Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Head of the EPA Went A Bit Too Far On Rollback According to Automakers

      This isn't what we exactly wanted. -Automakers

    We all know someone who takes things a bit a too far. In the case of automakers, that someone is EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. Back in April April, Pruitt announced a serious rollback of fuel economy regulations that were set in stone during the Obama administration. In a summary of the proposed draft, the EPA would rollback the fleetwide average from 46.8 mpg for the 2026 model year to around 37 mpg - the fleetwide average for the 2020 model year. The draft also mentions pre-empting "California's authority" on setting their own emission standards under the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act. This move has caused California and a collation of other states to file suit over the proposed changes.

    According to Automotive News, the changes proposed by Pruitt go a bit too far for automakers. All they wanted was the emission targets for the 2022-2025 model years to "ratchet up more gradually and offer more compliance flexibility." Now, they have to worry about litigation and uncertainty.

    "I don't think anybody in industry, when asked for reopening of standards, asked to level out to zero," said an unnamed lobbyist for a major automaker.

    However, certain groups argue that automakers should have expected something far-reaching under this current administration.

    "You've got to know your audience. If you go to [EPA Administrator] Scott Pruitt and Donald Trump and say you want relief from the rules and they are going to cost jobs, this is what you end up with," said Andrew Linhardt, deputy director of the Sierra Club's clean energy campaign.

    Later this week, executives from the major automakers will be meeting with officials at the White House to see if they can get the federal government and California to agree to some sort of comprise.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Poor auto industry.  Scott Pruitt refuses to take a simpler approach to this: get Congress to repeal CAFE standards in the first place.  That would be ideal. So Pruitt pursues a rollback to 37 MPG eight years from now instead of the 46.8 MPG as proposed by the last administration.  He might have gotten away with it if he left CA authority alone and focused on the rollback instead.  His plan will probably fail because he got too greedy and wants to abolish higher state standards. 

    Choose your battles wisely and you might actually win.

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    20 hours ago, riviera74 said:

    Poor auto industry.  Scott Pruitt refuses to take a simpler approach to this: get Congress to repeal CAFE standards in the first place.  That would be ideal. So Pruitt pursues a rollback to 37 MPG eight years from now instead of the 46.8 MPG as proposed by the last administration.  He might have gotten away with it if he left CA authority alone and focused on the rollback instead.  His plan will probably fail because he got too greedy and wants to abolish higher state standards. 

    Choose your battles wisely and you might actually win.

    That's what happens when you're motivated by revenge and want to punish someone (in this case the prior administration and California respectively)

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 5/18/2018 at 8:51 PM, Zane Wylder said:

    Repeal CAFE, period


    Free market decides what it wants, not whatever administration's in charge

    the last time we repealed major regulations and allowed the free market to choose... the free market chose greed, hubris, and fraud... eventually plunging the country and world into the worst recession since the 1930s.  The free market isn't the end all be all.... there does need to be some regulation of it to try to prevent bad things happening. 

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    7 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    the last time we repealed major regulations and allowed the free market to choose... the free market chose greed, hubris, and fraud... eventually plunging the country and world into the worst recession since the 1930s.  The free market isn't the end all be all.... there does need to be some regulation of it to try to prevent bad things happening. 

    Not gonna pretend to know when that was, mind filling me in, chief?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    10 minutes ago, Zane Wylder said:

    Not gonna pretend to know when that was, mind filling me in, chief?

    Banks were deregulated with the repeal of Glass-Stegel Act. A big thing that came from that was that banks could now gamble with your money in dodgey investments. Simultaneously, mortgage regulations went out the window so that anyone who could fog a mirror qualified for a mortgage. You couldn't let your dog off its leash or it would come back with a home equity line of credit. 

    At the same time, wages stagnated. Off shoring became the big thing for companies to do. The internet made it even more possible. 

    People trying to make up for the loss of wage increases started turning to the home equity line of credit just to keep up with increases in the cost of living. That was what the professionals call; A Bad Idea.

    All of these newly qualified mortgage holders became house shoppers. This started driving up the price of homes. Speculators came in and flipped homes forming a housing price bubble.

    Swirl all that together and you have the perfect storm that caused the recession starting in 2007.  

    It all formed because banks wanted less regulation.

    Not all regulations are bad, some regulations keep bad things from happening. CAFE is regulation with good intentions being implemented badly. I agree with it's generally stated goal. I disagree with how they go about getting there. Repealing it without replacing it would lead to bad things, including possibly a significant loss of the auto industry in the US.

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ford is so desperate they're reclassifying their cars as trucks to comply.  How is this good for the consumer?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    Ford is so desperate they're reclassifying their cars as trucks to comply.  How is this good for the consumer?

    I've already said I think it is being implemented incorrectly while the overall goal is good.

    There is major risk in repealing it entirely.  We live in a global economy.  GM doesn't want to build one engine for the US and one engine for China and one engine for the EU.... they want to build one engine that will work in all of those places.  If suddenly the US is the one with the loosest standards, we will start falling behind in technology as all of the older stuff is sent here and the other countries get the newest things.   This is already happening in renewable energy.  China is pushing hard for renewables while we're trying to get our coal industry restarted. The center of gravity for solar and turbine development and manufacturing has shifted to China and the EU. 

    So, that's why the premise of this article talks about the auto industry not wanting standards rolled back too much.  Their ideal would be the same standard in emissions for all countries. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'd love to have solar panels on my roof, but acres and acres of them in fields are an eyesore.  Not so sure about wind.  Why kill birds?  I do wholeheartedly disagree with California's expensive decree to mandate solar panels on new construction.  Wacko to mandate something like that, unless you WANT people NOT to build new houses... or move out of state.

     

    I think coal can be made cleaner while remaining cheap... and of course it's plentiful.

     

    CAFE has brought us troublesome multi-cylinder shutoff smallblock V8's... when an unmolested smallblock will run 400k miles with proper care... it has brought us really stupid things like stop-start... and 2.7L FOUR CYLINDER fullsize pickups!  Not to mention Ford's twin turbo sixes that ace the test in the lab, but fail it on the road.

    There has to be a tipping point, and I think we might be past it, where physics steps in and intervenes... Americans demand larger, more capable vehicles... the engineering compromises are becoming too great...

    Edited by ocnblu

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think you inadvertently pointed out part of the problem. The manufacturers are building to Ace the test, but the test in an effort to be fair and uniform is terribly unrealistic. That's why NA V6es often to better in the real world on the highway than smaller displacement but similar power turbo 4s. 

    If the test was more representative of real world driving, we'd see different results.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    I think you inadvertently pointed out part of the problem. The manufacturers are building to Ace the test, but the test in an effort to be fair and uniform is terribly unrealistic. That's why NA V6es often to better in the real world on the highway than smaller displacement but similar power turbo 4s. 

    If the test was more representative of real world driving, we'd see different results.

    And this would expose CAFE as an even BIGGER bugaboo.  Its time has passed.  Technology won't stop... but the law of physics is unrelenting.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      The EPA has officially released its assessment of the 2020 Jeep Wrangler EcoDiesel. The EcoDiesel is only available as a 4-door with an 8-speed automatic and in that configuration, the EcoDiesel manages to get 29 mpg highway, 22 mpg city, and 25 combined. That is slightly better than a 4x4 Ram 1500 with the same powertrain. The next closest model in terms of fuel efficiency is the 2-door, 4-cylinder, manual transmission, rear-wheel drive Wrangler at 24 highway mpg, 22 city mpg, and 23 combined. 
      The diesel engine is a $4,000 option though so you may not ultimately save money. Instead, Jeep believes the EcoDiesel option is best suited for those who need the gobs of torque generated by the V6 diesel when going off-road. With 260 horsepower and 442 lb.-ft of torque, the Wrangler EcoDiesel has torque in spades. To the dismay of many, the Ecodiesel does come standard with electronic stop/start.
      If diesel isn't your thing, there is the 2.0T 4-cylinder which produces 270 horsepower and 295 lb.-ft of torque or the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 which produces 285 horsepower and 260 lb.-ft of torque.  Both engines also come with stop/start or can be upgraded to the eTorque system that smooths out the torque band and either engine is available with a manual transmission or 8-speed automatic.
       

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The EPA has officially released its assessment of the 2020 Jeep Wrangler EcoDiesel. The EcoDiesel is only available as a 4-door with an 8-speed automatic and in that configuration, the EcoDiesel manages to get 29 mpg highway, 22 mpg city, and 25 combined. That is slightly better than a 4x4 Ram 1500 with the same powertrain. The next closest model in terms of fuel efficiency is the 2-door, 4-cylinder, manual transmission, rear-wheel drive Wrangler at 24 highway mpg, 22 city mpg, and 23 combined. 
      The diesel engine is a $4,000 option though so you may not ultimately save money. Instead, Jeep believes the EcoDiesel option is best suited for those who need the gobs of torque generated by the V6 diesel when going off-road. With 260 horsepower and 442 lb.-ft of torque, the Wrangler EcoDiesel has torque in spades. To the dismay of many, the Ecodiesel does come standard with electronic stop/start.
      If diesel isn't your thing, there is the 2.0T 4-cylinder which produces 270 horsepower and 295 lb.-ft of torque or the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 which produces 285 horsepower and 260 lb.-ft of torque.  Both engines also come with stop/start or can be upgraded to the eTorque system that smooths out the torque band and either engine is available with a manual transmission or 8-speed automatic.
       
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The Ford Explorer hybrid got its EPA ratings finally. They're an improvement over the base 2.3 liter 4-cylinder delivering 27 city, 29 highway, 28 combined for the most efficient RWD model. That is an improvement of 6 mpg for city and 4 mpg combined. The AWD model comes in a bit lower at 23 city, 26 highway, and 25 combined. Unlike the Lincoln Aviator GT, the Ford Explorer Hybrid is not a plug-in model. 
      Powered by a 3.3 liter V6 plus the electrified drive train, the Explorer hybrid has a lot more power than the 4-cylinder with 318 horsepower and 322 lb-ft of torque. It comes with the same 10-speed automatic that all Explorers come with. Compared to the 2.3 liter turbo with 300 hp and 310 lb-ft of torque, we expect the Hybrid to feel faster and more refined due to the extra torque at the low end from the electric motor. 
      The Explorer Hybrid has more power and torque than its only direct competition, the Toyota Highlander Hybrid.  The Highlander does slightly better in fuel economy, but comes up 1,500 lbs short in towing capacity, though the next generation Highland Hybrid is supposed to get 34 mpg in front-wheel drive form.
      The Explorer Hybrid is available as a Limited trim model and starts at $51,780 after delivery charge, a $3,555 increase over an equivalent Limited trim. 
       

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The Ford Explorer hybrid got its EPA ratings finally. They're an improvement over the base 2.3 liter 4-cylinder delivering 27 city, 29 highway, 28 combined for the most efficient RWD model. That is an improvement of 6 mpg for city and 4 mpg combined. The AWD model comes in a bit lower at 23 city, 26 highway, and 25 combined. Unlike the Lincoln Aviator GT, the Ford Explorer Hybrid is not a plug-in model. 
      Powered by a 3.3 liter V6 plus the electrified drive train, the Explorer hybrid has a lot more power than the 4-cylinder with 318 horsepower and 322 lb-ft of torque. It comes with the same 10-speed automatic that all Explorers come with. Compared to the 2.3 liter turbo with 300 hp and 310 lb-ft of torque, we expect the Hybrid to feel faster and more refined due to the extra torque at the low end from the electric motor. 
      The Explorer Hybrid has more power and torque than its only direct competition, the Toyota Highlander Hybrid.  The Highlander does slightly better in fuel economy, but comes up 1,500 lbs short in towing capacity, though the next generation Highland Hybrid is supposed to get 34 mpg in front-wheel drive form.
      The Explorer Hybrid is available as a Limited trim model and starts at $51,780 after delivery charge, a $3,555 increase over an equivalent Limited trim. 
       
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Does anyone else notice a big drop in fuel economy when using the air conditioning? For people with automatic climate control do you ever manually turn off the air conditioner? 
  • Posts

    • I've said it here a good dozen times; I think this is a terrible mis-appropriation of the storied nameplate. Sure, the crowd that has come to lean on the overly-simplistic 'A-B-C, 1-2-3' naming mindset will applaud, but it's still a travesty. None-the-less, here it is, threatening to return. Hopefully, it'll be another scenario like the '08 Invicta concept, and it'll remain peacefully dormant.  
    • Most all EVs are overpriced for what you get. Some are going to say there's a strict difference between incentives and MSRP cuts, but ultimately both are discounts to entice buyers.
    • You're talking about a vehicle piloting itself; navigating lanes & doing appropriate speed/ braking/ distancing, with some course changes (if within the AD network of allowable operating zones). If following the laws of the roadway you're on, said vehicle should perform exactly the same whether a semi or a sedan. Did you think AD allows a sport sedan to do 90 in a 55 and cut off drivers/pass on the shoulder, but semi's shouldn't be doing that? But the point wasn't the driving dynamics, but hard selling a technology that allows the driver to hover their fingers an inch or 2 from the wheel. That's not even to the level of a gimmick- it's downright annoying. Either steer, or fold your arms and take a nap.
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. ccap41
      ccap41
      (32 years old)
    2. William Maley
      William Maley
      (31 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...