By on July 27, 2021

NadyGinzburg/Shutterstock.com

The Biden administration is proposing a return to the Obama-era fuel-economy regulations over five years.

After that, the rules will get tougher, with the goal of getting 40 percent of American drivers into electric vehicles.

The exact numbers, which would come from the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency, haven’t yet been finalized. They are expected to be released next week, but the Associated Press has apparently spoken to sources who have been briefed on the plan.

The Biden administration has a goal of cutting the nation’s output of greenhouse gas by at least half by 2030. The new rules would begin with the 2023 model year and use the California compromise of 2019 as a template. That agreement was reached between BMW, Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, and Volvo. That deal increases the mileage standard and is supposed to cut greenhouse gas by 3.7 percent per year.

The requirements will move to a 5 percent annual increase in mileage standards by 2025, along with a similar reduction in emissions. From 2026 on, it will push higher, though the exact number isn’t known. Estimates are 6 or 7 percent.

The EPA may also have a nonbinding statement requiring requirements to climb even more quickly after 2027, in a bid to force the auto industry to sell more zero-emission vehicles. In the meantime, the agency is asking that 40 percent of new-vehicle sales by 2030 be that of EVs.

It’s unclear if the administration aims to restore credits for EV sales, though its infrastructure proposal includes 500,000 EV charging stations and makes mentions of tax credits and rebates as part of an effort to increase EV sales.

As you no doubt know, this is all happening at a time in which American consumers are swallowing up trucks and SUVs, which are generally less fuel-efficient. Meanwhile, the market share for EVs sits at 2 percent, though analysts expect it to rise rapidly in the years to come.

Transportation-sector emissions are the single biggest American contributor to climate change.

[Image: NadyGinzburg/Shutterstock.com]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter here.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

30 Comments on “Biden Fuel Rules Unveiled, Will Exceed Obama’s Goals...”


  • avatar
    CoastieLenn

    Checking out the EPA website, “transportation” includes all modes of transport, and that accounts for 29% (roughly) of the total greenhouse gas emissions. Private transport is responsible for about half of that total. We also have 25% of our total greenhouse gas production from the electricity generation sector. Coal is responsible for 61% of that, but only created 24% of the nations electrical supply.

    So, why can we stop the heave heavily toward forcing EV’s on people that might not have a way to use them (allowing natural market shifts occur, not stopping EV production), and rather focus on an overhaul of our small dependence on coal?

    No firm numbers are given in any of those categories, but I’d wager that if you had actual hard numbers, coal-fired energy is responsible for MORE pollution than passenger vehicles, while having a substantially smaller impact in what it actually accomplishes.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.

    • 0 avatar
      Greg Hamilton

      28,
      You are one of the few commenters on this site who has any idea what is going on. Unfortunately, I don’t see the situation improving anytime soon. Good luck to us all.

    • 0 avatar
      NigelShiftright

      Not quite.

      Imagine an ethically-sourced, carbon-neutral, trans-affirming, vegan-materials Birkenstock stamping on a human face – forever.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        The Taliban will come rescue us quite a bit prior to forever. They just did, and are doing, on their home turf. May take a while to get all the way over here. But basic competence (at something, even if perhaps not much), will eventually trump the absolute, complete, 100% utter incompetence at absolutely everything, which is all that is left of this financialized dystopia.

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    In other news, China is building 100s of new coal fired power plants to power their electric cars and conserve petroleum for the military.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Don’t worry, Greta’s on the case.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      Ah yes, the other main point I’ve been flamed for making. With all the strives we make to save the PLANET, not just our country- that’s not what this whole push is about, China will just continue to do what they do because “screw everyone else”, India will continue to do what they do because they can’t afford the infrastructure to support EV’s. All the advances we and Europe will make will simply be undone and overcome by other players around the world.

      Oh, and it makes China stronger… which I’m thinking the current administration sees as a benefit.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Real countries and real leaders do what is in their nation’s best interest. That would be a nice change of pace, but here we are.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        I pointed out before that Pakistan, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines will be another billion soon. They will pollute endlessly. Without immigration US would go lower in population, hence less consumption.

        I really don’t understand this dual standard of current admin and their supporters. They want to save the planet but on the other hand they increase consumption and pollution but bringing people here. In US these people will consume way more than in their native countries. Hence they will contribute less to the pollution.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          While there are [I hope] more in that camp who would be open to a discussion about this, a healthy portion of the nation is bordering on literal insanity. The latter is the group allowing themselves most to be pulled by the strings.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    “Vehicle emissions are the single biggest American contributor to climate change.”

    This is a fat FALSE

    1. we don’t know how much it is contributing to climate change. Climate was changing on Earth from day it was created.

    2. If we are talking about CO2/emissions production, it says “vehicle”. OK. But EPA says – transportation. It means air planes, trucks, buses, trains, boats. But somehow, only cars get all attention from the government. Our military burns more fuel than entire countries. Yes, in transportation sector cars/light duty trucks is the largest contributor. But this is simply because so many of them. But how do they count all these? By amount of gasoline sold and cars registered? Where is a small engine in all this? All these lawn movers?

    “Transportation emissions do not include emissions from non-transportation mobile sources such as agriculture and construction equipment. “Other” sources include buses, motorcycles, pipelines and lubricants.”

    3. Producing electricity is not distant 2nd emission generator after transportation.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      I wouldn’t say its a LIE, but it’s one of those “short truth’s” and as I pointed out above, 61% of Energy Sector’s pie slice is coal… while it only generated 24% of the nations power supply. I’m a complete moron, but I see what SHOULD be reformed. Sadly, consumers and taxpayers are easier to push around than the energy sector.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      On that note, I’d like to know if there is a credible source being cited for this statement:

      “Vehicle emissions are the single biggest American contributor to climate change.”

      Because that sounds a bit like agitprop along the lines of Dieselgate. Said scandal where I cited an 2009 EPA report which stated 95% of NOX emissions came from power plants with a mere 5% coming from every other source – meaning Dieselgate was ultimately pointless other than beating down those who dared to willfully ignore statist diktats.

      • 0 avatar
        CoastieLenn

        28: I think this is where he got that inference… but failed to elaborate and made a judgement that’s probably false.
        https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Not probably, is false. Mr. Healy keeps losing credibility in my eyes.

          Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation primarily come from burning fossil fuel for our ***cars, trucks, ships, trains, and planes***.

          “The primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States are:

          Transportation (29 percent of 2019 greenhouse gas emissions) – The transportation sector generates the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation primarily come from burning fossil fuel for our cars, trucks, ships, trains, and planes. Over 90 percent of the fuel used for transportation is petroleum based, which includes primarily gasoline and diesel.2”

          Since this is true:

          “Electricity production (25 percent of 2019 greenhouse gas emissions) – Electricity production generates the second largest share of greenhouse gas emissions. Approximately 62 percent of our electricity comes from burning fossil fuels, mostly coal and natural gas”

          A more interesting analysis would be how this number goes up to provide EV power as emissions come down from trucks and automobiles. I do wonder if there is any net gain.

          • 0 avatar
            Tim Healey

            I got that from the linked AP article. It now reads “The transportation sector is the single biggest U.S. contributor to climate change.”

            So either I misread it, which is my fault, or AP had it wrong and updated to correct it. Either way, I will correct this post. Thanks for pointing out the error.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            *Nods*

            Granting you benefit of the doubt Mr. Healy, that means AP was peddling inaccurate information which we were able to show in a matter of moments. Could be an isolated incident on their part, or could be a pattern of misinformation on their part. Place your bets…

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          if you go to 2018 page, they have better breakdown. But hey. This is bureaucracy. It could be better, could be worse. Just like with covid cases now. If you’re fully vaccinated and ended up in the hospital, they don’t count you as a covid illness case. We’re living in an interesting time.

          “May you live in interesting times” – Chinese curse. While seemingly a blessing, the expression is normally used ironically; life is better in “uninteresting times” of peace and tranquility than in “interesting” ones, which are usually times of trouble

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      The proliferation of human beings is the biggest contributor to climate change, yet environmentalists avoid the topic.

      • 0 avatar
        kc27

        A free documentary on YouTube called Planet of the Humans takes the position that brn noted, that the growing human population and its resulting energy demands have to be considered when looking for a solution to energy generation and pollution. It also examines the renewable energy industry, and how its proponents promise much more than it can deliver.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Thank you for validating my long held point.

  • avatar
    pmirp1

    America soon to be more like Cuba, where old cars get fixed for a long long time so they can stay on road and get people around, as we wait for electric infrastructure and charging to catch up with hype. I am 60 and I have no intention of ever buying a electric car. Will buy my last ICE vehicle (number 5 in my fleet) next year and then just laugh at the madness.

  • avatar
    teddyc73

    “Transportation-sector emissions are the single biggest American contributor to climate change.” I see TTAC pushes leftist narrative garbage. What about the billions of years there was no transportation sector? What caused the change then?

    As for this article…I can not believe my fellow Americans allowed this dementia patient to occupy the White House.

  • avatar
    Daniel J

    How will companies pull this of? 2023 models have already been designed. How will companies decrease consumption year over year when models are set for 4-6 years? This looks unobtainable.

    I what about when all the soot created is more of an issue because of trying to make these engines more fuel efficient.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    And the clown show in Washington becomes more destructive by the day. 2022 needs to get here quick so we can put a stop to all of this. The adults need to take back control of the house and senate from the children and then we take the White House in 2024. At that time we can start rebuilding and allow our country to heal.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • SCE to AUX: “But the Bolt situation calls into question the entire premise of EVs since fires typically...
  • SCE to AUX: “Sadly, that moment still looks to be several months away.” It took years to produce 70k...
  • SCE to AUX: Flawed manufacturing processes; you never want to rely on human inspectors. -Deming
  • SCE to AUX: Most of the fault lies with LG Chem who produces the battery. Some of the fault lies with GM, who...
  • mcs: By the time they build an electric version of one of these, they’ll probably be able to make it like a C5...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber