- The White House yesterday repealed a 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions are a danger, removing the foundation for much of environmental law.
- Automakers are unlikely to drastically change car design over the move.
The White House yesterday repealed a 2009 finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to the public. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says the move ends “all subsequent federal GHG [greenhouse gas] emission standards for all vehicles and engines of model years 2012 to 2027 and beyond.”
The move, however, may not bring drastic change to the cars you see for sale.
Let’s explore what the decision means and why its impact may be limited.
Why Does the Endangerment Finding Matter?
Congress writes laws, but federal agencies like the EPA write the regulations that explain how the federal government interprets and enforces those laws.
Those agencies are staffed by lawyers, scientists, and other professionals who take the broad guidance of federal law and make it specific. Congress, for instance, empowers the government to pass rules that will protect health. Congress does not define whether carbon dioxide and methane are dangerous or how industries should restrict them. Federal agencies do that.
Many of those regulations cite the 2009 endangerment finding as the reason for their existence. Revoking the finding could end the rules. In a statement, the EPA called the move “the single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history,” asserting that it repeals regulations on the automotive industry, the electric power industry, and others.
Why Will the Auto Industry’s Response Likely Be Limited?
The New York Times notes, “The administration claimed it would save auto manufacturers and other businesses an estimated $1 trillion, although it has declined to explain how it arrived at that estimate.”
But the move may have limited impact on the cars you can buy for two reasons.
One reason is that designing a new car from scratch often takes five years or more. Designing new parts, testing and validating them, securing suppliers and contracts, and retooling factories is a slow process.
Automakers rarely react strongly to swings in U.S. policy because they know a new White House will take over before their next designs reach the market. They have to plan for future presidencies.
The Trump administration leaves office in less than three years. The new cars that reach showrooms for the rest of its term will have largely been designed before it began. Automakers know that any cars they design during Trump’s second term will be sold under the next president, who might tighten the rules.
The other reason is that many automakers sell the same cars and engines in many countries. They have to build to the strictest standards they will encounter. One country tightening standards can force changes. One country loosening standards rarely does.
The U.S. is the largest market for pickup trucks and large SUVs, though overseas markets are growing for even those. Most other types of cars are designed for worldwide sale.
Industry publication Automotive News also notes that “the repeal amounts to a significant break between the industry and the government. In annual financial reports, automakers warn investors about the effects of the warming planet.”
What Kind of Changes Might We See?
Though designing new cars and new engines is a years-long process, there are short-term steps an automaker can take. Those mostly involve the engines and vehicles they already build.
Last summer, the White House announced it would no longer enforce fuel-economy standards.
In response, Stellantis, the parent company of Dodge, Jeep, Ram, and other brands, decided not to end production of its Hemi V8 engine. The company had removed it from several models, but brought it back to most of them.
Other automakers have swapped 6-cylinder engines they already build into cars that used 4-cylinder engines last year.
Will the Move Be Challenged?
The decision is also likely to face court challenges. NBC News notes, “Major environmental groups have disputed the administration’s stance on the endangerment finding and have been preparing to sue in response to its repeal.”
The New York Times reports that the state of California has also promised a court challenge.
Potential lawsuits will also likely delay significant changes as industries wait to see if the courts block the move. Litigation could take years, extending beyond the end of Trump’s last term,
