epa Archives - Transportation For America

Will EPA’s proposed emissions rule go up in smoke?

A cloudy haze of smoke surrounds back-to-back vehicles in stand-still traffic

The EPA’s proposed tailpipe regulations could reduce carbon emissions across all types of vehicles over the coming decades. While reducing emissions produced on the road can only be part of our national climate strategy, the EPA’s rule could be a boon for communities thanks to the benefits of zero emissions vehicles. However, recent opposition means this rule’s future could be at risk.

On April 12th, 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced an update to federal vehicle emissions standards that could accelerate the ongoing transition to a clean vehicle future. While these new measures are an essential step forward, addressing vehicle emissions at the exhaust pipe alone is no silver bullet. As we found in our Driving Down Emissions report, we need to combine vehicle electrification strategies with transportation alternatives, like transit, walking, and biking, to make the most of the clean vehicle switch. The EPA has since released the text of the proposed rule, with comments closing soon—July 5, 2023.

When combined with another proposed rule that closed comments in mid-June, this rule would require that by 2032, two-thirds of cars and light trucks, 46 percent of medium-duty vehicles (such as delivery vans), half of all buses, and a quarter of all heavy-duty trucks sold would need to be zero-emission vehicles. The rule does not specify the fuel source to reach zero emissions, leaving the industry room to experiment with new solutions.

The EPA estimates that just the new light-duty tailpipe regulations alone could cut down the U.S.’s carbon emissions by 15.5 percent. These sweeping regulations on new vehicles would take effect in 2027 and build off a decade of standards implemented by the EPA.

The third and final phase

This recent regulation is the last phase of a three-step strategy to support the United States’ international commitments to limit emissions and slow the progress of climate change. The first two phases of the EPA’s tailpipe emission standards focused specifically on medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. Phase One (2011) of the greenhouse gas emission standards targeted medium- and heavy-duty vehicle (MHDVs) models to be made in the years 2014-2018 and set fuel efficiency and emissions standards for manufacturers, while Phase Two (2016) set even stricter standards for MHDVs for the model years 2019-2027.

With the years of lead time provided, these regulations gave automotive manufacturers adequate time to slowly ramp up the production of cleaner vehicles. At the same time, they introduced standards that reduced both CO2 emissions and consumers’ fuel costs by increasing efficiency within the physical limits of traditional internal combustion engines.

Understanding the impact

Phase Three standards are heavily influenced by the rapid uptake of electric vehicles. Recent innovations in electric vehicle technology and the record federal investments in EV infrastructure in the 2021 infrastructure law and Inflation Reduction Act make the ambitious new standards a viable goal.

The EPA estimates that Phase Three standards could save 7.3 billion tons of CO2 emissions from light duty vehicles between 2027 and 2055 and avoid 1.8 billion tons of CO2 from heavy-duty vehicles through 2055. That’s the equivalent of eliminating all greenhouse gas emissions from the entire current U.S. transportation sector for an entire year. Overall, the EPA estimates that the value of benefits, such as improved health outcomes and mitigated emissions, would exceed total costs by at least $1 trillion over the course of its existence. These improvements could only be made possible through widespread adoption and production of electric and other zero-emission vehicles, which the rule functionally requires.

The ongoing electrification transition is an opportunity to make equitable investments across all communities. You can take a look at our vision for America’s electric future in Sparking Progress, our report produced in collaboration with the Coalition Helping America Rebuild and Go Electric (CHARGE).

Let EPA know if you support cleaner vehicles

Despite the benefits these changes could bring to the nation’s overall health, air quality, climate, and communities disadvantaged by heavy-duty vehicle emissions, some powerful interests oppose the new rule. In May, 151 members of the majority party in the US House of Representatives signed on to a letter to denounce the new standards. Later, on June 7, 2023, Florida Senator Marco Rubio sent a letter to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission referencing the rule and arguing, contrary to the evidence, that EVs could pose a threat to the electric grid.

These attacks on clean air come at a crucial time, as the EPA is seeking comment on the rule through July 5, 2023. A strong tailpipe emissions rule, coupled with our recommendations to reduce vehicle miles traveled in the Driving Down Emissions report, could be a powerful force to combat climate change and increase the efficiency of the transportation system.

Ready to submit comments, but not sure what to say? Take a look at sample comments from NUMO and the California Air Resource Board.

EPA rolls back CAFE standards, highlighting the need to reduce driving

This week, as the coronavirus crisis worsens, the Trump administration finalized its rollback of clean car standards, a move that will undermine public health and place even more of a burden on finding ways to reduce driving to reduce emissions.

As expected, the Trump Administration released the second part of the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles rule, which would require automakers increase fuel economy of passenger cars by 1.5 percent each year, compared to the previous more stringent 5 percent increase mandated by the Obama administration. This would allow cars on American roads to emit nearly a billion tons more carbon dioxide over the lifetime of the vehicles.

As cities and towns across the country urge people to stay home and only venture out for essential trips, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions have dropped drastically across the country. In Los Angeles, a city notoriously choked with smog from tailpipe emissions, skies have been remarkably clear as highways have been empty, demonstrating just how much pollution comes from all those cars and endless highways in any other normal week.

But while empty highways have been one of the most visceral signs that our economy has come to a standstill, we shouldn’t need to sacrifice our lungs and health for the sake of a robust economy.

There are ways to have both a booming economy and cleaner air and clear skies. One way is through more efficient and electric vehicles. But with the federal government reluctant to set ambitious efficiency standards for automakers, the floor dropping out on oil prices, and relatively slow sales of EVs, that’s unlikely to happen anytime soon. (Ford and GM are only planning to make 320,000 electric vehicles in 2026, fewer than Tesla made last year.) The only other way is to provide meaningful transportation options that would help people reduce the distance they need to drive—or eliminate vehicle trips altogether.

We need fuel efficient vehicles, but this crisis has also shown us the deep value of having other transportation options, especially for those who need it the most. Over 600,000 transit commuters work at hospitals, in doctor’s offices, or as home health providers; 165,000 people take transit to jobs in grocery stores or pharmacies; and 150,000 workers in social services commute on transit. Transit is essential now more than ever, and it will be essential to getting our economy back up and running again.

We need more robust federal support for transit operations so buses and trains can provide frequent and reliable service. We also need a better way to fund projects that build new or expand existing transit service. Across the country, there are dozens of projects trying to get off the ground, collectively hoping for more than $23 billion in federal support. To reduce emissions and provide options other than driving, local transit agencies need a reliable federal partner.

While the clean air across the country is welcome but also a painful reminder that we’re in a crisis, it also shows us what could be possible if we found ways to reduce driving and remove even just a small share of cars off the road. But to do that, we need to give people cleaner options. This week’s latest action proves once again that the administration is moving in the wrong direction.

Partnership for Sustainable Communities celebrates two years, and we hope for many more

The Partnership for Sustainable Communities, an innovative plan to get federal agencies working in concert instead of at cross-purposes, is celebrating its two year anniversary. And there is good reason to celebrate.

The Partnership, a joint venture between the U.S. Department of Transportation, Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Environmental Protection Agency, promotes multi-agency cooperation and solutions to key economic problems. One of its chief advisers is HUD’s Shelley Poticha, a longtime advocate for smart planning and transit who previously served as President and CEO of T4’s co-parent organization Reconnecting America.

In a blog post today, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood joined EPA chief Lisa Jackson and HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan in describing the Partnership’s work:

Two years ago, President Obama offered a new vision for sustainable communities and vastly improved how our agencies work together. He challenged us to coordinate our efforts and help build communities where housing, public transportation, jobs, and services are conveniently connected, where businesses thrive, and where the air, water and land are clean.

Agency collaboration is precisely the kind of common sense that Americans expect from Washington. If anything, policymakers have been slow to catch up with what local officials are already doing.

Last year, we spoke with Kris Krider, Town Planner for Davidson, North Carolina, a small community 20 miles from Charlotte, about the Partnership and the need for collaboration.

“I think the relationship between the DOT, HUD and EPA is a great way to start,” he told us. “I think it’s looking at things comprehensively. We don’t live in a world that’s just HUD and EPA, so the relationships between agencies in the federal government should mimic what towns are facing.”

Roger Millar, who now serves as director of the Leadership Institute at Smart Growth America, said federal assistance in 3,000-person McCall, Idaho “gave citizens a vocabulary that they didn’t have,” adding: “What the team was able to do was put the tools in the citizens’ hands to say, ‘This is what we want — it looks like this.'”

Millar got it exactly right — the Partnership is not about dictating on high what local communities should be doing to create jobs, get people moving and improve quality of life. It’s about giving them the tools and resources to make those decisions for themselves, and recognizing that it’s nonsensical to keep housing, transportation and the environment in their own compartments.

The two-year mark is important for it’s own sake, but especially notable given the the very real threat the Partnership was under during this year’s budget debate. As Poticha put it, according to Transportation Nation:

Our office was lined out of the budget for 2011 and we were out for months. I think it’s only because people in communities called up their representatives that we are still here.

Reform and progress are often fragile, so it is gratifying to see how far the Partnership has come. And their approach is needed now more than ever.