Did Trump End the EV Mandate?

News coverage says President Trump revoked California’s authority to forbid the sale of  other than battery powered devices – which he did. But this does not end the EV manufacturing “mandate” he likes to talk about ending.

In the first place because there is no “mandate” – as such. There are federal regulations that can only be complied with by manufacturing devices. The first are federal regs dictating how many miles-per-gallon every vehicle manufacturer’s fleet must average. The second are federal regs dictating how much of the gas that does not cause or worsen air pollution – CO2 – may be “emitted.” Trump has done nothing to fundamentally challenge let alone rescind either of these regulations or the authority of the federal regulatory apparat – the EPA – to issue these regs.

All he has done is to halt (for now) their advance.

But that will not halt the advance – the manufacturing – of battery powered devices. Understand that the only reason there are so many devices being manufactured right now is because of the existing regs – which have been in force for several years. Put another way, the EVs you see right now are a function of the regs in place in 2020 – the ones Trump says he wants to “get back” to. If they are not pushed back much farther, the devices already being manufactured will continue to be manufactured because manufacturing devices is the only way the manufacturers can comply with the existing regs, which demand their vehicle fleet average 35 MPG (not just 35 on the highway) and that overall “emissions” of CO2 be reduced to a level that cannot be achieved without eliminating engines in some vehicles and downsizing them and shutting them off as often as possible (hybrids) in others.

Each device manufactured helps with both because each device is rated by the government as having an extremely (and fraudulently) high MPG”e” – typically at least 75 MPG”e” – or equivalent – that greatly improved the overall fleet average and because devices “emit” no CO2, at least at the tailpipe – which is all that counts irrespective of whether that makes any difference.

This is how it works – and Trump appears to not understand how it works. If he did understand it, he would not speak of “mandates” bur rather of regulations that effectively mandate the manufacturer of battery powered devices. And then he would challenge the legitimacy as well as efficacy of the regs as such – or at least, make it plain that he does understand them by explaining how they operate as a de facto EV manufacturing mandate to the people, so that they understand.

He could explain that the reason why the six cylinder engine – which was once a common upgrade or even standard equipment in affordably priced family-type vehicles as recently as ten years ago – has become an upgrade in $50,000 luxury-brand cars and unavailable in anything that has a starting price of less than about $40,000. He could enlighten the buying public as to why it is that the V8 engine – which as recently as two years ago was still available in a family sedan such as the Dodge Charger and its sibling the Chrysler 300 – is now an exotic engine that is only available as a very expensive upgrade in already-very-expensive luxury badged vehicles, which now encompasses half-ton trucks that cost $50,000 or more if you want one with a V8. If you can find one that still offers one (many – such as the Toyota Tundra and the Dodge Ram, no longer do; they are still available – if you can afford them – in the Chevy Silverado and Ford F-150 but probably not for long).

He could tell the people why the are not allowed to buy any of the under-$15k small cars and trucks that are being manufactured by the major car companies right now but which they are not permitted to offer for sale in America on account of bogus “emissions” and “safety” regulations that have very little – if anything – to do with either thing. Models such as the Toyota HiLux Champ, for instance – which is a small pick-up that has a base price equivalent to about $13,000.

Getting at the root of the matter, Trump could explain to people exactly that – about the bogus nature of the “emissions” regs especially. Which stoped having anything to do with pollution when the EPA – during the Obama years – summarily decreed that carbon dioxide constitutes an “emission” and so is subject to regulation but really to trick people via greasy word misusage into believing that CO2 is related to pollution. So as to get people to accept the need to regulate it, as most people understandably do not like pollution, for entirely rational reasons. But CO2 isn’t a pollutant. It is a background gas constituting 0.04 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere. Plants need it to grow and we plants to breath (and to be able to eat). To characterize CO2 as a “pollutant” was one of the greatest despicabilities of the Obama-era EPA and Trump has the power to correct that.

Not necessarily by issuing more executive orders (which can just as easily be rescinded by the next executive) but by telling the people the truth so that they know it and understand it and then things will get corrected. But will he do this? So far, he has not. The federal regs and the regulatory apparat that issues them (the EPA) are still there and still “on the books.” Unless they are pulled out by the roots, both will still be there when Trump no longer is and they will grow back with renewed ferocity.

So, while it is true that Trump has at least temporarily ended California’s mandate requiring the sale of only devices by 2030 (as well as the similar mandates mirrored by about a dozen other states) he has done nothing to end the the de facto manufacturing mandates at the federal level. Which means nothing has fundamentally changed.

Only that it has slowed down a little, for the moment.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.