Jump to content
William Maley

Industry News: EPA Moves Forward With Locking In Emission Regulations By 2025

Recommended Posts

The Environmental Protection Agency has today proposed to keep its vehicle emission targets through 2025, shocking a lot of people and possibly setting up a major fight between regulators and the automotive industry. 

According to Automotive News, the proposal will now enter a 30-day comment period. After this period, the EPA administrator could finalize this proposal and begin enforcing these standards a bit quicker. By 2025, automakers will need to increase their  to 54.5 miles per gallon corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) numbers to 54.5 miles per gallon.

Why move the proposal up now? A proposal was expected next year with a final decision in 2018. The EPA said in a statement their “extensive technical analysis” has shown no reason as to why the timeframe or standards should be changed. Also, automakers will be able to achieve those 2025 standards at “similar or even a lower cost”.

“Due to the industry’s rapid technological advancement, the technical record could arguably support strengthening the 2022-2025 standards. However, the administrator’s judgment is [that] now is not the time to introduce uncertainty by changing the standards. The industry has made huge investments in fuel efficiency and low emissions technologies based on these standards, and any changes now may disrupt those plans,” said Janet McCabe, acting assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation on a conference call.

That analysis started back in July and is used to determine whether or not the EPA needs to make adjustments to the regulations or schedule.

But there might be another reason. With President Obama leaving the White House on January 20th and President-elect Donald Trump, there are concerns that Trump's administration could challenge the regulations. By doing this now, it would make the process of undoing these regulations more complicated - notice and comment requirements, possible court battle with environmental groups, etc. McCabe denied this, saying the decision was based on analysis and a “rigorous technical record,”

Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears


View full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The present EPA staff has been an activist staff. They have pushed  a very green agenda with no regard to cost to the MFG and or the consumer. 

Their moved have even been un constitutional  at times. The Clean Air Act was written to exempt cars built with emission controls so they could be removed if they were used for off road use as in grassroots racing.

The present EPA had taken it upon them selves to reinterpreted the law passed by the Senate and House to day it really meant to cover the off road use too. This means if you own a 2005 Camaro and you only drag race it you would not be permitted to put in a Big Block engine and you would be required to run full emissions on the car even if it never turned a wheel more than a quarter mile or a lap at a time.

The RPM act is still floating out there and SEMA is working to make sure it gets passed to prevent appointed government agencies like the EPA from changing laws that were passed by a constitutional body.

Look for more games like this from the outgoing progressive appointed agencies. They know much of their work will be over turned and they will try to do anything to delay that.

This has been why so many are upset with the election results as with the loss of the house, senate and oval office they will lose much of what they have done in many areas and to the point they may not be able to undo much if and when they should get back into office.

A lot of people were watching the moves Obama did with his presidential decrees but the appointed agencies were all busy out of sight and mind changing the laws from how they were intended to suit their own needs. We at this point do not know all the damage done yet. 

Laws like these need to be passed buy the voting body not some appointed bureaucrat. No matter what side you are on you should never over step the constitution as it could be used against you too at some point. 

The EPA has backed off but SEMA does not trust them and is still working to pass the RPM act. If you enjoy motorsports or actively participate you need to be aware of this.  

Even Tim Ryan the Democrat from Ohio was against what the EPA was trying to do. He even dropped to my cubical one day at work. Too bad he did not displace Pelos.

The staff at the EPA is dirty and need to be watch till they are replaced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, coercion is the worst use of government/regulatory powers.

The miles per gallon metric is starting to cause some stupid comparison of vehicles.

 

Like EV's and gas vehicles. The mpg-e is just a weird way to conform the efficiency of EV's with gas cars to make them comparable. But that's not how EV efficiency should be measured. If EV's become big, and ICE vehicles become smaller, say even 20% EV, 80% gas, it will eventually cause FE between the two to become totally lopsided in the favour of the EV's.

 

Miles per kilowatt is a better measure of efficiency, because EV power density is measured in kilowatts, but that's not what they put on the moroney, they use mpg-e.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In so many ways it seems like we do the dumbest things possible. You have both made some good points, there is not enough face palm for the situation...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they need to back off on this high CAFE and noose like emissions madness.  Take the hand off the throat for awhile and let the companies figure out how to make the newest stuff cheaper so the price of everything can not raise up so much. 

At the same time, i'd enjoy seeing the focus move to incentivizing Volt like powertrains (energy diversity).  The real mpg increases are going to become incremental pretty soon, but plugging in as a choice and option will spur a charge network and in home infrastructure development across all manufacturers and globally.  Pure electrics too, but i think reality is we are 20-30 years away from electrics becoming wide spread and convenient still. 

Of course GM has a leg up on pretty much everyone with electrics right now.  I don't count Tesla because they are not everyman's product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, regfootball said:

they need to back off on this high CAFE and noose like emissions madness.  Take the hand off the throat for awhile and let the companies figure out how to make the newest stuff cheaper so the price of everything can not raise up so much. 

At the same time, i'd enjoy seeing the focus move to incentivizing Volt like powertrains (energy diversity).  The real mpg increases are going to become incremental pretty soon, but plugging in as a choice and option will spur a charge network and in home infrastructure development across all manufacturers and globally.  Pure electrics too, but i think reality is we are 20-30 years away from electrics becoming wide spread and convenient still. 

Of course GM has a leg up on pretty much everyone with electrics right now.  I don't count Tesla because they are not everyman's product.

Tesla is in deep crap financially, something people do not want to realize.

We need to  top trying to slut shame people into change, and bring them actual options.  As Wings said in the fast charger thread, people in America will buy electrics when they become a viable option.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you really want to cut down on emissions, tax gas at $2-3 per gallon and people will flock to electric cars and out of 15 mpg trucks.  CAFE is a skewed number anyway, they can hit it with electrics and hybrids.  Car makers will still try to work cost out so they can sell cars.

There are cities in Europe talking about banning diesel cars from entering the city by 2025, countries saying by 2030 gas powered cars won't be allowed to be sold.  If Europe and china ban emission producing cars in 2030, there would be no reason for an American car company to even develop a gas engine when it can't be used in 2 of the largest car markets in the world.  They will put ever dollar into EV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MB has over 20 models that get 16 or less city. If the diesels go and a towering gas tax kills off the 16 MPG gas vehicles, MB would lose 2/3rds of their vehicles.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2016 at 7:39 PM, Suaviloquent said:

Miles per kilowatt is a better measure of efficiency, because EV power density is measured in kilowatts, but that's not what they put on the moroney, they use mpg-e.

I totally agree with the Miles Per Kilowatt. I think that would be a much better standard. I fear that because most buyers have a hard time changing their thinking from Miles Per Gallon to Miles Per Kilowatt since they want an equivalent comparison.

EPA should have everything stated MPK on all EV systems and in the fine print say a MPK is equal to MPG formula. Let the consumer have the facts but this way it would then be able to phase out the comparison once we really make the switch over to EV everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the deal. 

You can force higher refs but it will come at a high cost. Note no one is really making money on the new EV cars and they may not for g good deal longer.

Also you raise taxes you just make people mad and you slow the economy and fail to get elected.

The real deal is to get government and the automakers to work together. This was why I was glad Mary was asked to be an advisor. 

This is a two way street wher it is in the best interest of all parties to work together for the good of the country. 

The regulations should be brought up for review every so many years. This way it can be adjusted to real expectations and not destroy the automakers and still let people able to afford cars and own cars they really want to buy not forced to buy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

The regulations should be brought up for review every so many years. This way it can be adjusted to real expectations and not destroy the automakers and still let people able to afford cars and own cars they really want to buy not forced to buy.

Reviewing regulations is crucial, and will have implications beyond the auto industry.

There is such a thing as a proxy war...we are fighting a proxy war with Iran by arming the Saudi's to the teeth in their battle against the Yemeni Hoothi rebels, which are backed by Iran.

It feels like we are fighting a proxy war with the German auto industry via diesel gate.  The punishment is way out of line with the crime, and will be much more environmentally damaging to crush half a million cars.

You have an additional impact on our relations with Germany....

We had an interesting dialogue at a debate tournament I judged/Coached this last weekend...between students and coaches of very liberal and very conservative as well as libertarian viewpoints.  We all were of the view that were society to more closely follow the ideas of Adam Smith we would be much better off.

I think electrification is inevitable....but I am damn sure going to enjoy my ICE cars while they are around...and my electrics when they come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   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 dfelt
      EPA - Fuels New Standard - Premium?
      Current administration has been doing everything they can to gut the EPA even though Auto companies have stated just push out the MPG standard till 2030 or so giving us time to delivery the results. Yet with that, the auto industry is trying to get onboard with Europe to a single standard. In Europe, 95 RON is their baseline fuel standard. This is equal to our 91 octane and while we have a 40 to 50 cent premium standard for 91 octane fuel, this only makes up 11% of the gas produced in the US. Making 91 the new base standard would increase gas creation resulting in lower prices for that gas and cleaner running engines along with a 3-4% increase in fuel economy for new Auto's.
      The story does say that you would not see a drop right away overnight but over a couple of years in the price of premium.
      This brings up some interesting questions:
      What about the cost hit to the lower income parts of society? Could they handle seeing a hit to buy gas as automakers stop producing auto's that run on regular or mid grade?
      Could they just drop Mid grade and like Costco, offer only regular or premium at the same price to help transition people to Premium autos everywhere?
      What else could be done to help with a change to a superior fuel?
      The Drive Story
    • By William Maley
      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)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      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)
    • By William Maley
      Nissan is joining Toyota in gradually ending the sale of diesel vehicles in Europe.
      “Along with other manufacturers and industry bodies we can see the progressive decline of diesel but we do not anticipate its sudden end in the short-term. At this point in time and for many customers, modern diesel engines will remain in demand and continue to be available within Nissan’s powertrain offering,” a Nissan spokeswoman told Reuters.
      “In Europe, where our diesel sales are concentrated, our electrification push will allow us to discontinue diesel gradually from passenger cars at the time of each vehicle renewal.”
       
      Sales of diesel vehicles have been on a sharp decline for the past year due in part to rising taxes and possible bans looming. Analysts believe this trend will continue in 2018.
      Last month, a source revealed to Reuters that Nissan is planning to lay off hundreds of workers at its Sunderland plant due to falling diesel vehicle sales.
      Source: Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Nissan is joining Toyota in gradually ending the sale of diesel vehicles in Europe.
      “Along with other manufacturers and industry bodies we can see the progressive decline of diesel but we do not anticipate its sudden end in the short-term. At this point in time and for many customers, modern diesel engines will remain in demand and continue to be available within Nissan’s powertrain offering,” a Nissan spokeswoman told Reuters.
      “In Europe, where our diesel sales are concentrated, our electrification push will allow us to discontinue diesel gradually from passenger cars at the time of each vehicle renewal.”
       
      Sales of diesel vehicles have been on a sharp decline for the past year due in part to rising taxes and possible bans looming. Analysts believe this trend will continue in 2018.
      Last month, a source revealed to Reuters that Nissan is planning to lay off hundreds of workers at its Sunderland plant due to falling diesel vehicle sales.
      Source: Reuters
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.