Trump administration reveals plans to roll back vehicle fuel standards


#1

Trump administration reveals plans to roll back vehicle fuel standards

Earlier this year, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it wanted to roll back vehicle efficiency standards put into place by the Obama administration, and today the Trump administration revealed its plan to do so. While the previous policies stated that automakers have until 2025 to get their average fuel efficiencies for passenger vehicles to over 50 miles per gallon, the Trump administration rules would freeze standards after 2021 and average fuel efficiency requirements would then remain around 37 miles per gallon. Further, the plan aims to revoke a waiver that allows California to set its own vehicle efficiency standards.

[…]

Seventeen states filed a lawsuit against the EPA in May after it announced plans to roll back auto emission standards and the agency is sure to face vigorous pushback over the proposal published today. Further, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has already said the state will fight back against the removal of its waiver. "

[…]


#2

Short term gains at the expense of long term losses.


#3

One of the big losers if this goes through will be Mexico. CAFE standards are an average. The auto companies can still build gas guzzlers, but they have to offset them with high-mileage models. Those high mpg cars aren’t popular, so a lot of them are made in Mexico to take advantage of the cheap labor, and thus bring the price down to where at least some Americans will buy them.

So, get rid of the standards (which will probably be impossible to meet in 2030 no matter what anybody does) and fewer underpowered cars will be built in Mexico.


#4

So what. The Obama regulations were a bit unrealistic. Fleet average of 50mpg? That would call for a lot of exceptionally high mileage cars to balance out work trucks and the like. And California, lol. I bought a clutch of bananas not too long ago and it no joke had a sticker that said “this product is known in the state of California to cause cancer”. Get out of here.


#5

Another step in the right direction.


#6

Maybe leaded gas will make a comeback


#7

maybe not leaded but non-ethanol mixed gas would be nice


#8

These standards were completely ridiculous.

The only way they could be achieved was with a massive transition to electric vehicles, so it wasn’t even about improving fuel efficiency of ICE vehicles.

I’m all for fuel efficiency, but an electric vehicle won’t work for me.


#9

Obama had no regard for Americans, what they believed, needed, enjoyed, just plain preferred. His abuse of the auto industry impacted on their product design and performance. It got so messed up, cars were made of plastic coated paper and either moved forward or not at all. They were made in Timbuktu and sold to folks that used to have jobs. You can see them today, piled on top of each other - they couldn’t make it until we elected a new President. Their term limits was Obama’s term. The car industry is making a comeback to the U.S. and the quality steel and the quality workers will be working! Let’s all hope recalls and “went out of business” cars are off the roads.


#10

I will not weigh in here concerning my agreement or disagreement with rolling back vehicle fuel standards.

But I will say . . .

This is yet another example of problems with Obama’s presidency.

If Obama really thought these standards were key issues, instead of rulings by executive fiat, he should have worked with Congress for law changes. (Then we could have also had a national discussion on the issue.)

Obama seemed to lack the will to carry this (and many other executive “laws” that may or may not have been reasonable) out legislatively.

Obama lacked the leadership to do this as well.

This is what happens with an “executive rule president”.

The “legislative” tone was set when ObamaCare was forcefully rammed down the proverbial throats of Americans.

So he was left with (admittedly with some exceptions) . . .

Capricious “executive rules” substituting for “legislation”.


#11

Recently some of the QT stations where I live have started carrying ethonol free gas. Not sure who uses it and what for.


#12

It is believed by many that the ethanol in gasoline exacerbates engine wear and deterioration of non-metal surfaces. Can’t prove it by me one way or the other.


#13

You are correct especially for small engines, plus it dilutes the BTU value of the gasoline, and it is immoral to turn food into fuel. Just saying.


#14

Let’s think about this a little. I don’t give grain to my cattle. But then not many do, and when they do, not much is given. Typically, what cattle (hogs too) are fed is “distiller’s grain”. It’s what’s left over after the starch in the grain is turned into alcohol. That turns something like corn, which is very low in protein naturally, into a high-protein product.

Even in the feed lots, most of what they get is distiller’s grain. Now, a lot of that grain is not saleable for human consumption. It’s damaged or moldy or insect infested or any number of the conditions that will cause people not to buy it for human consumption. I’m not saying it’s all like that, but a lot of it is. I’m no grain farmer, but I’m told some grain is raised just for ethanol. It’s not edible from the start.

So I don’t know whether ethanol production wastes food or not. I do know the starch is removed, but the process increases the protein level and the animals that eat the distiller’s grain turn it into a highly nutritious product.

Poultry, however, requires corn of a fairly high quality. So using any of that kind of corn for ethanol might indeed be wasting food, or at least making it more expensive than it needs to be.


#15

#16

Ethanol is bad for your engine. :unamused:


#17

Even automakers don’t want Trump’s emissions rollback

The only winners are the lawyers.

utomakers were not fans of the Obama-era rules. They also found them to be overly ambitious. Still, they’re not really happy with this proposal either.

The issue is that this kind of scorched earth rulemaking puts automakers in a sort of limbo. California and other states have already said they’ll challenge these new rules in court. While the states and the federal government battle it out with teams of lawyers, automakers will have to decide if they go with the Obama-era rules (basically going down the road they already know), go down the potential Trump-era rules (which might bite them in the ass if they are defeated in court), or find a happy medium and hope for the best.

It’s a happy medium that the auto industry wanted in the first place. They wanted some of the rules to be tempered with year-based goals. Something to take some of the pressure off the fuel economy rules without triggering what’s happening now, which is uncertainty.

To highlight the industry’s concerns, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (which includes Ford, BMW, Fiat Chrysler, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes, Toyota, Volkswagen, Volvo and others) issued the following statement:


#18

That’s largely because they have already invested in the Obama Administration’s diktat on CAFE.


#19

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.