a presession, House Democratic news conference on Friday, that what the bill is asking isn’t rushed. In fact, if anything, the measures it takes are too late, she argued.

“One of the biggest elements adding momentum to this is young people,” Palm said. “It’s about environmental justice, it’s about asthma, it’s about mental health. And it’s being led primarily by young people ... 13-14-year-olds who are terrified for their future. And I’m not being hyperbolic, they are in a state of panic that is justified and which we have the responsibility to help get them through in one piece.”

State Rep. Devin Carney, R-Old Lyme, ranking member of the Transportation Committee, has a reputation for being an environmentally conscious legislator. He said he was glad that a provision he fought for made it into the bill — it would ensure that the state’s clean air act fee “that is on motor vehicle registrations will be going to things that actually improve our air quality.” He said that in 1990 when the clean air act account was created, those funds eventually were “diverted to the special transportation fund, or the general fund. And in the general fund it’s been difficult to understand where these things are going.”

But he was one of many Republicans on Friday who were not opposed to the concepts in the bill but were concerned enough about the cost to vote no.

“I do have some concerns about this legislation, predominantly with the cost it’s going to bear on businesses, the cost it’s going to bear on taxpayers. I think that we could do certain things better with this legislation,” Carney said. “I do have concerns about the school bus section in there. That’s going to cost taxpayers a lot of money to have all these zero-emission school buses. I’m not opposed to the concept, but I am concerned about the cost.”

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, told legislators Friday morning to “keep in mind the cost of goods in the context of forest fires in California, or the cost of goods when there’s flooding across the Midwest.”

“I think often this is framed in terms of short-term costs, but there are legitimate long-term costs that I think we are more sensitive to as policymakers that I don’t know the average person thinks about,” Rojas continued.

In a statement issued Friday night, the governor applauded the bill's passage.

"The transportation sector is responsible for 67% of the emissions of nitrogen oxides, a key component of smog. Medium and heavy-duty vehicles — which include trucks, buses, and smaller delivery vehicles — account for as much as 53% of nitrogen oxide emissions, despite being only 6% of the on-road vehicle fleet," according to the release from the governor's office. "The transportation sector is also the largest source of statewide greenhouse gas emissions at 37%, and as the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection’s most recent Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory found, emissions from that sector are increasing, when they must decline by roughly one-third in this decade if the state is to meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction target for 2030. Medium and heavy-duty vehicles are responsible for 25% of the greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector."

“The choice is clear, adopting the California framework and the other great initiatives in this bill will be another important step toward cleaner air and better health outcomes for all residents, particularly those who live in our cities and along our transportation corridors, and also gets us headed back in the right direction on our greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals,” Lamont said.

DEEP Commissioner Katie Dykes also touted the legislation's passage in the news release. “Today’s vote was a win for the residents of Connecticut — all of us,” she said. “This legislation will mean cleaner air, better health outcomes, and reductions in our greenhouse gas emissions; providing residents and businesses with more clean options for vehicles; making it easier for residents to purchase and charge an electric vehicle, particularly those in environmental justice communities who bear the worst air pollution burdens; and so much more.

In public testimony, the Motor Transport Association of Connecticut had said California's emissions requirements would result in an overwhelming cost for trucking companies.

State Rep. Roland Lemar, D-New Haven, co-chair of the Transportation Committee, responded to the trucking industry’s public opposition to the bill.

“The trucking industry itself is at a crossroads. The standards we’re seeking to adopt today have already been adopted in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, we actually create a voucher program for private businesses to take part in to help them electrify their fleets,” he said. “The Motor Transport Association of course doesn’t love additional costs on anything, but they’ve been active in conversations with us all along, we’ve addressed a number of their concerns internal to SB 4 ... I think we’ve gotten pretty close with them.”

Session update

With this year’s short legislative session nearing its close — Wednesday at midnight — House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, addressed the House’s progress on remaining legislation.

After telling reporters on Wednesday that the House may not be in session on Saturday because of planned political demonstrations, Ritter said Friday that “our decision-making process will have nothing to do with the rally ... It should just be a pretty standard rally.”

But, the House still may decide not to go into session on Saturday because as Ritter said, “We basically have given a list of bills that if done today we may not come in tomorrow. If those bills are not completed and we don’t get them done, we will come in tomorrow.”

Ritter confirmed that the state budget adjustment won’t be brought up for debate until next week.

s.spinella@theday.com