Lobbyists Estimate Billions in Fines If New Fuel Economy Rules Adopted

by Matthew Guy

Published: October 3rd, 2023

lobbyists estimate billions in fines if new fuel economy rules adopted

A letter from talking heads at an outfit called the American Automotive Policy Council outlines what it estimates billions of dollars in fines could be levied at companies like General Motors and Stellantis if a government proposal to hike fuel economy standards through 2032 is adopted.

Reuters is reporting the concerns were sent to the U.S. Energy Department last week, citing “alarming” expected penalties for companies not meeting proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements. In a nutshell, the DOE is seeking to revise how it calculates petroleum-equivalent fuel economy ratings for electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids under CAFE. Currently known as MPGe, efficiency numbers for these machines use a byzantine morass of values for national electricity, petroleum generation, distribution efficiency, and even driving patterns.

Proposed rules would change these calculations and likely saddle EVs and PHEVs with MPGe values far below the digits they garner today. Examples cited by Reuters suggest machines like the Chrysler Pacifica plug-in hybrid could fall from 88.2 MPGe to 59.5 MPGe, potentially putting companies in a bind if they are relying on these vehicles to boost fleet numbers. Automakers tend to buy credits or pay fines if they cannot meet CAFE requirements.

Without delving into too much of their math, the American Automotive Policy Council is suggesting GM could be on the hook for $6.5 billion under the new rules, while the bill at Stellantis would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $3.0 billion. Companies like Ford and VW could also get dinged for about a billion bucks, apparently.

If you’re wondering, the AAPC bills itself as AAPC is an association based in Washington, D.C. which helps American Automakers deliver on commitments by representing Ford, GM, and Stellantis on “common public policy interests” at the federal and international levels. In broader terms, going to bat for them when the gubmint wants to change something. Matt Blunt is the group’s president and a former governor of Missouri.

[Image: Siripatv/Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#CAFE #Automakers #Washington #FuelEconomy

Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments

Join the conversation

6 of 19 comments

Dukeisduke on Oct 03, 2023

Meanwhile, the Automotive Alliance for Innovation, that represents the Big 3, blasted NHTSA's CAFE proposal, stating it "exceeds maximum feasibility", and will cost the automakers $14b in fines between 2027 and 2032.

NHTSA's reaction: Lol, just build more EVs, you silly gooses.

What happens if consumers revolt, won't buy EVs, and hold on to their old cars instead?

2 Reply
- See 3 previous
- SPPPP on Oct 03, 2023
  
  Then the taxman cometh.
  
  1
- Lou_BC on Oct 03, 2023
  
  Let me get this straight, the lobbiests claim 10 's of billions in fines based on what? The current crop of EV'S?
  Looks like Ford gets off light since they will be the most prepared.
  Oh and science just stopped functioning?
  
  Like
- Jeff on Oct 04, 2023
  
  Lou_BC--I have more faith in science than many on this site. There will be push back on these regulations and compromises made. These are proposed regulations meaning they have not been set yet. I remember many similar regulations on vehicles in the past in regards to safety, efficiency, and emissions and most of those proposed regulations were changed and deadlines were extended and most auto manufacturers were able to eventually comply with the regulations.
  
  Like
- 28-Cars-Later on Oct 05, 2023
  
  @Lou
  
  Too early to tell, but Ford may not make it based on it's current BEV missteps.
  
  "Oh and science just stopped functioning?"
  That happened in 2020, did someone turn it back on?
  
  Like
28-Cars-Later on Oct 05, 2023

"Reuters is reporting the concerns were sent to the U.S. Energy Department last week, citing “alarming” expected penalties for companies not meeting proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements. In a nutshell, the DOE is seeking to revise how it calculates petroleum-equivalent fuel economy ratings for electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids under CAFE. Currently known as MPGe, efficiency numbers for these machines use a byzantine morass of values for national electricity, petroleum generation, distribution efficiency, and even driving patterns."

Its hard to keep track but didn't some unelected technocracy already decree the CAFE standards for 2024ish to be 49mpg? So now we're going to go full retard for 2030ish and tinker with our CAFE formula while simultaneously going to I think 58mpg? I have a better plan, you're all fired.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Tassos Under incompetent, affirmative action hire Mary Barra, GM has been shooting itself in the foot on a daily basis.Whether the Malibu cancellation has been one of these shootings is NOT obvious at all.GM should be run as a PROFITABLE BUSINESS and NOT as an outfit that satisfies everybody and his mother in law's pet preferences.IF the Malibu was UNPROFITABLE, it SHOULD be canceled.More generally, if its SEGMENT is Unprofitable, and HALF the makers cancel their midsize sedans, not only will it lead to the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST ones, but the survivors will obviously be more profitable if the LOSERS were kept being produced and the SMALL PIE of midsize sedans would yield slim pickings for every participant.SO NO, I APPROVE of the demise of the unprofitable Malibu, and hope Nissan does the same to the Altima, Hyundai with the SOnata, Mazda with the Mazda 6, and as many others as it takes to make the REMAINING players, like the Excellent, sporty Accord and the Bulletproof Reliable, cheap to maintain CAMRY, more profitable and affordable.
GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
Wjtinfwb Not proud of what Stellantis is rolling out?