With a Week to Go in Obama Administration, EPA Sets 2025 Fuel Economy Targets in Stone

by Matt Posky

Published: January 13th, 2017

with a week to go in obama administration epa sets 2025 fuel economy targets in

Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy has decided to maintain current emissions and fuel economy standards through 2025, cementing a central pillar of the Obama administration’s green legacy.

Many automakers have been critical of Obama’s rather strict climate policies and were hopeful that President-elect Donald Trump might roll back some of the more stringent regulations. Of the policies, none is more controversial than the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) mandate, which began a midterm review earlier this year.

While the EPA’s ultimate determination wasn’t due until April of 2018, choosing not to alter 2025 vehicle emission and CAFE rules effectively locks in the standard before Trump can take office.

McCarthy explained that her decision, which institutes a legal means to maintain the fuel efficiency rules, rests entirely on the facts.

“My decision today rests on the technical record created by over eight years of research, hundreds of published reports including an independent review by the National Academy of Sciences, hundreds of stakeholder meetings, and multiple opportunities for the public and the industry to provide input,” said McCarthy in her official statement.

“At every step in the process the analysis has shown that the greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and light trucks remain affordable and effective through 2025, and will save American drivers billions of dollars at the pump while protecting our health and the environment.”

The agency believes that the standards, which requires an average fleet-wide light vehicle fuel efficiency of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, will result in consumer EPA window stickers surpassing 36 mpg for passenger cars and light-trucks. That’s more than 10 mpg higher than the fleet averages of today. The mandatory improvement in economy is also estimated to diminish U.S. oil consumption by around 2.4 million barrels a day — a 10 percent reduction of America’s total petroleum consumption.

While environmentalist groups are chuffed to hear that the adjudication won’t be undone by the next POTUS, those in the automotive industry are less pleased to see the inflexible standards remain.

“The EPA decision is disappointing,” said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which had been urging the agency to reconsider. “Our fundamental priority remains striking the right balance to continue fuel economy gains and carbon reduction without compromising consumer affordability and vital auto-sector jobs.”

#CAFE #Emissions #EnvironmentalProtectionAgency #EPA #FuelEconomy #GovernmentalRegulation

Matt Posky

Consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulations. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, he has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed about the automotive sector by national broadcasts, participated in a few amateur rallying events, and driven more rental cars than anyone ever should. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and learned to drive by twelve. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer and motorcycles.

More by Matt Posky

Comments

Join the conversation

3 of 137 comments

Jimf42 on Jan 15, 2017

The regulations can be reversed through the same process as they were enacted. The new administration at the EPA has to publish the new regulations (or the reversal of the old regs) in the Federal Register, giving a specified time for comments. Once that period is up, they then can make the new regs final, while responding to comments (pound sand, etc).

Like Reply
Mtmmo on Jan 16, 2017

Obama's 2025 EPA fuel economy targets are set in stone just like his Syrian red line. More than 400,000 people have been slaughtered in Syria many of them women and children. Thanks Obama. You won't be missed. Only 4 More Days!!!!

Like Reply
- Big Oil on Jan 16, 2017
  
  Let's interject some fact into the politics today. The Obama red line in Syria was specific to chemical weapons. It threatened direct military intervention against the Assad regime if they did not remove all its chemical weapons. Tail between his legs, Assad then exported all chemical weapons from Syria. So it worked. Now, you can fault Obama for not doing more to prevent bloodshed in Syria, especially against civilians. IF there were easy answers here, I'm sure they would have been taken. We should keep in mind that in America, it is Congress that uniquely has the power to declare war. Congress chose instead to sit back and criticize Obama, instead of taking the lead. It will be interesting to see how Trump and Congress handle Syria going forward. I certainly hope they are successful in reducing civilian casualties while advancing American interests and values.
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Lou_BC I've had my collision alert come on 2 times in 8 months. Once was when a pickup turned onto a side road with minimal notice. Another with a bus turning left and I was well clear in the outside lane but turn off was in a corner. I suspect the collision alert thought I was traveling in a straight line.I have the "emergency braking" part of the system turned off. I've had "lane keep assist" not recognize vehicles parked on the shoulder.That's the extent of my experience with "assists". I don't trust any of it.
SCE to AUX A lot has changed since I got my license in 1979, about 2 weeks after I turned 16 (on my second attempt). I would have benefited from formal driver training, and waiting another year to get my license. I was a road terror for several years - lots of accidents, near misses, speeding, showing off - the epitome of youthful indiscretion.
Lou_BC Jellybean F150 (1997-2004). People tend to prefer the more square body and blunt grill style.
SCE to AUX My first car was a 71 Pinto, 1.6 Kent engine, 4 spd. It was the original Base model with a trunk, #4332 ever built. I paid $125 for it in 1980, and had it a year. It remains the quietest idling engine I've ever had. 75HP, and I think the compression ratio was 8:1. It was riddled with rust, and I sold it to a classmate who took it to North Carolina.After a year with a 74 Fiat, I got a 76 Pinto, 2.3 engine, 4-spd. The engine was tractor rough, but I had the car 5 years with lots of rebuilding. It's the only car I parted with by driving into a junkyard.Finally, we got an 80 Bobcat for $1 from a friend in 1987. What a piece of junk. Besides the rust, it never ran right despite tons of work, fuel economy was terrible, the automatic killed the power. The hatch always leaked, and the vinyl seats were brutal in winter and summer.These cars were terrible by today's standards, but they never left me stranded. All were fitted with the poly blast shield, and I never worried about blowing up.The miserable Bobcat was traded for an 82 LTD, which was my last Ford when it was traded in 1996. Seeing how Ford is doing today, I won't be going back.
Jeff S I rented a PT Cruiser for a week and although I would not have bought one it was not as bad as I thought it would be. Pontiac Aztek was a good vehicle but ugly. Pinto for its time was not as good as the Japanese cars but it was not the worst that honor would go to the Vega. If one bought a Pinto new it was much better with a 4 speed manual with no air it didn't have the power for those. Add air and an automatic to a Pinto and you could beat it on a bicycle. The few small cars available today or in the recent past are so much better than the Pinto, Vega, and Gremlin. A Mitsubishi Mirage, Nissan Versa, and the former Chevy Spark are light years ahead of those small cars of the 70s.