Let’s strengthen ZEV incentives on the federal level, but not demonize CNG and propane because they’re not “zero.”
Here are my tree-hugger bona fides: I’m a long-time Sierra Club member. I think global warming is real and I see its effects growing year after year. I am seriously worried about the planet we will leave our children. The transportation sector is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the U.S., accounting for 28% of the nation’s total emissions. We need to address this now.
So yes, when the Trump administration says we need to eradicate fuel efficiency standards, EV incentives, and state emissions mandates like Sherman marching to Atlanta, I’m concerned. But I also see opportunity. Hear me out.
A Patchwork of Regulations
We’ve built ourselves a well-intentioned acronym salad of regulations on top of regulations.
On the federal level, EPA’s Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for MY-2027 for light and medium-duty vehicles run parallel to the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) more stringent Low NOx Omnibus rule, which California and at least nine states are set to follow on different timelines.
CARB’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule is supposed to work in tandem with CARB’s rules for manufacturers — Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) and Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II).
While CARB was able to secure waivers from the EPA on ACT and ACC II, it rescinded its waiver request on ACF. That means ACF is now on hold for private fleets, yet municipal and state fleets must still comply.
With some rules still in place, funding is in doubt. CARB still has HVIP money for small fleets, but federal funds through IRA’s 45W program are in the administration’s crosshairs.
On the NHTSA side, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards were in place to set industrywide MPG goals. However, new Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy signed an order directing NHTSA to rescind those standards.
Messy for Fleets & the Market
This is a messy state for fleets, and the market is in a constant state of whiplash.
How are trucking carriers considered “high priority” by CARB able to compete for jobs with non-high priority operators that follow a different set of rules and incentives?
How do you tell large government fleets that federal or state incentives are no longer available to shave the gigantic premium for that electric truck, but they still have to buy the electric truck to comply with the rule?
Will CARB lose its authority only to regain it after the next presidential administration, and reup on enforcement? Is a high-noon showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court eminent?
CARB has successfully defended its authority in court for over 50 years. If CARB wins again, how will it continue to set and enforce its stringent regulations in a new regulatory environment that will be radically different from a year ago?
10 Policy Actions to Reduce Emissions
This is not the time to relax the urgency of the climate crisis. But it is an opportunity to “build back better” with a clean slate. Let’s normalize the rules on a federal level. Make them so half the people will say they don’t go far enough, and the other half will say getting there is impossible.
Here are a few ideas. Let’s:
- Continue incentivizing consumer and commercial buyers of electric passenger cars and trucks.
- Revise phase-in targets that don’t target a date for 100% of anything.
- Acknowledge that current battery technology and the industry as a whole aren’t ready to satisfy many trucking duty cycles.
- Incentivize renewables (diesel, hydrogen, and biofuels).
- Not demonize CNG and propane because they’re not “zero” and keep incentivizing them.
- Strengthen existing tax credits (in IRA, or a new form) for domestic battery and EV manufacturing.
- Incentivize the heck out of the U.S. companies that engineer battery technology.
- Investigate a sliding-scale vehicle registration fee based on vehicle emissions.
- Explore a national system for tracking and reporting fleets’ fuel usage and emissions data (similar to the SmartWay program but with some teeth), to benchmark performance and set reduction targets.
- Investigate a federal low-carbon fuel standard (LCFS) similar to states’ LCFS (California, Oregon, and Washington) that reduces carbon intensity over time. The LCFS would reward the use of renewables and provide credits for electrification in trucking and fleets.
I’m not advocating for all these ideas to come to fruition, but rather to open our minds to the possibilities.
A New Moonshot Moment?
When President Kennedy gave his famous moonshot speech, there were plenty of people at the time that didn’t think we’d ever get there. NASA had not yet sent a human into orbit. The technology required for the moon landing didn’t even exist.
In 1960, NASA’s budget was $500 million. By 1966, it was $5.9 billion, about 4.4% of the total federal budget at its peak. Can you imagine the social media meltdown today? But we got it done.
Kennedy’s words still bring chills when I read them:
“We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win.”
In today’s political climate, this won’t be easy. But it’s not impossible.
