According to Bozzella, that just-right situation means shifting “quickly and aggressively” to cut back automobile emissions however doing so in a method that maintains client selection throughout EV varieties and acknowledges the U.S. nonetheless must construct up the availability chain and charging infrastructure.
“Right now, despite significant policy direction from the federal government, we haven’t seen that materialize,” he stated.
Bozzella argued that the EPA’s rule, as proposed, places the U.S. on the “too fast” route, consequently giving China a bonus and threatening a just-right transition to electrification.
In feedback submitted this month to the EPA, the alliance referred to as the draft rule “a de facto battery-electric vehicle mandate” that’s “neither reasonable nor achievable in the time frame provided.”
Among its suggestions, the alliance desires the EPA to align the requirements extra carefully with President Joe Biden’s 2030 goal by adopting necessities that will result in full-electric and different electrified fashions — together with plug-in hybrids and gas cells — making up 40 to 50 % of new-vehicle gross sales by the tip of the last decade.
Other automakers additionally weighed in on the proposal, with Ford, GM, Hyundai, Toyota and Stellantis among the many commenters elevating issues over its stringency. The UAW, which has not but endorsed Biden for reelection, additionally referred to as for the EPA to melt the proposal and conduct extra evaluation on its affect to union auto staff.
Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers within the House and Senate have urged the EPA to rescind its proposal, arguing that the fast EV adoption wanted to fulfill the necessities may drive the U.S. to depend on adversaries comparable to China.
This month, a House subcommittee voted in favor of a invoice led by Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Mich., that will block the EPA from finalizing the proposal. The invoice heads to the total committee for consideration; nevertheless, it’s unlikely to change into legislation, as it will want Biden’s signature.
The alliance stated it has not taken a place on the invoice.
In an announcement to Automotive News, the EPA, which is anticipated to finalize the rule by spring 2024, stated it “welcomes input on the proposal.”
At a House listening to in June, the EPA’s Joseph Goffman argued that the requirements are supported by investments spurred by the Inflation Reduction Act and bipartisan infrastructure legislation and are aligned with commitments already made by automakers and states.
“Because the proposed standards are performance-based emissions standards, it is the car companies who would choose the mix of technologies they believe would be best suited for their fleet,” Goffman, principal deputy assistant administrator on the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, stated in ready remarks. “The proposal is not a national electric vehicle mandate or an internal combustion engine ban.”
He stated the EPA estimates about 42 million to 48 million new ICE autos would nonetheless be offered from 2027 via 2032, with anyplace from 5 million to six million new ICE autos offered in 2032 and past.
However, Bozzella has argued the proposal — particularly the stringency within the early mannequin years — would require automakers to “eke out some incremental improvements by installing expensive new technology” on all ICE autos.
“That capital allocation has to come from someplace, and it will come at the expense of EV investment,” he warned.