Fuel Efficiency Standards

 

Economists Slam Vehicle GHG Rule Freeze, Critique 'Flawed' Cost Analysis. According to Inside EPA, “Economists are renewing their strong criticism of the Trump administration’s proposal to freeze vehicle fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards, detailing the plan’s ‘pessimistic’ stance on the cost of meeting current standards and floating a ‘safety valve’ that could limit such costs without rolling back the rules. The researchers’ Dec. 7 analysis in Science does not fully outline a cost containment tool for the vehicle rules -- though they liken it to existing provisions in cap-and-trade programs, such as the one run by California in which entities can buy credits in lieu of compliance once prices rise above a predetermined threshold. Rather than offering a detailed new proposal, the cost discussion is part of a broader takedown of the rollback proposal, including claims that Trump officials relied on flawed assumptions about drivers’ behavior to make the case that the proposal would boost traffic safety. ‘We see no economic justification to keep the standard flat [as the administration proposes] from [model year] 2020 to 2025,’ nearly a dozen economists write in the article, ‘Flawed Analyses of Fuel Economy Standards.’ While the article does not endorse the Obama administration’s 2016 technical analysis in support of retaining its standards, it says the Trump administration’s 2018 justification for its rollback has ‘fundamental flaws and inconsistencies, is at odds with basic economic theory and empirical studies, is misleading and does not improve estimates of costs and benefits of fuel economy standards beyond those in the 2016 analysis.’” [Inside EPA, 12/10/18 (=)]

 

Other News

 

GM Fights Government To Retain Tax Credit For Electric Cars. According to Associated Press, “General Motors is fighting to retain a valuable tax credit for electric vehicles as the nation’s largest automaker tries to deal with the political fallout triggered by its plans to shutter several U.S. factories and shed thousands of workers. Preserving the $7,500 tax incentive for buyers is crucial for GM as the company pivots from internal combustion engines in favor of building cars powered by batteries or hydrogen fuel cells. Yet the layoffs and plant closings could imperil GM’s push to keep the incentive. It helps make plug-ins such as the $36,000 Chevy Bolt more affordable at a time when competition from other electric vehicle makers is heating up. GM faces opposition from President Donald Trump and other Republicans who consider the credit a waste of taxpayer money and want it eliminated. Trump, who has pledged a manufacturing rebirth in the Midwest, reacted angrily to GM’s ‘transformation ‘ announcement late last month, declaring that his administration was ‘looking at cutting all GM subsidies, including for electric cars.’ The company already is on the verge of being phased out of the tax credit program unless Congress changes a law that caps the break at 200,000 vehicles per manufacturer. Without the incentive, GM may be forced to cut the price of its electric cars to keep prospective customers from taking their business elsewhere, according to automotive industry experts. As evidence of the credit’s importance to GM’s future, the automaker has expanded its lobbying footprint in Washington and even joined forces with two rivals, Tesla and Nissan, to call for 200,000-vehicle limit to be scrapped.” [Associated Press, 12/10/18 (=)]

 

Why General Motors Is Ditching The Chevy Volt. According to Greentech Media, “When General Motors launched the Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid in 2010, it was heralded as a breakthrough ‘car of the future.’ Turns out it came with an expiry date. Come March, GM will no longer produce the Volt, as part of the automaker’s restructuring plan announced last month. GM said it will focus on growing its truck and SUV business, while prioritizing future investments in next-generation of battery-electric vehicle architectures. The Volt isn’t part of that plan, news that EV fans took hard. A primary selling point for the Volt was that owners could go (mostly) electric without having to compromise on range. The Volt’s roughly 50-mile electric range covers most daily commutes in America. For longer journeys, the car seamlessly switches over to using its small gasoline engine to power an on-board generator, for a total hybrid range of more than 400 miles. But GM’s customer data shows that Volt owners simply aren’t turning on their gasoline engines all that much anymore. ‘What we’re finding is that consumers are … carrying around this engine and driving on full electricity,’ said Shad Balch, Chevrolet spokesperson, in a recent interview at the LA Auto Show.” [Greentech Media, 12/10/18 (+)]

 

Mass. Extends Rebate Program. According to E&E News, “Massachusetts is extending its electric vehicle rebate program through the middle of next year. The administration of Gov. Charlie Baker (R) announced the program will now run through at least June 30, thanks in part to $3 million from the Department of Energy Resources in response to increased demand. Since 2014, the program has issued or reserved more than $23 million in rebates for more than 11,000 cars and has reduced the state’s greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 35,000 metric tons annually. Starting Jan. 1, the program will shift its focus to meet the demands of the industry by supporting only qualifying battery-electric vehicles up to a $50,000 sales price with a $1,500 rebate. Information about the program can be found at the MOR-EV website.” [E&E News, 12/11/18 (=)]

 

Chart Of The Day — PEV Registrations Per 1,000 People, 2017. According to Axios, “This new Energy Department chart provides a helpful way of seeing how electric vehicle adoption in California is far ahead of other states. By the numbers: Per DOE’s Vehicle Technologies Office... ‘California had 8.64 plug-in vehicle (PEV) registrations per 1,000 people in 2017, followed by Hawaii with 5.12, and Washington state with 4.06.’ ‘Other states with PEV registrations per 1,000 people greater than two were Oregon, Vermont, Colorado, Arizona, and Maryland.’ The big picture: Cumulative electric vehicle sales in the U.S. recently topped 1 million. According to the pro-EV coalition Veloz, over 500,000 of them were in California, which is by far the nation’s largest auto market.” [Axios, 12/11/18 (+)]

 

On My Screen: Russia, Tesla, Wetlands. According to Axios, “Tesla: Business Insider reports that ‘Even as Tesla remains the most shorted US-listed stock, it’s beating the broader market by a mile.’ ‘Tesla has soared 45% since putting in its 2018 closing low of $250.56 in early October. The S&P 500 has fallen 8% over the same time. Shares are now trading near $366, about 6.6% below their all-time high hit in June 2017,’ they report.” [Axios, 12/11/18 (=)]

 

Opinion Pieces

 

Op-Ed: Two-Faced Industry On Display In L.A. According to an op-ed by David Reichmuth in Automotive News, “If the Los Angeles Auto Show is the litmus test of American carmakers’ commitment to new, advanced mobility, you’d think we could look forward to a future that is electric and autonomous, clean and moving beyond congestion. But what was on display at this year’s show was hypocrisy. While the industry has been touting next-gen mobility here on the West Coast, its lobbying teams in Washington have pursued a backward-looking strategy, leading to a radical proposal from the Trump administration to roll back the nation’s clean-car standards and revoke state authority to lead on reducing tailpipe emissions and advancing electric cars. Automakers claim they are opposed to the proposed rollback, but our analysis of comments by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers shows their proposal could result in even more pollution than the administration’s preferred rollback scenario. Not all automakers stand together, but even a less harmful proposal from Honda would still significantly erode the benefits of the standards currently in place. The result of a rollback will be a U.S. auto market that is grossly out of step with global trends, resulting in the loss of tens of thousands of good manufacturing jobs across the country; dirtier, more fuel-hungry cars that are more expensive to drive; and more climate warming emissions.” [Automotive News, 12/10/18 (+)]

 

 

 

Please do not respond to this email.

If you have questions or comments please contact mitch@beehivedc.com