Rest Of Automakers Join Call For EPA To Withdraw Proposal For 2022-2025 MPG, GHG Standards

11 months ago by Jay Cole 154

Front page of Global Automakers - featuring the plug no less

Front page of Global Automakers – featuring the plug no less

Strike when the iron is hot.  Isn’t that what they say?

With the nomination of Oklahoma attorney general, Scott Priutt to take over the EPA, a person noted to be sympathetic to fossil fuel industry (and climate science denier), and set to take over the government organization with the new administration, all the major automakers have unified in their call to stop the EPA’s review determination that the 2022-2025 C02/54.5 fleet MPG regulations should go ahead.

John Bozzella - "We look forward to working with EPA, NHTSA and CARB on harmonized standards that are achievable, cost-effective, and most importantly account for the needs of customers"

John Bozzella – “We look forward to working with EPA, NHTSA and CARB on harmonized standards that are achievable, cost-effective, and most importantly account for the needs of customers”

Currently, the proposal is in a 30 day comment period, before heading to President Obama’s desk for “final approval”.

Previously, the Auto Alliance, a shell organization for many of the major automakers, had called on Congress to step in and attempt stop the process before final approval was given, asking for more time to review the findings (in other words, to wait until the new Sheriff comes to town and changes the rules of engagement).

It was noted at the time that not all the big automaker names where attached to that list, there was some notable exceptions (like Nissan, Hyundai/Kia, Subaru etc.), but today the “Global Automakers” has called on the EPA to withdraw the proposal “or at the very least grant an extension of the current 30-day comment period.”

This means that if you are an individual looking to protest/vote with your wallet on the matter, the only remaining major automotive choice is now Tesla Motors.

Given that the current 30 day comment window closes on December 30th (at which point the mandate can, and likely will, be finalized), and that the new administration takes over on January 20th, we imagine the automakers would like an extension of, oh…at least 3+ extra weeks.

The Global Automakers membership includes Aston Martin, Ferrari, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Kia, Maserati, McLaren, Nissan, Subaru, Suzuki and Toyota, somewhat ironically has concerns on “the objectivity and factual foundation of (the EPA’s) action.”  

Separately, the Auto Alliance consists of  General Motors, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, VW, Mazda, Volvo, FCA (Fiat), Jaguar/Land Rover, Mazda, Mitsubishi and once again, Toyota.

Some new faces from the Global Automakers add to the Auto Alliance's earlier call for the EPA to withdraw final proposal for future GHG stndards

Some new faces from the Global Automakers add to the Auto Alliance’s earlier call for the EPA to withdraw final proposal for future GHG stndards

Here is the statement issued by John Bozzella, President and CEO, Global Automakers (PDF can be found here):

“The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to rush forward with its Midterm Evaluation and issue a Proposed Determination on MY 2022-2025 greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards undermines the important process the regulators and automakers agreed to in 2012 for establishing one harmonized national program for regulating GHG and fuel economy. Global Automakers and its members remain committed to the goals of one national program and therefore are asking the EPA to withdraw its Proposed Determination, or at the very least grant an extension of the current 30-day comment period.

“Emissions standards going forward were to be based on a data-driven and objective review in which the EPA, the National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) are aligned every step of the way.  The hasty decision to accelerate the EPA process, taken in the waning days of an Administration, raises serious concerns about the objectivity and factual foundation of their action.

“We look forward to working with EPA, NHTSA and CARB on harmonized standards that are achievable, cost-effective, and most importantly account for the needs of customers.”

One will note the language for the “harmonization” of standards and the inclusion of CARB is once again clearly noted in the statement…unlike the actual detailing of which automakers make up the group.

Holdouts Nissan And Hyundai/Kia join request for EPA to step down on MPG mandate

Holdouts like Nissan, Hyundai/Kia and Subaru join request for EPA to step down on MPG mandate

The letter sent to the EPA, and current administrator Gina McCarthy highlights the groups concerns (highlighting is ours):

“…the EPA and NHTSA have consistently been very transparent about the timeline for the Midterm Evaluation. The final NHTSA rule and EPA determination were expected by April 1, 2018, with a proposed rule and a proposed determination expected in the summer of 2017

Seemingly inexplicably, the EPA has changed course dramatically, and has issued its Proposed Determination: (a) far ahead of the previously-established schedule, (b) separately from NHTSA’s fuel economy rulemaking, and (c) with a truncated, less than 30-day comment period following publication in the Federal Register.6

In doing so, the agency has seriously prejudiced our ability to provide meaningful input on the Proposed Determination. Global Automakers believes that the EPA’s acceleration of its proposed determination process so that it no longer aligns with NHTSA’s rulemaking was improper and contrary to the spirit and intent of the joint national fuel economy/GHG program.

The EPA should issue its proposed determination at the same time that NHTSA releases its notice of proposed rulemaking on the MY2022-2025 CAFE standards (which we expect in the summer of 2017), and the two agencies should then jointly issue the final rule/determination. Doing so will ensure that the actions of both agencies are coordinated and harmonized to the greatest extent possible. Divorcing the rulemaking processes of the two agencies (as the EPA has done) raises the risk that each will come to different conclusions concerning the appropriate stringency of the standards and the specific compliance mechanisms automakers can employ to achieve the standards.”

Scott Pruitt to take over EPA administration in 2017

Scott Pruitt to take over EPA administration in 2017

The request to the EPA cites the lack of study time as its main issue with the EPA’s determination:

“Setting the acceleration of the Proposed Determination aside, the 30-day comment period will make it extremely difficult for automakers to provide meaningful comment on the document. The Proposed Determination and the accompanying Technical Support Document that were released on November 30 consist of almost 1,000 pages, and rely on almost 1,100 studies.

This material—which includes a number of significant new assumptions, analyses and studies—forms the basis of the EPA’s determination that the GHG emission standards for MY2022-2025 should remain unchanged….Thirty days (concluding on December 30, 2016) simply is not enough time to do so—especially given that the comment period includes the holiday period between Christmas and New Year’s, during which most manufacturers are closed and staff are on holiday. “

Despite all skirting of the real issue on the subject, from both the automakers and the EPA, we all know what is happening – but we might as well say it nonetheless.

The EPA is currently rushing through the technical hurdles that it needs to lock in 2022-2025 regulations that it had thought it had a lot more time to enact; and the automakers – suddenly buoyed by an unexpected regime change in government, are opportunistically trying to best capitalize on that change as quickly as possible.

On can read the entire “Request for an Extension” from the Global Automakers here.

Hat tip to Brian S!

Tags: , , , ,

154 responses to "Rest Of Automakers Join Call For EPA To Withdraw Proposal For 2022-2025 MPG, GHG Standards"

  1. bro1999 says:

    Gotta be freaking kidding me.

    1. pjwood1 says:

      https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/midterm-evaluation-light-duty-vehicle-greenhouse-gas-ghg

      Public comments may be submitted at http://www.regulations.gov to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0827.

      It shouldn’t take too long to scan, or word search yourself to a point of being able to comment, if you wish.

      1. bro1999 says:

        I will submit my comment, sir!

        1. bro1999 says:

          Comment submitted. I would hope others on here do the same.

    2. vdiv says:

      You were saying something about Tesla fanbois…

      1. bro1999 says:

        Tesla fanbois are still an extremely annoying group, but I can’t fault their purchase choices.

    3. Mister G says:

      Elections have consequences. Fight back by buying solar bonds from solar city.

      1. mx says:

        Lesson. How Capitalism Fails and why we need Government.
        Capitalism is a mechanism, that gives a justification, to allow business leaders to ignore the externalities of their products.

        The Profit Motive above all other measures of success means capitalists will beg that you ignore pollution, and other negative effects of the production process, because their INCENTIVES are ONLY aligned to Profit.

        Yet, the thing about regulations is that they apply to all in the industry. They’re a level playing field. Actually the larger the corporation the easier it is for that corporation to have the resources to address the regulation. Giving long term players an advantage.

        But, once a corporation achieves monopoly or duopoly status, the management team needed to run the corporation, just doesn’t have the motivation to innovate. It can sit back on a monopoly position and “Rent Seek”.

        And that’s why Government needs to be higher in the command stack. Because a monopoly has no incentive to reduce pollution or the safety of it’s products. There’s no market justification for that “Extra” “Expense”.

        1. mx says:

          Summary: Large Corporations Don’t Innovate.

  2. jimijon jack says:

    ICE maker are Profit happy Slime Bags…It’s the Jimmy Carter story all over again. If we would of gotten 0ff of 0il back then the EV advancements would have been unimaginably incredible by now..

    1. speculawyer says:

      They are also short-sighted idiots.

      What is going to happen the next time gasoline goes up to $5 and no one wants to buy their big gas guzzlers anymore? They’ll go bankrupt again as the oil companies sit back and laugh.

      1. jimijon jack says:

        0il companies have been laughing for too long now..People should Demand EV’s and “REFRAIN” from buying these Noisy Dirty Maintainance Riddled ICE Cars..I Know I Will keep my old Car as long as I need to , But I will not buy an ICE Car!

        1. CLIVE says:

          That is a huge statement.

          I applaud you, and I agree wholeheartedly.

      2. John volt no 4 says:

        The genie is out, the more people buy EV and PHEV , the quality of smooth exeleration and low charging prices ( even lower if you have solar panels you can purchase with home equity loan or barrow on your 401k or pay slightly higher and use give money while it lasts ) , I have a co-worker that leased a Tesla , and is charging it on 120vac , his electric bill only went up $50 per month, my 2012 Chevrolet Volt just less then $40 per month, granted in my case the motor kicks in to keep the cabin warm when the temp less then 27f , I then only fill the tank once every 5 weeks, and there been very low maintenance, no brake jobs , oil change once a year, and my friend and myself have only gotten software updates, and he needs no oil changes in his Tesla.

        Growing up during both energy crises in the 70’s this has been a blessing , they can scrap the standard’s , most people are tired of spending at the gas station, let the market forces will lean torward the least resistance, and with advancements in both lithium , super cacitors , solar panels , even hydrogen in 10 years will be doable for the big rigs, but I think most Busses will be electric with in 10 years fuel is a fleets most expensive in finance, more so the human driver , and those days are numbered, the new appointment, he a dinosaur period!!!

        1. Lad says:

          Market forces be damn; there is no competition when the oil companies buy off your politicians and the car companies decide not to build EVs, you have no EVs to buy except what they decide you can buy; Get it? That’s a monopoly, especially when companies organize to control their market, in this case the car market. The oil market is controlled by the API and the car market by the AAM. And, in this case, the Republicans in Congress and President Elect are a major part of this growing illegality. How? By aiding and abetting this form of racketeering.

          Pray that Tesla is allowed to continue in business because the oil company/car maker/lobbyist/politician oligarchs will do whatever they can to sink the company;Tesla is the only EV maker of size who can oppose the fossil fuel polluters with a real weapon, an electric car for the masses.

          1. Steven says:

            Apparently, the “Free Market Economy” is free to include lobbyists, bribery, and collusion.

            In the future, you will be able to buy whatever kind of car they’re willing to sell you.
            And if they aren’t interested in selling clean, efficient cars, oh well then. Tough luck.

            At worst, I see all federal incentives disappearing and various surcharges tacked onto the purchase of BEV’s

          2. Rightofthepeople says:

            Dude, you gotta take that tinfoil hat off. In case you haven’t noticed, there are dozens of EVs for sale today that didn’t exist just a few years ago, and dozens more that are on the near term horizon. Most of these are from the major, established automakers. The genie is out of the bottle, EVs are just better, and they aren’t going away. Relax and enjoy the ride.

            1. przemo_li says:

              Most if not all of those are spurred by regulation. We are in thread where car oems call for abolition of those regulations.

              If You want to find that tin foil hat look into mirror…

            2. mx says:

              Thank you CARB.
              California Air Resources Board.

            3. Nix says:

              Rightofthepeople — The reason all those car makers magically started building EV’s at the same time isn’t because they all happened to stay at the same Holiday Inn the night before.

              The vast majority of the world’s EV’s exist because of a set of strict emissions regulations and mandates in the US, EU, and China.

              Or do you think it is all just a coincidence, and that it happened because of the free market?

        2. Bacardi says:

          When has smooth “a”cceleration ever sold a car? Doesn’t nearly half of the United States live in complex where the overwhelming majority face challenges to charge at home?

          As much as people whine about gas stations (there are uber like mobile gas delivery services that are doing quite well) imagine the whining of sitting on a fast charger for an hour for a long?

          Most popular ICE vehicles have an ICE “range” of over 500 miles which reduces the frequency of getting gas…

          1. “Most” new cars don’t go 500 miles… sorry Charlie.

            Why would anybody sit at a quick charger for an hour? That’s not quick. Most charge breaks for most cars are 20-40 minutes.

            The most popular vehicles in USA:

            1) Ford F-Series
            Sales: 69,651 (9/16)

            2,3) Ram and Chevy pickups

            4) Toyota Corolla
            September 2016 Sales: 32,272

            5) Honda CR-V
            September 2016 Sales: 31,884

            6) Toyota Camry
            September 2016 Sales: 30,707

            1. Can you guess the range of any of these vehicles?

              1) with standard 23 gallon tank at 20mpg combined is slightly over 400 miles

              2,3) about the same as above

              4) with 13 gallon tank at 35mpg is 455 miles

              4) 14 gal / 31mpg combined is about 440 miles

              Starting to see a trend?

              EVs really don’t need 300 miles of range *if* you can charge them up every night at home *and* have ubiquitous fast charging available.

              For folks that don’t have a daily charging location at home / work / school / etc, then a gas station model is noticeably difficult at 80 miles range with a 50kW charger.

              In the future, those will truly be low end cars, with the bulk of charging in 100-300kW, and ranges of 150-300 being “the norm”.

              In those snearios, where you can add 3-5 kWh per minute, you can add 80-250 miles range in 15 minutes, I think the world will “suffer”.

    2. bogdan says:

      Or George Bush story over again.
      Remember the story of EV1, Hummer, war in Irak, etc?

      1. Texas FFE says:

        Remember EISA07? That’s where your electric cars came from ye of little knowledge.

  3. MTN Ranger says:

    It’s not really surprising. Corporations invested in the status quo don’t want to spend money on better technology or efficiency. It’s all about the money.

    1. vdiv says:

      It is greatly disappointing, not in the least for the many folks at these companies working on electrification. Buying an EV from these companies should be seen at least in part as a sign of acknowledgement, support, and appreciation for what they do.

      1. ClarksonCote says:

        Yeah, but economies of scale are starting to tip in favor of EVs. At this point, if big auto doesn’t innovate and continue to diversify into electrified transportation, they’ll be left behind by the likes of Tesla and others.

        They’ll be no different than other “powerhouses of yesterday” like Sears or K-Mart. Refusing to innovate eventually results in being a success story of the past.

  4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    Hmmm, well I’ll bet I can think of at least one auto maker which didn’t join the pack of hyenas circling around the soon-to-be-gutted EPA lioness:

    Tesla Motors.

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Sure, but that means that Tesla is on an island by itself.

      We need to make sure that every ICE maker got some attachment in EVs so they won’t favor completely killing off EVs.

      Yes, Tesla needs to survive. But EV programs inside GM/Toyota/Nissan/BMW/VW/Mercedes also need to survive!

      Remember the EV1 story. EV1 failed partly because the EV1 team inside GM didn’t sell it well to the executive team.

      We need to show those executives that there are enough demand for EVs that they can make money on it so they would turn around.

      If we stop buying their expensive SUVs, but line up to buy their EVs, then their own board will have no problem to pressure them to produce the car that people are willing to buy.

      1. WadeTyhon says:

        Exactly! We all want regulations to continue to hasten the adoption rates.

        But if anything happens… then in the mean time, we need to double down our support on those who offered exceptional plugins in large quantities *before* they were forced to. BMW, Nissan, Tesla, Chevy, etc.

        This is a harder path, but it is how most industries change.

        Samsung, HTC and Apple smartphones didnt push out the Blackberries or Nokia flip phones because government increased regulations. They did so because early adopters showed their friends and loved ones how much better the technology was. And consumers demanded it.

        If you boycott all automakers but Tesla, then the EV adoption rate will be slowed.

        1. Eco says:

          Flawed logic. You have to make the automakers compete, don’t pity buy from the bullies hoping they will stop bullying you. Regulations are still tightening, they will need to sell some amount of EVs but they are lobbying to make that amount as small as possible. Rather than to make it easy for the dinosaurs to achieve their requirement you should support the one company that wants to make electric cars something everyone would prefer over an ICE car. You have too much faith in the industry if you think creating demand for some half-assed car will be more effective than scaring them shitless by not buying anything from them and just going to the competition to buy a superior product.

          1. WadeTyhon says:

            This logic is not flawed. Do not purchase cars from companies who make no EVs or limited run EVs like Honda, Mazda, Subaru, etc.

            Give priority to companies who made large volumes of EVs before the stricter ZEV requirements kicked in. BMW, Chevy, Nissan, Tesla, BYD.

            These automakers had already built tens of thousands of plug ins and dedicated EV platforms when other automakers were building very few or none.

            For the rest of the late comers, Kia, Hyundai, Fiat, VW, Ford, Toyota… buy their EVs if they suit your needs. But give priority to those who saw EVs as the future.

            Tesla is great, but Tesla will not suit everyone. They also do not make enough vehicles to satisfy all EV demand worldwide.

            And Tesla makes money directly off of ICE cars as well by selling credits to the automakers who have refused to start any large volume EV production. If Tesla was not willing to sell these credits, then other automakers would be forced to pay a much more significant fine.

            Its very simple. Buy EVs from companies who got in early and planned for an EV future. It is also OK to buy cars from the lagging companies who offer large volume EVs but only reluctantly. This forces them against their will to make more plug ins.

            Most importantly, do not buy ICE cars and if you have one, get rid of it and buy an EV or plug in hybrid. 🙂

            1. Texas FFE says:

              You can’t put Ford in the list of late comers. If anything Ford was a pioneer offering four different plugin models back in 2012, the C-Max Energi, the Fusion Energi, the Focus Electric and the Transit Electric. And Ford was number one in plugin sales last month, so it looks like Ford is still in the game regardless of the bad EV press Ford is getting lately.

              1. WadeTyhon says:

                This is true, although they have no dedicated plug-in models like the other manufacturers I mentioned. And we know on the record how the Ford CEO feels about EVs. Despite exceptional plug-in sales he still feels they’re a failure.

                But you could definitely slot them in with the pioneers, and their offerings are quite compelling especially for the price!

                Companies like Ford do make EVs in large numbers. They should not be boycotted or written off. If they make the Plug-In that works for you, then buy it so that they must keep making more of them. 🙂

        2. przemo_li says:

          Nokia flip phones registered RECORD sales and profits well into iPhone mania…

          Only when Nokia announced that in future they will go to Windows Phone (WinP phones where not ready for 2 full quaters!!!), sales tanked.

          Only then everybody understood that Nokia is going to slaughter its ecosystem, suppliers, partners, etc. for some imaginary gains.

          (Truth be told, then Nokia CEO had 20 milions bonus for selling Nokia phone business… at any price! go figure why he had huge personal stake in killing Nokia as phone maker brand)

          So there You have it.

          Which also means no car OEM can go Tesla route 100% right now.

          There are not enough batteries out there for that, and telling Your customers that their current offerings aint no good simply wont do 😉

          1. WadeTyhon says:

            Didn’t know about the CEO’s bonus. Very interesting and slimy!

            Nokia had many early attempts at blackberry-style smartphones which were ahead of the competition but not very successful by today’s standards. They had their first all touch smartphone within a year or two of the iPhone but their aging Symbian OS was far behind the competition by the time it was released.

            I’d say we are still in the Blackberry, PDA, Windows Mobile era in EVs. Mostly these are only available to the rich or upper middle class.

            And like with early smart/feature phones the average driver doesn’t see the use of switching to a more expensive alternative. (“Why would I need all that? My phone is for making phone calls!” )

            We need to change their minds. 🙂

      2. Breezy says:

        Right. Not everyone can afford a Tesla; a Tesla won’t work for everyone. Buy whatever car meets your needs from whichever company, otherwise you’re just reinforcing the notion that efficient vehicles don’t “account for the needs of customers.”

    2. CLIVE says:

      “Hmmm, well I’ll bet I can think of at least one auto maker which didn’t join the pack of hyenas circling around the soon-to-be-gutted EPA lioness:

      Tesla Motors”

      Absolutely!!!!

      1. Kdawg says:

        BAHAHAHA! Clive, what happened with “Nissan, Kia, and Hyundai are making a stand”? Are you still going to boycott car companies instead of technology because your choices really just got slim.

    3. Nix says:

      Unfortunately, Tesla alone can’t provide anywhere near enough variety of different models to support a healthy EV market all by themselves.

      We already suffer from not having anywhere near as many choices of EV’s/PHEV’s in so many different market categories.

      The ICE car makers have us in check-mate.

      1. CLIVE says:

        Are you sure?

        Give them time and they will make several variants.

        1. Nix says:

          That’s the problem. Time.

      2. przemo_li says:

        Of course they can.

        2 more years of failing luxury ICE sales, and shareholders of every car company will burn CEOs at stake if those companies wont have luxury EVs 😉

        When unobtanioum will become equated with EVs? … Game over for ICEs.

        It’s already happen. Most of the planned EVs are positioned as “premiums” compared do ICEs sold with same body style.

        Tesla by virtue of stealing enough luxury market can do it singlehandedly.

    4. John says:

      Washington is rigged. Pure and simple. Instead of wasting our time whining about the mainstream automakers bribing politicians to keep them rolling in cash, EVERY SINGLE PERSON HERE (who is able) should just buy a Tesla.

      If the automakers want money, deprive them of yours. It’s the only long-term strategy that will work.

      1. Rich says:

        Agreed. The decision in front of me is whether to put another $1,000 down on a second Tesla Model 3.

  5. JyBicycleOrTesla says:

    It’s bicycle time or Tesla.

    1. Mister G says:

      Another option is to buy solar bonds which directly helps Tesla without having to buy a vehicle from Tesla.

    2. Rick Danger says:

      Yup.

  6. ModernMarvelFan says:

    LOL. Those people who were preaching to favor Nissan over GM/Ford on the EVs are now basically got a pie in face.

    At the end of the day, we should boycott all ICE cars and only buy the PEVs. It is basically voting with our wallet. Then, based on demand, they got no choice but to produce PEVs.

    1. JyBicycleOrTesla says:

      We still have Tesla. Lucid, and FF. Man it hurts that Hyundai, Kia, and Subaru are included.

      1. Kdawg says:

        Tesla is too expensive for 95% of the public and the others are non-existent. If you’re shopping for a car, buy a plug-in today, vs. using your gasser. Lot’s of good options. Support the TECHNOLOGY with your wallet.

      2. WadeTyhon says:

        Lucid and Faraday Future have no EVs on the market yet. When they do finally release something, they will not be priced within most peoples budgets.

        Sadly affordable Tesla’s are years away for anyone who has not already put down a deposit. 🙁

        If you want a Kia or a Hyundai then do not let this news stop you! 🙂 They’re finally releasing good EVs. Force them to keep making plug-ins. Go buy a Soul EV or a Hyundai ioniq.

        Do not buy a Subaru, they have no hybrid, PHEV or EV models.

    2. WadeTyhon says:

      Exactly! This is what we have been saying to them and this is what needs to be done.

      Look to the automakers who have a long history of developing compelling EVs. Chevy first showed off the Volt prototype nearly a decade ago. The spark ev was a test bed for their new 200 mile EV. The Volt drive train was also adapted into a very efficient malibu hybrid.

      Nissan unveiled the Leaf less than two years after the Volt. Both companies have an EV history going back to the 90s.

      BMW has developed two dedicated EVs and adapted plug ins hybrids for a significant amount of its lineup well before they really needed to.

      And we can all count on Tesla to continue the push.

      Those who have been dragged in reluctantly like Ford and Toyota? Dont look at buying their plug ins as rewarding them… instead look at it as forcing them to continue making them. Bending them to your will. 🙂

      Any automaker who hasnt made an EV or plug in as of yet… or has provided only token limited run models… has no investment in the tech. Honda, Subaru, etc.

    3. JakeY says:

      I’m not one that said that, but Nissan is still way better GM given GM’s the only one that actively lobbied to block Tesla (the only holdout in this article).

      And Ford still haven’t made a serious non-compliance EV yet.

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        “but Nissan is still way better GM given GM’s the only one that actively lobbied to block Tesla (the only holdout in this article).”

        LOL. So you are hating GM more because of your blindly love for Tesla.

        GM is defending its home turf. US market isn’t Nissan’s home turf. In fact, LEAF doesn’t even sell that well here. No reason to lobby hard in a foreign market.

        As far as “bad vs. good” goes, how come Nissan only offers 1 PEV in the US market. It has been over 5 years now. What is the excuse?

  7. Tech01x says:

    I will be voting with my wallet.

    1. CLIVE says:

      That’s it… !

      1. wavelet says:

        How exactly (unless you can give up cars)? The only one not there is Kia, which is a sister company to Hyundai.

        1. CLIVE says:

          Easy as pie… Buy 100% Electric or PHEV’s only!

          That is how you vote w/your wallet.

          1. WadeTyhon says:

            Exactly, CLIVE. Vote with our wallets for EVs from all automakers who have taken EVs seriously.

            Preferably Tesla, BYD, Nissan, Chevy, BMW.

            Tell anyone you know who is looking for a new car to buy one with a plug. Take them for a ride in your Volt or Tesla or i8 and show them the superiority. 🙂 They will see.

            1. unlucky says:

              The i8 is a joke. It has Plug-in Prius levels of EV capability.

              1. WadeTyhon says:

                It isn’t my choice of Plug-In either. For the money, I’d buy a Tesla before an i8. But it’s better than the Prius Plug-In for what it is.

                It’s a sports car with 15 miles of all electric range and 28 mpg with it’s 7.1 kWh battery.

                The Prius Plug-In is especially embarrassing because it is already a small efficient car and should have performed better. That 4.4 kWh battery doesn’t get it very far.

                A longer range i8 will likely be announced next year and the all-electric version is on the way in a few years as well.

                http://insideevs.com/next-generation-bmw-i8-crank-750-hp/

                1. unlucky says:

                  EPA lists it as “0-14” miles of AER. 15 miles is the “elec + gas” range.

                  http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=38230&id=37309&id=35598&id=37470

                  This means for 15 miles you can run on a combination of both, but you are still in charge depleting mode. After that it’s all gas (hybrid still, but gas).

                  See how a volt has a 50 mile “electric” range but the PiP and i8 are “elec + gas”?

                  In pure electric mode the i8 is a poor performer also, just like the PiP. It is better than the PiP, but it’s along those lines. A Ford Fusion Energi goes much further on almost the same capacity battery despite not using the exotic materials of the i8 and presumably being heavier. It’s much more efficient in charge depleting mode, it’s much more efficient in charge sustaining mode too.

                  Maybe there will be a better i8 next year. It sure seems like they could do a lot better.

                  1. WadeTyhon says:

                    Fair enough, 14 miles AER, I stand corrected. 🙂

                    And I definitely don’t hold the i8 up as one of the best plug-ins out there for efficiency. I just happened to mention it lol.

                    But anyone who owns an i8 probably is not going to use it in the same way as a Volt, Prius Plug-In, or an Energi model.

                    My original point was just that, no matter what ev you have, get out there and have friends and family drive it or ride in it.

    2. Rightofthepeople says:

      How very capitalistic of you! 🙂

  8. speculawyer says:

    So we should keep the USA completely addicted to finite commodity that is largely imported, pollutes the atmosphere, and changes the climate.

    Great plan, what possibly could go wrong?

    1. William says:

      Nothing wrong with these little National skirmishes and Civil Wars, where religious factions and their militias, creat havoc sending millions of defenseless people fleeing outside their national borders as refugees. Then said “refugees”, ( some militiamen disguised as fleeing victims ) get their proxy wars to infiltrate and expand into other regions outside their sphere of influence, (oil producing areas)where, they can use their religious dogma to perpetrate further infrastructure seizure and asset forefiture.

      Of course, then the need for weapon suppliers and first world governments and their allies, and their Sovergn Tax payers, have to jump in the fray, footing the bill by supplying Blood and Treasure to “defend” their “interests”, in said conflict zones. Faustian Bargain hunting at its best. Just in time for the Chistmas Rush.

  9. JyBicycleOrTesla says:

    How much does a CPO model s cost?

    1. Nix says:

      They start at around 50K

      https://ev-cpo.com/

      Folks looking at buying a used, out of state Tesla in Colorado, have until the end of the month to still get a Colorado State rebate before the rebate on used EV’s ends.

    2. OCRyan says:

      Just purchased one for $42k, CPO 2013 Model S60 with 38k miles. Every single person that sees it assumes that it is brand new (they do that good of a job). Made it in time for the unlimited supercharging as well!

      1. Scott says:

        I just bought a 2013 Leaf SV with 30k miles for $7000.

  10. Zerbert says:

    Meanwhile, Toyota’s like “We’ve been at 38MPG for a loooonngg time. Stop bitching my fellow automakers. It can be done ?”

    1. philip d says:

      Even more powerful mid-size hybrids like the Malibu and Accord are now getting 47-48 mpg.

  11. Ampedvolt says:

    I voted with my wallet and put 1000 down for a model 3. I don’t care if it takes 3 years and costs more than 35k. The other automakers just lost me.

    1. jimijon jack says:

      YEP! me too , I’ll keep my present car going until then!…NO ICE FOR ME!

  12. Ash09 says:

    “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

    – Upton Sinclair

    I think this is pretty appropriate to use here.

    1. speculawyer says:

      Yeah, I love that quote. It really explains a lot of self-destructive behavior.

  13. realdb2 says:

    Despite what anyone thinks about the governments role regarding mpg standards, there is no denying electric cars have better performance, are cheaper to fuel, and cheaper to maintain than ICE cars.

    Any deregulating or removal of incentives only slows down the demise of ICE vehicles, it doesn’t stop it. All auto manufacturers now know this. They are merely trying to hold on to high profits for as long as they can.

    1. Texas FFE says:

      +1

  14. SteveSeattle says:

    Need to start saving for the Teslas

    1. Texas FFE says:

      -1

  15. Don’t worry people. Vote with your pocketbook. Only way to impact ice…..

  16. CLIVE says:

    How about…

    most importantly account for the needs of planet!

  17. CLIVE says:

    How about….

    Most importantly account for the needs of our planet!

    1. speculawyer says:

      We now live in a post-truth world. The Trumpkins voted away that Chinese hoax know as “climate change”.

  18. SparkEV says:

    The alliance doesn’t include any of the Chinese automakers. I doubt GM, etc will pull out of making EV, but even if they do, Tesla and the Chinese will carry on. What, me worry? 🙂

    1. CLIVE says:

      Well Spark I cannot emagine they will pull out of making them. There is a huge demand for quality EV’s. Just look at what Tesla has done to impact sales from the entire industry.

  19. unlucky says:

    In the end I really wonder how the EPA figured they’d get away with this. Pushing things forward over a year was going to be met with resistance.

    They went for the brass ring and may have ended up undoing beyond what they already had.

    I’m for the higher mpg goal, but trying to do it this way was probably a big mistake.

    In the end, the car companies are fighting this because they think there is no market demand for it. Let’s show them they are wrong. Buy plug-ins, buy BEVs. They will make them if people buy them, they’re not against making money.

    1. speculawyer says:

      We do it this way because the most logical way to do it, high gas taxes, is political suicide.

      Our civilization is fat & lazy and thus refuses to do the right thing.

      1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

        Higher gas taxes in the US are long overdue, but they would not solve issue of all tailpipe emissions, just CO2.

    2. Roy_H says:

      You got to be kidding. If the EPA had left this till next year, there wouldn’t even be a vote on it. It’s now or never!

      1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

        Do you think it would have high chances to stand in court even if it would be rushed before next POTUS?

        1. Roy_H says:

          Yes I do. I believe the EPA have done their homework and if this administration is allowed to vote it through, it will be very difficult for the next to overturn it.

  20. Ocean Railroader says:

    This song really tells what is going on with these stupid auto makers.

    This proves my theory that no mater what you do to try to save the environment the car makers will wreak things for all of us so they can put more gas guzzlers on the road.

    But technically if all Dino mobile car makers scraped their EV’s.

    You would technically see this environmental notch filled in by Tesla and that other electric car maker too.

    1. Priusmaniac says:

      We could even have had ev with rex 43 years ago in 1973 instead of giving in to the Saudi with all the bad consequences we have now.

      But that was then and we are now. If only Tesla and BYD don’t sign that document, I am all for a duopoly in cars in 20 years exactly like Intel and AMD for PC chips. Let the geometric grow carry on.

  21. Jake Brake says:

    If they end up scrapping most of the big electrification plans ill be pissed. The technology is here today at the right price to meet the goals.

  22. Texas FFE says:

    EV sales have spiked 30% in the last year even as gas prices were low. You are not going to have to worry about not being able to buy electric cars because consumers have spoken and they have said there is a market for electric vehicles. Car makers have seen that there’s a demand for electric vehicles and they are going to continue to build and improve electric vehicles regardless of government policy.

    I’m seeing a lot of reactionary rhetoric right now FROM US, the enlightened. Is the sky really falling? We need to take a step back and think, how bad can it be?

    I not saying to give up the fight, far from it. But we need to pick our battles and hopefully they are battles we can win. I can’t control politicians but there is something I can control and that’s what I purchase.

    I’ve said this many times before, we all have the power to change our world with the purchase choices we make. We are very lucky that we have the choice to purchase electric vehicles, that’s a choice didn’t have just a few years ago. So let automakers complain about having to build fuel efficient vehicles, but if any of them want to ever sell me a vehicle again they better sell electric vehicles.

    1. JyBicycleOrTesla says:

      You think automakers will build you a better electric car when there is zero incentive?

      “Pop the trunk, throw those battery in, and call it a day.”

      1. Texas FFE says:

        The incentives are scheduled to expire soon regardless. The incentives were only intended to kick start electric vehicle production, not to sustain it indefinitely. EV production will eventually have to stand on its own merits just like any other commodity.

        1. Josh Bryant says:

          I think “incentive” was a poor choice of words. It probably should have been regulation.

          If “harmonization” mean killing CARB and setting national rules, ZEV mandates will disappear. Automakers would also continue their push to have cars and “light trucks” have separate MPG standards. OEMs can then choose to build just enough to meet the requirement, regardless of demand (because they are lower profit vehicles). If it is not on the lot, most car buyers aren’t going to order it.

          i.e. GM could offer Volt and Malibu hybrid as their only car offerings, then classify Bolt as an “SUV”. Sell them in low numbers and still hit the MPG requirement.

          Your FFE would be one of the first vehicles on the chopping block if the ZEV mandate goes away. The Energi products are more than enough to hit the MPG requirements.

    2. Nix says:

      EV sales are up as the CARB ZEV mandate has increased for Large ICE car makers, and as all the Intermediate ICE car makers are stockpiling ZEV credits for when they soon will need to also have ZEV credits.

      EV sales are up as the total number of ICE car sales are up, which increases each ICE car maker’s ZEV requirement.

      This is NOT a coincidence. Currently ICE car makers choose what EV’s they will sell and where, and at what profit margin in order to meet various regulations.

      With the mandates gone, many will simply end their EV programs. Others will cut the number of EV options. Others will raise prices, because they won’t be under pressure to hit sales targets.

      This will set the EV movement in the US back a decade, as EV’s/PHEV’s become an EU/Asia thing, like passenger diesel cars.

  23. David Murray says:

    They just want to sell more big trucks and SUVs, however as long as Tesla is still in business holding the model III over their heads, the big car makers can’t ignore that! Even toyota, I predict the Prius Prime will become the best selling Prius model and they won’t be able to backtrack away from that.

    1. Nix says:

      They are going after Tesla too. The NADA (ICE car maker dealership lobbyists) are actively fighting Tesla’s factory direct sales model.

      And that was BEFORE the recent political upheaval. Those attacks will be redoubled.

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Yes car makers that crushed the EV1 would sure be happy to crush Tesla as a whole, but this time there are way more Tesla backers to resist. The battery technology is also still better and there are the superchargers. That is all much more robust, independent and harder to knock down. Tesla was also smart to distribute worldwide so they have backup market in case something goes wrong in the US market.

        1. WadeTyhon says:

          Chevy, Nissan, Renault, BYD, BMW will never crush your EV.

          And they will not stop making them.

          They made EV plans way before they had to.

          The EVs from the 90s were a different time and technology was not there. This is an important part of our history but we need to put it behind us and look forward. The above automakers found a way to make profitable plug ins.

          They will not drop their EVs unless we as customers stop buying them.

        2. Nix says:

          Thank God Tesla didn’t lash themselves to the ICE car makers by selling their EV’s through ICE car dealerships. At least they aren’t being undermined by the very same companies who would have been selling their cars for them.

    2. Josh Bryant says:

      If there is no threat of regulation, Toyota can just limit Prime inventory and/or raise the price to kill the sales volume. They did it last time.

      It makes sense for Toyota to direct buyers to the regular Prius with a higher profit margin.

    3. Bacardi says:

      The Prime will be the best PHEV seller mainly due to half being sold in cali which gains a HOV sticker and because it’s cheaper than the regular prius…The feds can’t stop the HOV lane but can start to wean us off of the federal tax credit…

  24. Terawatt says:

    The auto CEOs will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes! Even before the telemarketers…

  25. goodbyegascar says:

    I am disgusted, but not worried. The superior performance of today’s electric drivetrain will drive the EV revolution with or without our government’s cooperation.

    BEVs are already in so many product pipelines. They are are certainly on the minds of every engineer and designer in the global auto industry. That kind of momentum will prove to be unstoppable.

    1. Tech01x says:

      That can easily change. You can’t buy something that isn’t offered. How many times have we seen EV’s cancelled? For some automakers, cancellations exceed the number that made it to market.

    2. CLIVE says:

      Absolutely

  26. kubel says:

    And I agree with them. Consumers should vote with their wallets, instead of government mandating what consumers don’t even want themselves.

    If you want a 50MPG car, don’t buy a F-150. It’s really as simple as that. I, as a consumer, had a choice between an F-150 and a Volt. I chose the Volt. Not a difficult concept people.

    1. speculawyer says:

      Without the CAFE standards, you never would have gotten the chance to buy a Volt!

      1. CLIVE says:

        And as soon as somebody brings out an Electric Truck you can kiss the F-150 goodbye. Then they will fire Mark.

      2. Texas FFE says:

        I disagree. The advent of the lithium ion battery made modern electric vehicles possible. The CAFE requirements definitely accelerated the development of EVs but it is a very definitely possibility that EV development would have and will progress without government intervention.

  27. William says:

    If you don’t drive a Tesla, Big oil owns your AZZ! Period! This is the time to Vote for the One And Only, St. Elon.

    1. CLIVE says:

      The world is still going to be turning

      I am not buying petrol.

      Damn right.

  28. HAuer says:

    So my choice is now down to Tesla.
    Not a real problem, considering that I Already have a reservation for a model 3.
    but might now be forced to make a second one for my daughter.
    Too bad.

  29. Jeff Songster says:

    This is the death of the EPA… let’s hope California can uphold its own standards without getting over ‘harmonized’. As a fallback… check out YesCalifornia… secession from the sad,crazy union. California can get away from the insanity that is the upcoming corporate oligarchy. 6th in the world economy… sorry about the rest of the country… but I really think we should at least try to keep the west coast free from Canada to Mexico. The EPA will be gone soon… and medicare, and social security, and public education… very sad. Nissan is a real disappointment so we will be angling for a Tesla next too. Don’t lease them… buy them, so they can’t try to crush them out of existence like they did with GM EV1 and Honda EV Plus.

    1. CLIVE says:

      They will not stop making EV’s. Leasing is the only way to fly.

      I am not buying a battery that is outdated so quickly.

  30. Jack says:

    The only thing we can really do is supporting Tesla and buying their Cars. You do worse if you support the others and buy their EVs, as that’s just a Honeypot to catch that money which otherwise might help Tesla staying in Business. Think twice, we only got one Automaker supporting the move to EVs out there, the rest is just Oil-Business! If Tesla is dead all other ICE-Makers will easily stop their EV support!

    1. CLIVE says:

      Tesla caused the full domino effect.

      There is no stopping it now.

      1. Jack says:

        You are just partly right, you can’t stop this anymore on long term, agreed, that’s common sense. However the whole change still can be delayed much much more, and this delay won’t be counted in years but decades instead! There is no real competition on EVs between the classical Makers and that’s the Reason why this won’t stimulate each other to do more into that direction. Tesla is the only one that is pushing as they are eating their Business, so Tesla is still the only one who is in fact a real Competitor to them on this playing fields. No Competitor anymore, no game required.

  31. tosho says:

    This made the decision what my next car will be very easy. Now excuse me, I need to go reserve a Model3.

  32. CLIVE says:

    Scott needs a makeover himself.

  33. Bill Howland says:

    If this Forum is in any way representative of the feelings of EV owners, then it looks like Tesla is it and the model 3 will win in the car sales race because all those who ran to Nissan or Kia will have to run back to tesla since they to date at least don’t use ICE powerplants in their cars.

    I take a different view in that if ALL the automakers are saying the same thing, then the Epa requirements are too onerous.

    1. Jack says:

      Let’s take another view… Just drop all those Emission Regulations if the Automakers agree to one law: The Exhaust Pipe of their Engine (if it still has one) has to end in front of the Drivers Face. If they do that, they can ignore any Emission Regulation! Do we have a deal?

      1. Hauer says:

        AND windows have to be closed all the time.

    2. speculawyer says:

      Hey, the Tesla Model 3 is definitely the hottest most-affordable and most-exciting EV ever introduced.

      Of course it is vaporware for now but if they delivery, it certainly will do big sales. But I am sure that all the other automakers can make good EVs too if they decide to put in the effort.

  34. Hauer says:

    So it is really simple now: buy a Tesla now. If the affordableTesla is Not available yet, keep your old ICE as long as needed.

  35. another_leaf_owner says:

    Luckily America != world. There should be enough demand in Asia and Europe to sustain development and marketing of EVs.

  36. Texas FFE says:

    THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!

    Watch out, there is a Model X falling over there and a Model S coming down over here! And here comes a Leaf and an I3!! Oh no, that Volt and Fusion Energi are going to hit you!!

    Seriously people?

  37. Kyiv-Ukraine says:

    What are the biggest concerns buyers of EVs have so far – miles range and quick chargers on their way? And that is all… With newer technologies that are already coming into our life – in a few years the miles range and availability of gas stations will be concern of ISE owners.
    Who could imagine 20 years ago the smartphones and Internet world we got used to so quickly. Or should we still use steam engines to power us ahead?

  38. Mister G says:

    Support TESLA buy solar bonds.

  39. TNT says:

    How hard will it be for the Fed’s to stop CARB? Also, I assume that Trump will figure out a way to cancel the $7500 rebates. I assumed all this was going to happen the day he was elected. I live in a red state and these people laugh at solar and electric cars. If you don’t have an oversized truck, they look down at you as not being a real American.

  40. Scott Franco says:

    “The EPA is currently rushing through the technical hurdles that it needs to lock in 2022-2025 regulations that it had thought it had a lot more time to enact; and the automakers – suddenly buoyed by an unexpected regime change in government, are opportunistically trying to best capitalize on that change as quickly as possible.”

    Oh, so the EPA is “rushing”, but the automakers are “opportunistic”.

    Nice unbiased reporting.

  41. TNT says:

    Hey Scott, here is some unbiased reporting from some people close to Trump.

    https://stopelonfromfailingagain.com/

  42. Scott Franco says:

    And bummer for the “I hate trump crowd”:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/07/opinion/say-what-al-gore-ivanka-trump-and-donald-trump.html?_r=0

    Trump met with Al Gore to discuss climate change issues.

    1. bro1999 says:

      How is that bad news for the “I hate Trump” crowd? His daughter convinced him to meet with Gore because maybe she believes climate change is actually a thing.

      It’s good news, if anything. I bet the meeting was merely a PR stunt, and Trump won’t actually listen to anything Gore said, but whatever.

    2. speculawyer says:

      And he met with Leonardo DiCaprio too.

      And then he promptly nominated an AG that literally copied an oil industry written letter and send it to the EPA on his AG letterhead.

      We are going to be ruled by witchdoctors.

  43. Assaf says:

    So… who was really pissed yesterday at insideevs “injecting politics into EVs”?

    EVs have been political for decades, and they are super-political in the US right now.

    The only people refusing to realize this and willing to blame the messenger, are those whose love for EVs does not align with their politics.

    Sorry fellows, but it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee.

    1. Nix says:

      I’ve been a contributor to many different green car/green energy for over a decade and a half.

      No board, no forum, no mailing list has ever been able to keep politics out of the topic of green anything. It simply isn’t a realistic expectation as long as there are political influences into our US and global energy and pollution policies.

      Pretending we can leave politics out of the discussion is the equivalent of putting a blindfold on and pretending that politics hasn’t already been deeply involved with energy and pollution for decades.

      People who complain typically do so because they can’t or don’t want to rationally defend the actions of the politicians they have voted for. So they choose to “attack the ref” in order to evade the issue.

  44. Assaf says:

    As to the post itself: you are right Jay, automakers are avoiding the issue.

    The main issue is not who’s committing which foul (to be fair, it’s the automakers who fouled first, with that letter to Trump as soon as the election results were known).

    The main issue is whether we know enough right now, to determine if the 2022-2025 standards are doable – and then, whether they are doable.

    I think that anyone paying attention to the industry in general and EVs in particular, knows that the answers are, easily, YES and YES.

    That’s why the EPA feels good about rushing its recs ahead of schedule.

    Trust the automakers, Republican politicians, and incoming-Admin hacks to continue blabbering and whining about process, while avoiding the actual issue.

  45. Victor says:

    Fight back by buying Tesla.

  46. a-kindred-soul says:

    I wrote to Kia Worldwide that I was sad about their decision to slow down measures to clean up our air. And I wrote that my Kia Soul EV will be my last car from Kia. I know, it’s silly, just one individual, one drop in an ocean. Still I did it. They should know what the buyers of their products think.

  47. floydboy says:

    “..and most importantly, account for the needs of customers as it pertains to their ability to breathe clean air.”

    There, fixed it!

  48. TNT says:

    Trump transition team looking to single out people that supported climate change policy in the department of energy. Trump is one nasty guy.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-09/trump-team-s-memo-hints-at-broad-shake-up-of-u-s-energy-policy

    1. speculawyer says:

      Forget nasty . . . this is STUPID. Are we going to start burning witches next? Are we going to go back to bleeding people and applying leeches for medicine? Are we going throw virgins into volcanoes?

      Man-made climate change is a FACT. It is solid science that we have known about FOR MORE THAN 100 years! Based on our industrial activity over the past 200 years, it would be a miracle if global warming did NOT happen.

    2. Nix says:

      Career civil servants (employees at the EPA) go to the events and work on the projects that they are assigned by their bosses, just like any employee at any job.

      Removing political appointees is one thing. That’s to be expected.

      Going on a witch hunt and going after individual employees for what work they were assigned in some pogrom against any non-partisan career employees who dared to do the jobs they were assigned is another thing.

      This is crazy. This is going to be worse than even MY doom’s day proclamations I made prior to the elections.

  49. Radagast says:

    Thank you Nissan, GM, you made this decision much easier:

    DEC 12 2016
    Tesla Motors Corporation
    Payment
    – negative $2,500.00