Automotive Lobby: EPA's Vehicle Emission Standards 'Neither Reasonable Nor Achievable'
The group stresses that it supports the government's ultimate goal of electrification, but the method of achieving that goal should be realistic.

In April, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a rule intended to significantly curtail carbon emissions. If adopted, it would require that electric vehicles (E.V.s) make up 60 percent of all new vehicles sold by 2030—and 67 percent by 2032. It was a significant escalation from the Biden administration's previous goal of 50 percent E.V.s by 2030.
The nation's "Big Three" automakers—Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis—agreed to the latter goal when it was first floated in August 2021. Now, the auto industry's largest lobbying organization has gone on record opposing the more aggressive plan.
As part of the rule-making process, the EPA solicited comments on its proposal. One response came from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (AAI), a trade organization that represents the Big Three automakers as well as Honda, Nissan, Toyota, and others. AAI and its members "share EPA's and the Biden administration's goals to accelerate the transition to zero-emission vehicles," the group wrote, but the rule is "neither reasonable nor achievable in the timeframe covered" and "based on many assumptions that are largely outside the control of either EPA or individual automakers." As the standards are written, the group "does not believe they can be met without substantially increasing the cost of vehicles, reducing consumer choice, and disadvantaging major portions of the United States population and territory."
Further, the newly proposed requirements are significantly more strict than the ones agreed to in 2021. AAI points out that while the 2021 agreement only sought 50 percent compliance, it also allowed the goal to be achieved with a combination of battery-powered all-electric vehicles as well as plug-in hybrids and fuel-cell electrics. The newly proposed rule would only allow battery-powered electrics. Meanwhile, only 5.8 percent of new cars purchased in 2022 were electric, requiring a more than tenfold increase in less than a decade.
The EPA's proposal "effectively assume[s] that everything will go perfectly in the transformation" to E.V.s, AAI writes. But automakers already struggle to acquire the raw materials necessary to manufacture E.V. batteries; some regions of the country, even E.V.-friendly California, also lack the necessary electrical infrastructure to support so many new vehicles in need of regular charging.
The EPA apparently expects all of these problems to be solved in less than 10 years. "For perspective," AAI writes, "10 years is the time required to obtain the necessary permits for a mine in the United States. Once permitted, another ten years could elapse before the mine produces at capacity. Ten years is also close to the time required to bring 20 [megawatts] of power to a single location in the United States."
The group reiterates at multiple points throughout the letter that it supports the government's ultimate goal of electrification and expanding the number of climate-friendly vehicles on the road. But it asks that those goals be realistically achievable. In closing, the letter recommends that the EPA revisit Biden's more inclusive 50 percent goal, "coupled with and connected to regularly measured infrastructure deployment and battery critical mineral supply levels."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What does reasonable or achievable have to do with authoritarian progressive utopia?
Want To Work From Home Without Selling Anything? No Experience Needed, Weekly Payments… Join Exclusive Group Of People That Cracked {mjn} The Code Of Financial Freedom! Learn More details Good luck
Visit this website—————->> https://aprichs.blogspot.com
Nothing. Now shut up, submit, and obey!
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,400 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link————————————————>>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com
"now creating over $35,400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! "
Printer going brrrrrrr?
Just mandate that the electric vehicles have no batteries, just really long extension cords. You're not going to be allowed to travel outside of your 15 minute city anyways.
A comment made in jest - a little bit of snark - but to a bureaucrat, that would be "an option". Careful, Jerry - they may take your "suggestion" seriously! I believe what is really driving this EV foolishness is the desire for control.
So how do they (our betters) make tus peons buy EV's, if we don't want to? Let's count the ways they can use:
(1) punitive taxes levied on purchase of ICE vehicles
(2) punitive taxes levied on the use of ICE vehicles
(3) threats to close automakers that don't meet the "goal"
(4) tax credits for purchase of EV's (supported either by the printing press or the taxes in (1)
(5) tax credits for ownership of ;EV's (supported either by the printing press, the taxes in (2) or (6)
(6) punitive taxes levied per gallon "fossil fuels"
(7) a rationing system that limits monthly purchase of fossil fuels to an amount that does not allow "normal" use of ICE vehicles
(8) at tax- or legal-regime that eliminates the easy sourcing of parts for ICE vehicles. (When the old pickup won't run and can't be fixed because "parts are not available", whatcha gonna do, peon?)
Why must we wait until 2030 or 2032 for this utopia to arriave? This will save the planet, eliminate the need for AC cooling systems (saving just "tons" of electricity), and give us the (not our betters, just "us") the living standards of the average peon in Boogaboogaboogistan. And, if we allow our government to do this to us, we will deserve to live henceforth like Boogistanians..
For those of us in our 70's it sounds like some really exciting drama to watch. Put another bag of popcorn under the sun-lens, Mable. It takes longer to pop it that way than the microwave used to, but I still like buttered popcorn while I watch drama. (I wonder if cows will be "allowed" after 2030?)
You will be made to care. Submit. Obey.
Indeed. You will live in a pod and eat ze bugs.
Und you vill be happy.
They don't want more electric cars, they want fewer cars overall. That way, more people are dependent on public transportation, and when you have to ride the bus you can only go where the bus goes. Its all about control.
Yeah, a 7% increase in two years is tough if you’ve got to bring additional manufacturing online to produce 7% more vehicles but it could mean literally doing less than nothing if you just sell fewer vehicles overall.
The 7% increase in 2 years is less of a hurdle than the 55% increase in the next 7 years. That's a sustained 8% year over year, and since we can guess they aren't going to hit that level of increase for a few years at least, it means even larger increases will be needed in the final years leading up to the 2030 deadline.
I don't think the manufacturers want to see the loss in sales/revenues from this mandate, of course the people making the mandates are never affected by them.
It also means more 6 year olds in Africa will be up for gainful employment.
Can't we just uninvent the internal combustion engine?
I’ve managed $19930 in no more than 30 days through working job at my apartment. Just when I’ve lost my office position, I was so distressed but luckily I have searched this on-line task which is why I am ready to collect thousand USD from the comfort of my home.
Anyone can get this career and could get more money…..
…
Online heading… Following site………........>>> http://www.Richcash1.com
Wouldn't it be better virtue signaling to require all cars to be child-labor-free and slave-labor-free and rare earth mineral free?
What do you have against the liberal world order?
Mostly that it's completely idiotic.
No, it’s evil.
Idiotic and evil are not mutually exclusive.
In fact, they generally go hand in hand with malicious.
Move the reply button
So, family get together. Two of my older broodlings getting their licenses in a couple months-to-years and my BIL, their Uncle, tries to convince everyone, including the 10 yr. old, to buy a/his Tesla. "You should save up to buy my Tesla." he says. "No, I don't want a Tesla." the 10 yr. old replies. "It's good for the environment." he presses. "I. don't. care. I don't want a Tesla." the 10 yr. old gets more adroitly resolute. We get in the car to go home and the 10 yr. old says, "I'm so tired of hearing about [Uncle]'s Tesla. He's worse than [classmate] who doesn't eat meat."
*everyone else in the car, regardless of age*
History will not look kindly upon the current crop of religious zealots.
If his Tesla's so great, why does he want to sell it?
Maybe I wasn't clear that they're religious zealots? That's a bit (or a lot) like asking, "Why do people go to Church if the free grape juice and crackers are so terrible?" Pawning his Tesla off on my kids is how he tithes to his own Megachurch.
Just wait till he meets a pan vegan atheist. Ugh.
Surprising! I’ve been making 100 Dollars an hour since I started freelance on the Internet six months ago. I work long hours a day from home and do the basic work that I get from the business I met online. share this work for you opportunity This is definitely the best job I have ever done.
....
Go to this link.................>>> http://www.Richcash1.com
Disgusting display by the auto companies kowtowing to the overlords. "Oh, please don't beat me and the free market a whole lot, but I would be your friend if you back off just a little." It's telling that they are afraid to speak truth to power. We are doomed.
The "E" in "ESG" stands for "Environmental," that's why.
It seems to stand more for "Evil".
Evil Stupid Goombas.
Better copyright that, or they'll tax you on it.
substantially increasing the cost of vehicles, reducing consumer choice, and disadvantaging major portions of the United States population
That's the goal.
"Hm so they confirmed this could work."
The government shouldn’t set any fuel economy standards. Earlier standards already killed tens of thousands, by forcing manufacturers to make smaller, lighter, less safe vehicles. Now they want to strand people at home in climate change fueled wildfires because the green power grid is down and their all-electric cars (needed to meet the average fuel economy standards) don’t give them any alternative means of escape (as a hybrid vehicle would).
Hybrids are the automotive equivalent of “just the tip”.
No. Emissions and fuel economy standards are "just the tip". Hybrids are the rhythm method.
Move the reply button
God you're a fucking dumbass.
Gee what a rejoinder.
God you’re a retarded faggot Marxist.
Total horseshit. The CAFE standards are what resulted in BIGGER vehicles. Minivans and SUV's on a light truck chassis rather than station wagons on a car chassis. Yes that resulted in dead people - but that mostly meant kids and pedestrians outside the vehicle not drivers inside the vehicle. Not that anyone gives a shit about killing kids outside the vehicle. Or about the other consequence that cars themselves have now been run off the road because of bigger vehicles. Or that peds have now almost completely disappeared which is one reason Americans are fatter than ever.
How fucking moronic and assholish can you be to even pretend that vehicles are remotely 'smaller' or 'lighter' now. Lying piece of shit.
Then die. Nobody needs you'rey shitty polluting cars anyhow. You've had years. Figure it out or die.
No, you are the idiot. How do you think your food is going to be grown and delivered without the ICE? I'm just fine. Live in the country. Raise my own cattle and vegetables. Have land that I can raise grains on. Know how to hunt and fish and butcher my own animals. All you idiots in the city will starve if we don't have ICEs to farm and ranch with. Which is fine by me. Less morons like you fucking up liberty, freedom and the environment (electric vehicles are a hell of a lot harder on the environment than ICE). Oh and guess what, humanity, even with the worst case scenario, using the least likely inputs, isn't even close to being threatened with extinction anytime in the next century. That's just stupid talking points by someone who doesn't fucking understand science. But has the gall to call others idiots. Fucking scientifically illiterate moron.
When the system collapses people locked in their cities will starve. There will be no escape.
People living in rural areas will be more prepared for when it happens. Hunt, fish, plant gardens.....
If you live in the cities, oh well, tough luck.
It is none of your business if I have a "shitty, polluting car".
Wow! Angry and hateful.
You tony, bro? Haha.
It would be much simpler if YOU died. So kill yourself. No one could ever love you anyway. It will be a bonus for your family to be rid of you. You’re just a burden.
Just fucking kill yourself.
Ah, another Dunning-Kruger tyrant who seems to believe they can simply mandate innovation. How unoriginal.
If you're worried about CO2 emissions, just cease all of yours.
Then die.
What are you gonna do? Drive two hours towards my home, defend your position for 45 min., then drive another couple more hours in order to make me?
I imagine all those EVs sitting around in 2030 because there's not sufficient electrical generation or infrastructure to power them, plus all the electric heating, cooling, cooking, manufacturing, transportation, communications, etc., that will be mandated.
It's not a bug, it's a feature.
No cars, no pollution.
You can't make a utopia without breaking some eggs.
If Leftists are so worried about emissions, why don't they ever call to mandate stopping the emissions that cause more people?
Once again F’En scientifically retarded Environmentalists.
Electricity IS NOT a source of energy. It’s a transmission median.
They are just as stupid with money and pretending it has a source of value all within itself. The level of cognitive dissonance is a plague of retardedness.
Who in their right mind would trust such blatant stupidity with any "scientific consensus"?
Exactly right...as an engineer it's like nails on a chalkboard whenever I hear idiots refer to electric anything as 'zero emission' when the vast majority of the electricity generated in this country comes from fossil fuels - now if the lefties would support nuclear (and especially thorium) power generation we might have a realistic path to zero emissions in the near future but thinking that wind and solar alone are going to get that done just goes to show how detached from reality these people really are
If they really wanted us to drive electric cars, they'd be frantically building nuclear power plants to cover the 24-hour baseload, and natural gas power plants for peak power when wind and solar are producing nothing. Instead, they're shutting down the power plants needed to charge e-cars.
The Regressives want us restricted a 15 minute walking radius (about 1/2 mile) of our homes, aside from riding buses and trains to destinations they approve of. And that will leave the roads clear for their internal-combustion powered limos...
But before then, they'll give their co-conspirators at GM, etc., one final round of taxpayer subsidized profits from selling us e-cars to replace our gasoline and diesel cars, before it gets out that soon charging your e-car will be banned and it will just be a driveway ornament. I'm not sure if the "useful idiots" running the car companies realize that if they continue cooperating with the wreckers, this is their last round of sales...
Want To Work From Home Without Selling Anything? No Experience Needed, Weekly Payments... Join Exclusive Group Of People That Cracked The Code Of Financial Freedom! Learn More details Good luck...
Visit this website...https://prizebest01.blogspot.com/
Remember what happened in Commiefornia when the electric grid was under extreme duress during the heat wave. People were told to forego charging their precious little Teslas. Of course that state has a mental condition which prevents them from recognizing the true problem: their electric grid needs upgrading and improvements.
Now expand that to the rest of the nation that is woefully unprepared for such a scheme of 67% EV.
It's obvious those people simply have no idea what it takes to to be able to support such a mandate.
None at all. Like all liberals they think electrical power comes from a wall socket just like all food comes from the grocery store.
“does not believe they can be met without substantially increasing the cost of vehicles, reducing consumer choice, and disadvantaging major portions of the United States population and territory.”
Well yeah, that's the whole point of the rule: to make owning & using a personal vehicle as expensive and inconvenient as possible
I lost my office job 3 month ago, I was very upset and an unsuccessful try for a job hunt I was found this online job. and now I am able to earn thousands from home. Everybody can do this job and earn more,Click the link————>>> GOOGLE WORK
Start working at home with Google! Just work for few hours and have more time with friends and family. I earn up to $4500 per week. It's a great work at home opportunity. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out.....COPY►www.salary49.com
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Sounds like Biden Admin taking lessons from Trump on negotiating. Start off with an unreasonable offer. Then the final rule seems reasonable. But if they started off with what they thought was realistic people would still push-back and it'd be delayed more.