EPA Withdraws 50 MPG Target By 2025, Threatens California

The Environmental Protection Agency has confirmed plans to overhaul proposed fuel economy standards which were put in place under President Obama.

In a statement, the agency said it recently completed the midterm evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger vehicles for the 2022-2025 model years. Following the review, the EPA has determined “In light of recent data, the current standards are not appropriate and should be revised.”

The agency didn’t go into specifics but EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said “Obama’s EPA cut the midterm evaluation process short with politically charged expediency, made assumptions about the standards that didn’t comport with reality and set the standards too high.” He went on to call the previous determination “wrong.”

The news doesn’t seem that important on the surface but it kicks off a series of events which will see the average fuel economy rating of new vehicles drop from the previous target of nearly 50 mpg by 2025. The government declined to reveal the new number but Pruitt said the EPA will work with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to develop a “notice and comment rulemaking to set more appropriate GHG emissions standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.”

The decision was expected and reports have suggested California and a handful of other states could begin a legal battle with the goal of keeping the original proposal in place. The EPA alluded to this fact as they noted a waiver allows the state to impose stricter standards than federal requirements. The agency then, rather blatantly, warned “The California waiver is still being reexamined by EPA under Administrator Pruitt’s leadership.”

The warnings to California didn’t stop there as Pruitt said “Cooperative federalism doesn’t mean that one state can dictate standards for the rest of the country.” He went on to say “EPA will set a national standard for greenhouse gas emissions that allows auto manufacturers to make cars that people both want and can afford — while still expanding environmental and safety benefits of newer cars.” Despite the sharp comments, Pruitt finished by saying it is in “America’s best interest to have a national standard” and the EPA looks forward to working with “all states, including California, as we work to finalize that standard.”

  • Nordschleife

    I just don’t see how California or a handful of states including California thinks that they are going to have automakers make specialized versions of cars just for them. While I can respect California’s leadership role in a lot of things, like it was stated by Pruitt, they do not control the US. Here is hoping that things can be resolved quickly and with reasonable accommodations to both sides.

    • PB

      Going back some years, California-only models used to indeed be a thing. It was considered that Cali was a bigger market than some Nation-States, and worth the extra cost.

      • Moveon Libtards

        Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown is on here!

      • Nordschleife

        But to uhh huh point, if you are just capping horsepower or god forbid another diesel defeat switch it really isn’t proactively addressing the issues. they are not going to go for those targets if they don’t have to. They will just punish or cap California’s cars to be more in line because if they could create 50mpg cars they would do it for everyone.

  • S3XY

    Wonderful. Now all legacy automakers can create more large and inefficient vehicles for the masses for a much better and cleaner future.

    I just love having my windows down while driving and being able to breathe in diesel and exhaust fumes from smelly trucks and suvs.

    So much so that I think it should be offered as a service to everyone for free.

    Breathe into a running exhaust pipe on your own vehicle for 20 minutes and enjoy the experience…. then you die!

    • Moveon Libtards

      Moron, arent electric cars supposed to take obver by 2025 under your prediction? No worries then.

  • S3XY

    I think it’s fair for the implementation of the long awaited Carbon Tax. Pay for how much you pollute.

    – Pollute more, pay more.
    – Pollute less, pay less.

    You do not reap any benefits by paying more for gasoline while polluting more using gasoline.

    The latter is the obvious choice and eventually everyone would slowly transition.

    • Kyle Newberry

      Except there is still the far greater cost of electricity they now have to pay with their home electric bill.

      Carbon tax only hurts the poor. You’ll have the rich people who “buy” unused carbon footprints.

  • smartacus

    it’s the fault of the previous administration
    for setting MPG targets that almost
    guarantees the next incoming
    administration would scrap it.
    And they just did.

    Had the MPG
    targets been
    more realistic,
    nobody would
    have noticed.

    • vantageman1

      if the targets were so slight as to not be noticed what would be the point?????? that doesnt follow logic at all; there wasnt a new proposed target it was just scrapped entirely sounds like corporate interest winning over whats best….bottomline is there is no reason these automakers cant continue to produce more fuel efficient cars its not like theyre not working to do it anyway since “seemingly” thats what the consumer wants it seems this benefits “certain” automakers

      • Auf Wiedersehen

        I think the numerous stories and prosecutions for widespread defeat devices proves this goal was not reachable. They instead put their efforts into cheating JUST to sell cars. Because, they HAVE to sell products or they will be no more. There is a rational to making fuel economy better, emissions less and still be able to sell products. But set the bar too high and I think we see what happens. These companies develop and plan decades in advance and 2025 is hours in automotive design and R&D. 50mpg was an impossible goal and the inverse of your “corporate interest” comment, and the Obama administration knew it. It was a a heavy handed reactionary response that administrations tend to do. There needs to be a balanced attainable goal or there WILL be more cheating and it WILL become more stealthy. And the current electric technology is not a mass viable option.

      • smartacus

        your conclusion is absolutely devoid of logic at all.
        if the targets are guaranteed to be scrapped by
        the incoming administration; the point was
        never about raising gas mileage but
        about pontificating to the base
        which; obviously, wouldn’t
        even know or care
        as long as the
        virtue signal
        is there for
        higher
        MPG

    • SteersUright

      Is this a haiku?

      • smartacus

        lemme ask the Waifu 🙂

  • MultiKdizzle

    The California Waiver is precisely for situations like this. We have a climate change denier as head of the EPA – this administration is in over their heads.

    We won’t back down. While I love cars, I’d much prefer we stabilize the climate situation for future generations to enjoy. Emissions need to come down drastically, and transportation will play a big role in this transition.

    • PB

      You actually believe the climate hustle?

      • UrbanizeCompton

        Climate change is real and proven, to deny climate change is to deny science.

        • Skydis

          Just like global warming

        • Moveon Libtards

          Wait, I thought it was “Global Warning” and any denier was “stupid, uneducated…” Oh, wait, suddenly it is not Global Warming but “Climate Change” because, wait for it, the Earth is actually cooling!!! Isnt that convenient.

          Why are you afraid of being challenged on what is an UNPROVEN theory? Why when scientists bring forward evidence that refutes “climate change” they are screamed at, threatened, and banished in “scientific communities”? What are you afraid of if you have the evidence?

          Sorry, your left-wing, one-world government hustle has been exposed.

        • ChrisInIL

          To deny the falliablity of science is to deny reality.

          • Six Thousand Times

            OK, but to swallow the shaky, flaky, and on-the-takey counter “argument” is beyond foolhardy.

          • ChrisInIL

            Fair enough. Climate change is a hustle. The shaky counter argument is beyond foolhardy.

            Let’s stick to the facts. Climate change has never been proven with valid, unmanipulated data. Anthropogenic climate change has not and cannot be proven since no other possibility has ever been investigated to determine whether there are other factors that may affect climate.

          • Six Thousand Times

            You’ve gotta bury your head deep in the sand (or watch a lot of Fox News) to take such a line but I’m gonna leave you to that one and stick with the science.

          • ChrisInIL

            Your definition of climate change has nothing to do with science. I have a feeling you know that, which is why you’re projecting.

          • Six Thousand Times

            You’re right, the whole thing is a Chinese hoax. Or are you team “Scientists are making the whole thing up to shake us all down for grant money?”

          • ChrisInIL

            I believe in facts. You believe in information selected to support your narrative.

            Nice pivot from projection to the straw man, though. At least you are following the tactical playbook.

          • Six Thousand Times

            And yet, no facts? Even the Petroleum Institute occasionally deals out the occasional fact.

          • ChrisInIL

            While “And yet, no facts?” isn’t a question, it’s an incomplete statement – I will answer both of your questions thusly:

            “Climate change has never been proven with valid, unmanipulated data. Anthropogenic climate change has not and cannot be proven since no other possibility has ever been investigated to determine whether there are other factors that may affect climate.”

            This may sound familiar. It’s because I already provided these facts.

            When I said “climate change is a hustle”, I followed it up with “the shaky counter argument is beyond foolhardy” because I was repeating someone else’s declarative and your declarative.

          • Six Thousand Times

            Nope, no facts. It’s OK, I’ll let you go.

          • ChrisInIL

            Neither your agreement, nor your acceptance of the facts is required for them to be true.

            While you like to devolve into ridicule, you’ll note I don’t. I don’t have to, because your own words achieve the same result.

          • Six Thousand Times

            I think your problem is that you don’t quite grasp opinion versus fact.

          • ChrisInIL

            Usually the route in a circular argument is a lot longer, but OK.

            Neither your agreement, nor your acceptance of the facts is required for them to be true.

            (Hint: responding with essentially nothing more than “nuh uh” only reinforces my position)

          • Six Thousand Times

            Agreed, we’re going nowhere with this.

        • Auf Wiedersehen

          Science is proven wrong almost every day. In fact, science retracts studies and statements on a regular basis. pick one….bacon is actually good for you and helps you lose weight. Actually butter is a good thing for us. Low fat foods are actually bad for you. Eggs? Turns out they aren’t the devil in poultry embryo form after all.

          • UrbanizeCompton

            Science is wrong because bacon and eggs… What does any of that have to do with my comment or climate change?

          • Six Thousand Times

            He loves breakfast and you’ve gotta believe in something.

          • Auf Wiedersehen

            That science is wrong all the time. There are just as many saying the opposite of climate change. Many studies are done, e.g. bacon, butter and eggs will kill you, then are changed later by another study. Give it time and there will be, if not already, studies that show climate change is not caused by us but rather the typical cycle of Earth.

          • Six Thousand Times

            Fat guy, perchance?

        • SteersUright

          Were it one crazy person screaming at us then fine, people can and should remain skeptical. When top scientists from the top universities around the entire globe are in consensus and warning mankind, how can anyone be so dense as to not heed their warnings? It utterly defies logic to me.

        • Six Thousand Times

          Might I introduce you to the great American Dumb Guy? If the facts don’t support the story he’s chosen to be fed, obviously he has to deny the facts.

      • Moveon Libtards

        These are the same people who though Hillary Clinton had a 96% chance of winning.

        Science! Lol

    • MarketAndChurch

      Maybe if European and North American safety standards were the same, California can become a place where cars meeting the European standard would be the only cars allowed on roads. That way, you can import more European brands into the state. I would love to see Skoda’s on American roads.

      • Nordschleife

        Ha, American’s won’t have that. We didn’t even take the metric system so that won’t happen.

    • Kyle Newberry

      You do know that cars are some of the smallest contributions to CO2 emissions. In fact if every man made c02 from the US was made to be clean, we would see we are responsible for about 3% of the world’s emissions.

  • CarCzarDesigner

    The Car companies are already accommodating the national regulations of China, Europe and the US. So, I don’t see this as a drawback. How could it? The car companies are already developing Electric cars. They are gradually bringing more efficient vehicles to market. Yet, there is Consumer resistance in many cases. Like those Motor Heads that want no part of owning or driving an electric car. They would rather keep their old ride going than to drive an electric vehicle to please a particular group of ecologists. Then there is the reality that the technology still needs to mature, further. An electric car may meet the standards of an insistent Governmental bureaucrat/ politician. But its range is still limited and there are inconveniences in finding places to recharge it. This won’t stop development or improving the technology. The Car companies won’t be caught off guard if a Liberal Politician comes to power reverses this ruling.

    • MarketAndChurch

      I think the drawback is that developing zero emission products uniquely for the European market and not having the other car markets subsidize some of the costs for tens of billions thrown into R&D will mean that it will cost more to do this then it has to. Whereas if CAFE standards are upheld and all automakers required to provide a portfolio consisting mostly of low emission hybrids and zero-emission electric cars, the tens of billions thrown into R&D would pay itself off faster because you have more markets to sell those cars. The hope for CAFE was that it would be followed up with more strict regulations on what cars people can drive, like those currently being pushed in Europe vis-a-vis diesels, pushing people into buying more environmentally-friendly cars instead, but now that CAFE is being done away with, there’s less of a chance of that happening now. That’s why I don’t know whether this will be costly or not.

  • Six Thousand Times

    It will not do US automakers any good to fall behind the standards the rest of the world is setting. Certainly not in the longer term.

  • Moveon Libtards

    Thank God for our president!

    And to top it all off he has a HIGHER presidential approval rating than Obummer had at the same time during his admin. Winning!

  • Moveon Libtards

    Yes, FINALLY we don’t have an anti-American Mancurian Candidate moron in the White House who pushed his radical left-wing agenda.

    Instead, we now have a pro-American American president who wants to re-build the economy that the other idiot destroyed by farming everything out to China. And he is doing so at a record pace with jobless rate lowest in 45 years, record GDP, manufacturing on the rebound, and a massive tax cut. Oh, and a presidential approval rating higher than the last one to boot. Life is good, unless of course you are a left-wing ideologue.

  • Moveon Libtards

    California is a dump with the biggest exodus of people to other states happening right now. The state is a cesspool of violence, bankruptcy, and smog. Better handle?

  • Moveon Libtards

    Remember, “Elections have consequences.” Now who said that, I wonder…

  • Moveon Libtards

    Notice how suddenly this site “forgot” to add a bad photo of our president with some angry title attacking him to this article?

    I guess that is what happens when our president wins again. Going to be a rough 7 more years for the left-wing socialists in this country.

  • Moveon Libtards
  • Moveon Libtards
  • Moveon Libtards
  • Nordschleife

    I agree but I still don’t see it. Possibly you’re right but I feel it’s all or nothing situation. Carmakers are not going to develop more stringent vehicles for California so something will have to give and I feel it will be the California.

  • Patrick

    The previous administration wanted to change the way we live,,he and liberals hate the USA…

    • matrem

      Only “liberals” care about the environment. Gotchya 😉

    • Six Thousand Times

      Da, comrade? Can I interest you in an hour or two with the same ladies who peed on your favourite president?

  • Michael_66589

    There is great time to celebrate for car enthusiasts. Stricter emissions have really no sense- these days gasoline cars and trucks emit too little. 50 MPG rule could kill most of V8s and make car repairs more costly. It can also bring more diesels which can cause big problem for quality of air.

  • Mind Synthetic

    Cali is bum dump, they can take their sunshine and shove it. hail V 12

    • matrem

      You sound….educated, lol

      • Mind Synthetic

        you ever love California or you hate it, i live there due to work and i hate it with all my passion. Dirty air unless you drive into the mountains, horrid traffic, homeless are literally everywhere, stupid expensive homes, not to mention lack of a civilized downtown (LA). Plus smog regulations are a pile of dog dirt. name one upside to california?

        • matrem

          I live in and love California. Perhaps you should live in a red state if this blue state is so horrible.

          • Mind Synthetic

            what does red and blue have anything to do with my views?

        • Six Thousand Times

          But they’ve got great night schools where you could learn written English.

        • idop

          why do you think californa suffers all those issues?

  • Auf Wiedersehen

    Are you just now understanding politics and changing administrations?

  • Auf Wiedersehen

    This applies to any company selling cars here. Not just Americans.

  • FoxJ30

    Today: Hooray! Loosen the mpg/emissions standards! Big SUVs for all!
    5-10 years from now: Holy crap! Gas is 3x the price of last year! Quick, let’s dump all of our land barges and pick up compacts, hybrids, and electrics!
    15-20 years from now: Hey US government, bail us out cuz nobody wants to buy our inefficient SUVs anymore and we haven’t bothered keeping pace with any other segment of the market…

    It happened in the 1970s. It happened in the 2000s. It’ll happen again.

  • Emoto

    I am delighted that we have finally wrestled the EPA away from the extremists. Good for Scott Pruitt.

  • Maricaibo

    These fools DO know there’s such a thing as a global marketplace, right?

    I’ll just buy a Toyota. Pruitt snubbed and problem solved.

  • idop

    After owning a car that gets 16mpg city, i have to say, why would anyone want to pay so much to get around -_-

18-Year-Old Charged With DUI Smashes Lamborghini Gallardo Into Two Vehicles

The crash was so loud it made some mistake it for an explosion or something.

Maserati Quattroporte L’Ultimo Concept Is Italian Luxury At Its Finest

This futuristic Maserati Quattroporte render stays (mosty) true to the current model’s design language.

Lexus Safety System+ To Be Standard Equipment On All 2020 Models

The safety suite includes automatic high beam headlights, adaptive cruise control and a a pre-collision system.

Porsche North America Boss Says EVs Will Soon Become Commonplace

Porsche is confident it can easily out-sell its first year of production of the upcoming Taycan .

2020 MINI Electric Teased, Debuts July 9th

MINI is going electric, but the upcoming Cooper SE is only expected to have a range of approximately 114 miles.

Korean Brands Dominate Initial Quality Study, But Porsche’s 911 Comes Out On Top

Genesis had the highest initial quality and they were closely followed by Kia and Hyundai.

Ford Says Explorer ST Customers Aren’t Interested In A V8

The hottest Explorer on sale is powered by an EcoBoost 3.0-liter V6 with 400 HP.

SUV And Tow Truck Decide To Go Their Separate Ways

After the SUV fell off, the tow truck began rolling forward towards a parked van.

2020 Cadillac XT5 Facelift Bows In China With Minor Updates

The 2020 Cadillac XT5 has a new grille and an updated infotainment system with a rotary controller.

Spiderman Goes Electric, Takes A Spin In The Audi E-tron GT

The latest Spiderman flick will feature cameos by the Audi A7, Q8 and e-tron.