Trump Likely to Announce Review of Vehicle Emission Regulations This Week

Except that the head of the EPA is a shill for the oil and gas industry. So it will be up to the states to choose to retain the standards.

Electrification is clearly the route, be that full electric or hybrid. I see no reason to relent. It is very doable. Start by hybridizing the worst of the gas guzzlers and the fleet avg will increase dramatically.

The thing is 54.5 is just a number thrown out there by Obama to make him look good. The devil is in the details and that number, which was based on the model mix popular with gas was $4/gal, never ever has to be met thanks to the foot print rules. I read somewhere that FCA's mix when the Dart and 200 were still around would have put them in the low 30's which really means upper 20's on the sticker and mid 20's in the real world. The foot print regulations were what the auto industry wanted as it protects them from consumers changing tastes.

@JPWhite Electric cars are here and will eventually be the primary form of transportation, all this arbitrary goal will do is make the consumer have to subsidize it even more and pay a lot more for a new car than they need to. Cat's is already out of the bag, why punish consumers to get there just a few years quicker? If someone wants an electric car, they can get one. The tax code and regulatory environment already shower electric car makers with subsidies at every angle possible.

@Scoutdude Right, it was always unrealistic, but it made for a feel good headline and let somebody else be the "parent/bad guy" that splashes cold water on it because it would be devastating to the auto industry and consumers if actually implemented. Sort of like all of these "midnight" Executive Orders Obama gave after the election that somehow weren't important enough to put in place for the 8 years he was President. They were just designed to make Trump repeal them. Had the next President had a (Dem) next to their name, they wouldn't have been made.

@whitworth If by showering EV's with subsides at every angle possible, do you mean. 1. Outlawing the direct sale of Tesla's in many states. (The map resembles a political map) 2. Elimination/Expiration of state rebates in many states, e.g. Georgia, Tennessee to mention just a few. 3. Introducing fixed annual EV registration taxes that add up to more than the equivalent in gas taxes. http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1095337_where-can-tesla-legally-sell-cars-directly-to-you-state-by-state-map Allowing people to drive what they want (i.e. SUV's, 4x4 Truck's) and at the same time reducing emissions through significantly increased fuel efficiency seems like a good idea to me. The owners of these vehicles may also appreciate the reduced running costs of hybridizing their vehicle.

@JPWhite I thought it was all about people paying their fair share? These subsidies were always sold to us as just a short term sweetener, not a permanent entitlement. And many of these subsidies are still with us. Registration taxes pay for roads being built and maintained, why do electric cars owners not have to pay these taxes? The franchising laws and access are about brand and consumer protection, not the underlying vehicle technology. I don't support laws that limit the way Tesla sells its cars, but the issue is not that it builds electric cars. Other car companies are able to build electric cars without issue. I guess some people won't be happy unless EVERYONE is subsidizing their electric car. Just not getting the hero recognition they so deserve.

I've always liked that idea and now wonder if with the ubiquity of smaller, fuel-efficient engines the squawking about "regressive tax!" can't be discounted.

@OldManPants Perhaps naively, i figure that if the cost of gas goes up, buyers will naturally shift their buying habits to more fuel efficient models, which will pollute less. My issue, perhaps incorrectly, with CAFE is the regulation requiring ever higher mpg is driving the cost of R and D to generate unachievable mpg. To me, the gas tax achieves multiple objectives: increased revenue for our dereriorating infrastructure (even the most ardent tax hater would agree that bridges falling down is a bad thing) and having a market driven auto cycle vs a gubment induced market the manufactures spend more time circumventing. Pt Cruiser is a truck? FIAT 500E in CA so the hellcat can be sold. Even though the 500e will never sell.