The American Petroleum Institute (API), a prominent lobbying entity for the oil and gas sector, has vehemently opposed the new regulations proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
API’s President and CEO, Mike Sommers, characterized these regulations as a “de facto ban” on gasoline-fueled vehicles.
Read More: Biden admin reportedly considering obstructing sunlight to counter global warming
EPA’s Push for Electrification: Market Impact and Costs
The Washington Times reported that these new rules put forth by the EPA demand a 60% and 67% electrification of automakers’ new car fleets by 2030 and 2032, respectively.
Sommers stated, “This proposal seriously misses the mark.”
He stressed that even though it’s not a definitive prohibition on internal combustion engines, the regulations are an implied ban, potentially leading to the elimination of competition, market distortion, and restrictions on consumer options. It could be more expensive for taxpayers.
Alliance for Automotive Innovation challenges API’s steep electrification goals
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, the leading trade group for the auto industry, echoed API’s sentiment.
The group submitted remarks to the EPA, stating, “These levels are substantially higher than what the auto industry indicated was achievable.”
They suggested that these proposed norms essentially demand a tenfold sales hike in a brief span of just eight years.
Market readiness for EV surge questioned by Automotive Alliance
The Alliance acknowledged that while some customers may prefer electric vehicles (EVs), the market is not currently equipped to handle a surge in EV demand.
The availability and affordability of EVs, as well as accessible home and public charging infrastructure, are still areas needing significant improvements.
“Customers will consider affordability and access to home and public charging infrastructure, requiring stepped-up efforts at the state and local level when it comes to building codes, permitting, and approval from public utility commissions.” the group stated.
The group argued that fulfilling these requirements within the proposed timeline is a daunting task, with considerable impacts on automakers, workers, consumers, and vehicle availability for various individual and business needs.
The South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources (DANR) added another layer of criticism, deeming the proposed rule as a case of federal overreach.
DANR challenges EPA’s jurisdiction over climate goals
DANR pointed out that the EPA’s aspiration to limit the rise in global average temperature to well below 2 degrees Celsius exceeds its legislative jurisdiction.
The department’s critique read, “EPA’s fact sheet states the proposed standards would contribute ‘toward the goal of holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 degrees Celsius ….’ The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently told EPA it may not expand its federal regulatory reach beyond what Congress has given it authority to implement,”
“The U.S. Congress has not established this 2 degrees Celsius goal under the requirements of [the] Clean Air Act, and this goal is not found in a promulgated regulation.”
Read Next: Biden makes unfounded claim: People are ‘thrown out of a restaurant for being gay’
DANR asserted that the EPA doesn’t have explicit congressional authorization for such an ambitious approach to curb vehicle emissions.
Hence, DANR is skeptical of the EPA’s authority to enforce these proposed emission norms and views the initiative as overextending federal powers.
Malik is a skilled writer with a passion for news and current events. With their keen eye for detail, they provide insightful perspectives on the latest happenings. Stay informed and engaged!
Tags:
