Fuel Efficiency Standards

 

Protests, Pleas Expected At Hearing On Trump Fuel Rollback. According to The Washington Post, “Doctors, environmental groups and California officials will weigh in on the Trump administration’s proposal to roll back car-mileage standards at what could be a raucous hearing in a region with some of the nation’s worst air pollution. The daylong session in Fresno on Monday is the first of three events by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to gather public comment on the mileage plan. The proposal announced in August would freeze U.S. mileage standards at levels mandated by the Obama administration for 2020 instead of continuing to rise to 36 miles per gallon by 2025, 10 miles per gallon higher than the current requirement. Administration officials say waiving the tougher fuel efficiency requirements would make vehicles more affordable, which would get safer vehicles into consumers’ hands more quickly. Opponents say it would undercut efforts to reduce unhealthy tailpipe emissions that are a significant contributor to climate change. Environmental groups plan to hold a protest outside the hall where the hearing will take place. California, where some areas are experiencing the worst smog in decades, cannot afford to ‘turn back the clock’ on its efforts to fight air pollution, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said on a conference call with reporters Friday. Becerra is expected to testify at Monday’s hearing along with Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board. ‘This is existential for California,’ Becerra said. ‘Failure is not an option for us.’” [The Washington Post, 9/24/18 (=)]

 

Trump Admin, Calif. Set For A Public Face-Off. According to E&E News, “The Trump administration is set for an epic showdown today with California. The focus: federal clean car rules, a major sticking point between the Republican administration and the country’s boldest blue state. EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will hold a public hearing today in Fresno, Calif., on their proposed rollback of Obama-era clean car standards. The hearing is expected to draw dozens of attendees and feature passionate testimony from President Trump’s critics. The two agencies last month outlined a series of options for the car rules. The preferred option was freezing fuel economy targets at 2020 levels through 2026, rather than increasing their stringency each year as President Obama had envisioned. Just as significant, the agencies are taking public comment on the possibility of revoking California’s Clean Air Act waiver for greenhouse gases. The waiver lets California set more stringent tailpipe pollution rules than the federal government. Twelve other states have adopted those tougher rules, representing about 40 percent of the country’s auto market. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D), who has filed dozens of lawsuits to block action by the Trump administration, is scheduled to testify at the hearing. He’s expected to deliver a stinging rebuke of the proposal and its impact on planet-warming emissions. On a Friday call with reporters, Becerra emphasized that California has been a leader on vehicle pollution benchmarks without sacrificing economic growth.” [E&E News, 9/24/18 (=)]

 

Three Days Of The Commenter. According to Politico, “EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said late Friday that they have heard the calls for an extension of the comment deadline on their auto proposal — and the public can have three extra days. In a Federal Register notice slated to be published on Wednesday, the agencies reveal that 18 different petitions — from blue states, environmentalists, 32 Senate Democrats and even the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers — asked for at least 60 more days to comment on the complex proposal. All the petitions, including the automakers’ request, were denied. ‘Automakers will need maximum lead time to respond to the final rule,’ the agencies wrote. However, the agencies said they will extend the comment period — by three whole days. The Clean Air Act requires the comment period be open for 30 days after the last public hearing, which EPA will hold on Sept. 26. Hence, the comment period used to be Tuesday, Oct. 23, and is now Friday, Oct. 26. … The first public hearing runs today in Fresno, Calif. On Tuesday, Dearborn, Mich. gets its turn at the mic, and EPA ends with a day of testimony in Pittsburgh, Pa. More details on the hearings are here. Expect to hear from a few state officials in addition to the usual coterie of environmental activists. For example, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who is already suing EPA over its decision to roll back its emissions standards, said on Friday he plans to speak at the Fresno hearing today.” [Politico, 9/24/18 (=)]

 

California, Other States Set To Challenge Trump Over Relaxed Emissions Rules. According to Automotive News, “Democratic leaders in three states warned again Friday they are ready to challenge the Trump administration in court, alleging abuse of power, if it moves ahead with plans to weaken tailpipe emission standards, and they criticized the auto industry for welching on a national agreement to roughly double fuel economy targets. The EPA and NHTSA last month proposed freezing Obama-era fuel efficiency standards at 2020 levels, instead of requiring graduated increases through 2025 for a fleetwide average of about 47 mpg. Automakers triggered the proposal by asking President Donald Trump to revisit the EPA’s ruling that the standards agreed to by the federal government, the State of California and automakers in 2011 remained achievable. ‘Maybe one of the things we should start doing in this country is naming hurricanes after car companies and car models,’ Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy said during a conference call Friday with reporters. ‘Maybe that would bring the message home to the American people about how much pollution comes from the transportation industry and how much work remains to be done.’” [Automotive News, 9/21/18 (=)]

 

'We're In Favor Of Keeping The Standard' — Ford CEO. According to E&E News, “Ford Motor Co. CEO Jim Hackett this week signaled his opposition to the Trump administration’s rollback of Obama-era clean car rules. Speaking Wednesday to the Midwestern Governors Association in Columbus, Ohio, Hackett acknowledged chanting, sign-waving environmentalists outside the meeting and aligned himself with their cause. ‘There’s a group of people out there protesting today, the governor and I, about CO2 standards,’ Hackett said, according to a recording. He added, ‘Ford is leading in this regard. ... We’re in favor of keeping the standard, not a rollback. We have plans to meet it.’ The Trump administration last month outlined a series of options for the car rules. The preferred option was freezing fuel economy standards at 2020 levels through 2026, rather than increasing their stringency each year as President Obama had advocated. Hackett and Bill Ford, the executive chairman of the company, previously asserted in a March blog post, ‘We support increasing clean car standards through 2025 and are not asking for a rollback. We want one set of standards nationally, along with additional flexibility to help us provide more affordable options for our customers.’ But environmentalists viewed the March post with skepticism. They argued that the term ‘flexibilities’ was code for a series of loopholes that, taken together, would have the same effect as a rollback.” [E&E News, 9/21/18 (=)]

 

Wheeler, German Counterpart Meet In Canada During G-7. According to E&E News, “Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler met yesterday with the German environment minister about vehicle standards, as Germany moves in the opposite direction on tailpipe pollution. The meeting between Wheeler and German environment minister Svenja Schulze took place as part of the Group of Seven summit in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The two leaders discussed ‘the importance of enforcement for vehicle standards,’ among other things, according to an EPA news release. The meeting came on the heels of EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration proposing last month to dial back Obama-era clean car standards. The two agencies outlined a series of options for the car rules. The preferred option was freezing fuel economy targets at 2020 levels through 2026, rather than increasing their stringency each year as President Obama had envisioned. Schulze, on the other hand, has sought to crack down on pollution from the transportation sector in order to meet her country’s climate goals. In June, Schulze announced Germany would likely not meet its goals under the Paris climate agreement. She singled out the transportation sector for not pulling its weight. Emissions from that sector have remained flat since 1990, and ‘the least has happened there,’ she said.” [E&E News, 9/21/18 (=)]

 

Fresno Heat And Foul Air Set Stage For Trump Tailpipe Debate. According to Bloomberg, “To test how Americans feel about its plan for rolling back car and truck pollution standards, the Trump administration will hold an initial public hearing on Monday in Fresno, California, a place where it might reasonably expect a friendly response. Fresno lies in the Central Valley, California’s farm belt, where people drive pickups more out of necessity than fashion and where, according to the California New Car Dealers Association, the share of zero-emission and hybrid new-vehicle sales account for less than half what they do in San Francisco. Fresno is also represented in Washington by Congressman Devin Nunes, a Donald Trump loyalist who once described climate change as nonsense. ‘The Central Valley supported Trump over Hillary Clinton and its auto dealers have been plaintiffs in cases challenging California’s emissions standards,’ said Ann Carlson, a University of California at Los Angeles law professor. ‘This is ironic because the auto standards Trump wants to repeal would go along way toward cleaning up the valley’s air pollution.’ Fresno also happens to be the fourth most ozone-polluted city in the U.S., according to the American Lung Association, and in July experienced a record 22 straight days with 100 degree-plus high temperatures. It’s that type of paradox on climate change that environmentalists are likely to highlight for regulators when they hold the first of three public hearings Monday on the administration’s plans. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration proposed freezing fuel efficiency requirements for autos at 37 miles per gallon in 2020 instead of rising to 47 mpg by 2025 under Obama-era regulations. This would cap emission standards, too.” [Bloomberg, 9/23/18 (+)]

 

 

Chinese Lithium Giant Agrees To 3-Year Pact To Supply Tesla. According to E&E News, “China’s top producer of lithium, a metal used in electric-vehicle batteries, said it’s agreed on a deal with Tesla Inc. to supply a fifth of its production to the vehicle maker, highlighting the push for supply pacts. Tesla will designate its battery suppliers to buy lithium hydroxide products from Ganfeng Lithium Co. and its unit, the Jiangxi-based company said in a filing to the Shenzhen exchange on Friday. The agreement runs from 2018 to 2020 and could be extended by three years, Ganfeng said. Its shares jumped. Electric-vehicle producers including Elon Musk’s Tesla are pushing to secure supplies of lithium for batteries as investors and mining companies gauge the potential for growth in the industry. Still, the burgeoning market has been roiled in 2018 by price declines, and forecasts from some banks that a wave of new mining projects will outpace demand growth. Announcements from Ganfeng on plans for its relationship with Tesla, as well as battery producer LG Chem Ltd., help signal the quality of its products to potential investors ahead of a planned initial public offering in Hong Kong, Nomura Holdings Inc. analyst Jamie Wang said in an email. Earlier this week, Ganfeng announced an agreement to supply LG Chem between 2019 and 2025 under a supplementary contract, according to a separate filing. Its lithium compounds capacity may rise to 75,000 tons of carbonate equivalent at the end of this year, making the producer the industry’s second-largest, according to CRU Group research cited in its IPO prospectus.” [E&E News, 9/24/18 (=)]

 

GM Makes Internal EV Moves ... According to Axios, “General Motors is overhauling its electric vehicle management with several internal moves as the automaker works to have 20 EV models launched worldwide by 2023. Why it matters: The moves signal increased focus on EVs by major automakers — even though they hold only a tiny share of the market today. Driving the news: Pam Fletcher will take the newly created position of VP for innovation that reports directly to CEO Mary Barra, GM said. She’s currently the VP of global EV programs. Doug Parks, who is the VP for autonomous and EV programs, ‘will also assume primary responsibility for the growing global electric vehicle team,’ GM tells Axios. And Mike Ableson, who is currently VP for global strategy, will become VP for EV charging and infrastructure, reporting to Parks in the newly created role. The changes were first reported by Automotive News. The details: Parks, in a statement, said Ableson will ‘develop the partnerships, incentives and investments needed to create the necessary electric vehicle charging infrastructure to remove a critical barrier to acceptance of electrification.’ Fletcher, per The Detroit News, ‘led the team that launched the Chevrolet Bolt EV, which now serves as the platform for GM Cruise’s steering wheel-free Cruise AV, before she was put in charge of global EVs at the end of last year.’” [Axios, 9/24/18 (+)]

 

... While Porsche Sharpens EV Focus Too. According to Axios, “GM wasn’t the only important automaker to announce news this weekend. Porsche said Sunday that it will no longer offer cars with diesel propulsion and instead focus more of its attention on hybrid and electric vehicles. The big picture: Porsche stressed that it’s ‘not demonizing diesel,’ and that the decision is simply a case of demand for hybrid models skyrocketing at the same time interest in diesel is falling. The automaker, a unit of Volkswagen, said in February that it’s investing $7 billion on electrification-related initiatives by 2022, with a focus on plug-in hybrids and pure electrics. The intrigue: The move also can’t be untethered from the effects of VW’s diesel emissions-cheating scandal. ‘The decision also comes as diesel car sales have plunged as part of a wider backlash of the emissions-cheating scandal with European cities beginning to ban older diesel models from their roads to meet emissions reductions targets,’ the Wall Street Journal notes.” [Axios, 9/24/18 (+)]

 

Porsche To Cull Diesel Cars In Shift To Electric Vehicles. According to E&E News, “Porsche AG will stop offering diesel versions of its cars, marking the latest blow for the technology that has come under intense scrutiny by regulators and environmental groups. Porsche will focus on gasoline, electric and hybrid vehicles because demand for diesel is declining, the Stuttgart, Germany-based manufacturer said in an emailed statement yesterday. For the sports car manufacturer, diesel ‘has traditionally played a subordinated role,’ the statement said. ‘Porsche doesn’t condemn diesel. It is and remains an important powertrain technology.’ Diesel versions of cars like the brand’s Cayenne and Macan sport utility vehicles accounted for 12 percent of global sales last year, according to the statement.” [E&E News, 9/24/18 (=)]

 

Would Lowering Fuel Economy Standards Boost Car Sales? According to Scientific American, “Auto shoppers looking for a bargain could soon be in luck. The Trump administration wants to relax fuel economy standards (that’s how far your car travels on a gallon of gas). Doing so, the administration argues, will cause the prices of new vehicles to drop. The intended result is an uptick in new vehicle sales as price savvy shoppers trade in old autos for new ones. So-called fleet turnover matters. Over the last half century, technology has transformed the driving experience. Cars are more comfortable, more fuel efficient and safer thanks to systems like climate control, power steering and smart airbags. Consumers should benefit from these advances when newly minted vehicles hit the showrooms. Except that’s not happening. Instead, people are holding onto older cars for longer than ever before. The result is vehicles that are, on average, more outdated, dirtier and, most importantly, more dangerous than they should be. The blame, Trump officials say, lies with fuel economy standards that have caused vehicle prices to rise too far, too fast. The auto industry agrees, arguing that these standards shut millions out of the new car market and prevent many millions more from being able to afford new vehicles that meet their needs.An easing of regulation, we are told, will hold down prices, stimulate demand and make the roads greener and safer.” [Scientific American, 9/21/18 (=)]

 

 

'Energy Independence' Hawks Caricature Trump Auto Rule. According to Competitive Enterprise Institute, “Securing America’s Energy Future (SAFE), a pro-regulatory ‘energy independence’ advocacy group, this week released ‘The Military Cost of Defending Global Oil Supplies.’ The report is intended to persuade the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to finalize tougher fuel economy standards than the agencies are proposing. Under the agencies’ ‘preferred option,’ combined passenger car and light truck fuel economy standards would increase to 37 miles per gallon in 2020 and remain there through 2026, whereas the Obama administration’s standards would increase to 46.7 mpg in 2025 (83 FR 43390). SAFE complains that EPA and NHTSA estimate that ‘the cost to the United States of defending the global oil supply is zero’—an obviously indefensible calculation. Hence, SAFE contends, the benefit-cost analysis underpinning the proposed auto rule is deeply flawed. SAFE reckons that the U.S. military spends at least $81 billion annually protecting global oil supplies, which supposedly works out to an implicit subsidy of $11.25 per barrel of crude oil, or $0.28 per gallon of motor fuel. Thus, SAFE recommends that EPA and NHTSA assume a military expenditure of at least $0.28 per gallon when estimating the foregone benefits of replacing the Obama administration fuel economy standards with the proposed Trump administration standards.” [Competitive Enterprise Institute, 9/21/18 (-)]