According to Reuters, the Trump administration’s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on Wednesday that it’s taking action to reverse the Biden-era emissions regulations that effectively require automakers to produce EVs to meet the federal government’s standards.
The most recent EPA rules state that light-duty vehicles must emit no more than 170 grams of C02 per mile on average in 2026. That drops to just 85 grams per mile in 2032. The goal is for light-duty vehicles to emit half as many emissions in 2032 as they do in 2026. With these rules, the EPA expected that approximately two-thirds of new cars sold will be EVs or PHEVs by 2032.
Although the rules from March 2024 are less aggressive than the EPA’s previous emissions targets, the Trump administration is moving to relax them even more. Trump has often referred to these regulations as an “EV mandate” since the only way for automakers to realistically meet these targets is to sell EVs.
Another factor in what Trump calls the “EV mandate” is Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards imposed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The rules when Trump took office in January stated that the average fuel economy for light-duty vehicles must be no less than 50.4 mpg by 2031. Like the emissions rules from the EPA, the fuel economy rules from the NHTSA effectively mandate EV production. U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy directed the NHTSA to rescind those rules as one of his first orders of business in January.
“Artificially high fuel economy standards designed to meet non-statutory policy goals, such as those NHTSA has promulgated in recent years, impose large costs that render many vehicle models unaffordable for the average American family,” Duffy stated in a memo. “They also put coercive pressure on automakers to phase out production of various models of popular (internal combustion engine) vehicles.”
Additionally, the Trump administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) suspended the approval of EV infrastructure deployment plans. “The new leadership of the [DOT] has decided to review the policies underlying the implementation of the [National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI)] Formula Program,” read the memo that was sent in early February. “Accordingly, the current NEVI Formula Program Guidance dated June 11, 2024, and all prior versions of this guidance are rescinded.”
Comments
FREEDOM!!!
Heck yes!!! It was all fraudulent and money wasted by us tax payers.
This article is not about subsidies. How did an emission regulation waste taxpayers money?
Hey Suzy………. are you a Trump Chump?
One of the few policies of his that I agree with. Biden and his California cronies schemed that whole thing up without public input, no doubt. But the automakers never should have put faith in it lock, stock and barrel.
The automakers’ largest shareholders (via the Boards) pushed it and met in places like Davos for years and years scheming it up. That’s why the auto execs had things like bonuses for how many EVs they sold written into their contracts. They also bribe… eh lobbied politicians.
How did NHTSA ever come to the point of regulating fuel economy? Safety is literally in their name. Nothing related to fuel economy or environmental concern is. Any historical context that someone can share?
Copy and pasted on my part:
The CAFE standards were a response to the 1973–74 Arab Oil Embargo, which highlighted the U.S.’s dependence on foreign oil and the need for energy conservation. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975 was a pivotal piece of legislation, enacted on December 22, 1975, to address these issues. This Act added Title V, “Improving Automotive Efficiency,” to the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, establishing CAFE standards for passenger cars and light-duty trucks (LDTs). The goal was to double new car fuel economy from 13.6 miles per gallon (mpg) in 1974 to 27.5 mpg by model year (MY) 1985, aiming to reduce energy consumption and enhance national energy security.
1975: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act was enacted on December 22, 1975, giving NHTSA the authority to regulate fuel economy.
1977: NHTSA published the first CAFE standards in the Federal Register on July 26, 1977, for model year 1978, setting the initial fuel economy targets.
1978: The first CAFE standards took effect, requiring manufacturers to meet fleet-wide averages, starting at 18 mpg for passenger cars and 17.2 mpg for light trucks.
So adding some of my own initial thoughts on this:
– This is a 50 year old response to something that happened a little over 50 years ago. Things change.
– Efficient and healthy energy production and use are important, but they must also be balanced with current and ever evolving geopolitical and economic situations.
– Increasing mpg standards to absurd levels to the point they are in effect an “EV mandate” is not how I think the US should do things. Also, in current day, mandating EVs gives China the edge. They own and have access to more rare earth materials for EVs and “green tech”. They also run on mainly cheaply coal for electricity. The US has modern technology to extract oil and natural gas and we have those in cheap abundance now here at home. CURRENTLY, I think it’s in our best interests to use what is best for us and not a potential “enemy”, while continuing to evolve new tech.
From now on I’m referring to you as Dr. John Esquire.
Thank you, good sir.
Thank you. I appreciate both the factual response and your editorial comments. Well done!
The unmentioned thing here is that due to the EPA’s air pollution regulations creating “smogged-engines”, those Cafe standards were almost a joke due to the enormous inefficiency of those engines in achieving any worthwhile horsepower. Lowering the compression ratio, in order to burn unleaded fuel, was one of the leading causes of poor MPG. Thus, we had large displacement engines making very low HP for their size.
Unelected, out-of-control Bureaucrats issuing “mandates” that impact everyone’s life, job, and wallet are one of the top reasons the Dems were kicked out and will continue to be “out”. Now that their incredible waste, money-laundering and grifting is getting exposed almost every day with some new discovery anyone complaining about it is surely a recipient of that money.
Sounds like Elon.
Good one, Comrade! Say hi to Putin!
Bring back the V-12!
The first domestic manufacturer to eliminate cylinder activation from their light truck and SUV engines (or to at least offer an optional engine that doesn’t include that feature) will dominate the market until the others catch up.
It’s also a godsend to GM if this will now allow them to simply delete the AFM/ DFM equipment from the engines of the 800K+ trucks that they’re facing the potential of a massive recall on right now. It will be way cheaper for them to do a recall that simply installs the Range technology AFM/ DFM disabler or an equivalent device instead a full engine replacement.
Yes, there are literally MILLIONS of cylinder deactivation related issues. Manufacturers can now save on engineering costs, supply/shipping costs, manufacturing costs, warranty claims, and lawsuits, just for a start.
I’m guessing the next gen V8 will use VVL as a way of making additional power, meaning a change to their AFM system anyways. That probably means they won’t go back to the old system as their choice will be 10mpg and 500 HP or 25 mpg and 200 HP. They’ll probably keep the VVL system, and work hard on making it reliable.
The real boon would be allowing reasonable emission regulations vs just MPG requirements. Gen V small block can operate with up to an AFR of 21:1, but now theyre required to run a perfect mixture which hurts their efficiency significantly, all in the name of PPM requirements, thus causing them to run hotter (more air/fuel and emissions overall, but lower PPM 🤦🏼♂️)
Not sure it works that way. I think vehicles have to conform to all applicable motor vehicle standards at the time of production. Not two years later or five years earlier. GM will have to maintain them to meet all laws in effect when they were built, I believe.
when we took our planes around the world, ever sit at window and ever say to wife next me, “see how planet is huge”, really very big, nature ever had .. it has many volcanos, many geisers, so nature ever corrected what enthalpia needs for the balance. Do not agree humans must pollute planet of course not, but their intelligence never well solved the good recycling of materials, you can not have iron works if gases and temperature are low, so nature ever find a solution if you use a V4, V6, V8 or ethanol related. -i as mechhanical enginner and exterior designer ever wanted a car manufacturer had done a 3 cylinder flexi ethanol stationary carring energy for electric motors attached direct inside the 4 car wheels, a sedan small mid size for 4 people and beauty enough inside our poor pocket, until none industry had done and never will. So we keep with our Dacia Sandero to make supermarket, small trips and some seightseeings.. The woman owner of the apartment we live since 16 years has a 1980 Saab and still runs with oil. None here has conditions to pay expensive electric cars neither building cables installation
Sadly, by the time automakers can take advantage of this, it’ll be 2028 and the closing months of this administration. With no guarantee of the Republicans keeping anything, and a real chance of Democrats charging in with big plans to “make up for lost time”.
As an automaker executive what DO you do? A government which operates in 2-4 year cycles couldn’t be more at odds of an industry which needs to plan in decades…
Insightful post. With a 7 year car development cycle, auto manufacturers need predictability and constantly changing tariffs, subsidies and regulations doesn’t help them. The trend towards emissions reduction will continue so a 4 year break from that just makes long term planning harder.
Get rid of that 2.7L and GM 8 speed for good measure.
Not for getting rid of it, as it’s a cheap motor with ample power (perfect for dare I say an equinox???????) but the custom needs the 5.3 as at least an option, and LT and RST need it as standard as the 2.7 really does nothing for those in terms of power or fuel economy.
Sh*tcan the dohc 2.7 turbo asap, the answer to a question no one asked.
I agree, a transmissin with more gears than I can count is too many gears, what a waste, four gears are good enough. 8 is for weaklings
My opinion on gears is a manual will always need +1 gear over an automatic due to the torque converters advantage off the line. For automatics
3 gears isn’t enough
4 gears is sufficient, but leaves wanting
6 gears leaves nothing wanting
8 gears is transmission Nirvana, always right gear, right time
10, can easily be too many. They can make it as smooth as an 8, but largely is a waste, unless they use the extra gearing and space it out to get rid of the 2speed transfer case and make it act like an 18speed Eaton manual, which the didn’t do, and the 10l80 isn’t as durable as the 8l90, is heavier and can’t handle as much torque.
Caterpillar off road haul trucks use 7-speed power shift automatic to move 40 to 300 tons. 7 speed in a Corvette…
Trumpers complain about fuel economy standards because they’re too high Also complain gas prices are too high.
Also complain ICEs aren’t powerful enough but ignore EVs that blow the doors off ICEs.
Can’t believe the hypocrisy. Or stupidity?
Most trumpers are blue collar and can’t afford a new vehicle (while China sells more “new cars,” USA used car market is 2-3 X China’s) so we’re driving around old cars averaging well under 20 mpg. What would really Helpnfuel consumption would be:
1, making new cars simpler without aluminum, hybrids, turbos and especially EV’s as large profits are needed to offset EV costs so as to get more old cars off the road,
2, shut down these radical left cities that constantly push for “greener” zoning rules and massive school and city taxes as our jobs have all moved to the country and the average commute is now 40 miles. That’s a lot of driving just because companies can’t survive in left cities like Detroit, Chicago and Milwaukee.
You ever been by a chemical plant, manufacturing facility, or even GM’s Arlington plant? Those are blue collar workers….and (shocker) most of them drive pretty new cars. Or if they work at a chemical plant, they drive a beater to work because of overspray, etc., and go home to their new vehicle.
No, not in Texas, which was surprisingly split the last 2/3 elections. In the Midwest, where lots of auto suppliers, chemical plants, raw material producers, the average age of the vehicle on the lots are 10 years +, lots of 20+ old trucks too! Now when I travel to the coasts, I do see lots of newer vehicles.
GMC Fan – Harris voters can’t define what a woman is. Are you saying Trump voters are dumber than that? Wanting lower mileage standards and wanting the price of fuel to be cheap isn’t stupid, it’s what we are used to. We are also used to V8’s that don’t fail because of flawed technology that was put in place for fuel economy.
Most people do not buy a vehicle to drag race. It has been proven that EVs have far less range than an ICE vehicle when towing.
I have a Bolt and Suburban and I don’t complain. I celebrate Fuel Diversity.
Large track-wheelbase footprint trucks are one of the easiest CAFE segments. You haven’t really pushed any boundary there.
CAFE is an unneeded outdated regulation from the 1970’s.
CO2 is not a pollutant.
Fixing this kind of stuff is exactly what I voted for. I have no complaints.
GMC Fan, don’t you have a protest to go to, or a flag to burn?
No more smog testing or safety inspections . And how about shipping gasoline from Arizona to California and charging Arizona prices in California? Other wise, I will just move to Arizona.
Move to Arizona. California is drowning itself.
The trolls are out in force
Too bad Trump will be gone and forgotten but not forgiven after 2028. And the EPA numbers will chage back as they were in 2024.
Why would you ever imagine that we’re ever going to tolerate such Bolshevik nonsense again?
Sure wish they would offer a v8 in the regular cab standard 4×4 trucks.
DOGE should eliminate CAFE. It is not needed and it increases vehicle costs unnecessarily.
Good, finally, screw the EPA.
As a middle-age man looking for my “mid-life crisis” car, I went out looking for my fun weekend car. I had several requirements that turned out to be quite the tall order…especially when I want nothing to do with an electric car.
You’d think going out at this time in my life to go buy a nice fun car after stuffing my savings away like a squirrel for 30 years…but I found it more frustrating than fun. These ridiculous EV cars, even though some were as fast or faster than their ICE competitors, actually took the fun out of driving.
I wanted something (2 or 4 door) that was fast off the line (0-60) in less than 4 seconds-ish that hsd an ICE engine with a really nice sounding engine and exhaust…preferably a v8 or a v6 turbo… that had a sporty and luxurious feel and look… something that I could take my wife out on some weekend trips away from home while the kiddos go to the grandparents. I didn’t want a harsh ride.. I wanted something that had a more comfortable ride than the BMWs and sports cars like the Porsches and Corvettes (for less than 100k). This should have been a fun experience, but it was just as frustrating as it was fun.
EV options were obviously out of the question obviously because 1. I refuse to plan my trips around where EV charging stations are located (which also actually work and are not down due to vandals damaging them or required maintenance) and 2. Their driving range is way too short and don’t like the lack of the combustion engine sound of some nice v8 engines.
I looked around at a number of cars and test drove some…. (Porsche 718, Mercedes AMG C63 series (a fast gas and plug in electric hybrid), Cadillac CTV5 Blackwing, and Audi RS5).
The blackwing was my favorite and I was ready to proceed with a purchase but they didn’t have exactly what I wanted so the dealer told me I’d most likely need to place a custom order…. this coming fall…IF Cadillac was going to continue making them with ICE engines… which was still up in the air… however, per the following : https://gmauthority.com/blog/2025/03/no-internal-combustion-replacements-for-cadillac-ct5-ct4-planned-exclusive/ it’s not looking good…