Image 01 Image 03

Transportation Sec. Duffy Immediately Hits Reverse on Fuel Economy Standards

Transportation Sec. Duffy Immediately Hits Reverse on Fuel Economy Standards

Sec. Sean Duffy quietly rescinds Biden’s de facto EV Mandate.

The end of last week was very busy for the team of President Donald J. Trump.

While everyone was focused on the confirmation hearings of Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy was sworn in.

Afterward, he immediately hit reverse on the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.

On Tuesday, Jan. 28, Duffy directed the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to begin the process of rolling back updated corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards established by the previous administration. CAFE standards set minimum miles-per-gallon fuel efficiencies for passenger vehicles and fuel consumption standards for certain medium-duty vehicles.

Duffy’s directive to rescind Biden-era fuel economy standards came the same day the Senate approved his nomination and stems from an executive order President Donald Trump signed on Inauguration Day.

That order directs agencies “to eliminate the ‘electric vehicle (EV) mandate’ and promote true consumer choice … by removing regulatory barriers to motor vehicle access.”

Specifically, NHTSA is to begin “an immediate review and reconsideration of all existing fuel economy standards applicable to all models of motor vehicles produced from model year 2022 forward.”

Duffy’s decision was focused on the realities of transportation technology.

Duffy wrote “These fuel economy standards are set as such aggressive levels that automakers cannot, as a practical matter, satisfy the standards without rapidly shifting production away from internal-combustion-engine vehicles to alternative electric technologies.”

The standards do not kick in immediately, but instead allow automakers time to adjust their designs and production in order to meet them.

The new Secretary said “artificially high” standards force car manufacturers to phase out gasoline powered vehicles, making cars more expensive for buyers and “destroying consumer choice at the dealership.”

As a reminder, the Biden CAFE standards were an attempt to shoehorn the entire nation into de facto adoption of California’s mandates, forcing electric vehicles onto an unwilling population and prohibiting the sale of internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035.

Interestingly, by next year, 35% of new car sales in the Golden State must be zero-emission vehicles.

Meanwhile, reality is beginning to creep into the state’s plans for a green energy utopia. In January, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) ithdrew its request for a waiver to implement Advanced Clean Fleets, effectively killing the regulation that would require drayage operations and larger fleets to replace diesel trucks with zero-emission trucks.

The news comes less than a month after the EPA granted California’s waiver request for Advanced Clean Cars II and Heavy-Duty Omnibus regulations. By 2035, all new passenger vehicles sold in California must be zero-direct-emission, while truck engines must reduce nitrogen oxide emission by 75% and particulate matter by 50%.

However, the EPA failed to address four other pending waiver requests from California, including Advanced Clean Fleets and similar emission regulations for locomotives, tugboats, ferries and transport refrigeration units. According to CalMatters, the EPA told CARB it did not have time to grant those waivers.

Hopefully, the Trump administration will figure out a way to put a stake in the heart of this entire regulatory insanity based on pseudoscience and pipe dreams.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Can I have real Mustangs and Porsche come back as muscle cars?


     
     0 
     
     1
    TimMc in reply to Oracle. | February 5, 2025 at 7:56 am

    Hemi Cuda


     
     0 
     
     1
    The Gentle Grizzly in reply to Oracle. | February 5, 2025 at 8:55 am

    When one considers there are now regular family cars with better 0-60 times than the 60s and 70s muscle cars had, I don’t see the issue. Ford’s gasoline Mustangs are already offered with tons of power.

      mmm The cars today are pretty darn quick, but are tuned down for MPG. While some are coming up with “sport mode,” a lot of performance is left on the table.

      I know my Taurus SEL has largely the same platform as the cop version, but the computer fuel management is different. This is why the kiddos are having so much fun tuning (and mostly doing it wrong).

      I hope Elon guts the mandates. I don’t need TPS to tell me my tires are low. If a moron wants to pay more because they are too stupid to see a flat tire, let them, but I don’t see why my car has to cost another 500 bucks (at purchase and at repair) for this crap.


         
         0 
         
         3
        DSHornet in reply to Andy. | February 5, 2025 at 9:36 am

        I agree somewhat, but a modern low profile radial tire can be five+ pounds underinflated before it shows so TPS sensors can be a life saver after picking up a nail. Much of the other nanny warnings can be annoying, however. I can get my oil and filters changed regularly without having a stupid warning light tell me to do it. Technology is okay but it costs.

        And don’t get me started on how mechanically oblivious some people can be to the point they can’t even open the hood and couldn’t identify anything under it even if they could. Pathetic.
        .


           
           0 
           
           1
          paracelsus in reply to DSHornet. | February 5, 2025 at 10:39 am

          in re your last paragraph:
          that’s more about what’s taught (or not) in school today
          our (grand)children have become functionally illiterate unable to do anything but write with their thumbs (on their phone screens) leaving the “dirty” jobs under the hood to the immigrants


           
           0 
           
           2
          drednicolson in reply to DSHornet. | February 5, 2025 at 5:49 pm

          Carburetors may be less fuel efficient and harder to start cold than EFI, but you can learn how to tune one in an afternoon with just hand tools.

          Most systems on pre-80s engines were similarly user-serviceable with some basic mechanical knowledge.


     
     0 
     
     3
    TargaGTS in reply to Oracle. | February 5, 2025 at 11:08 am

    My first car was a ’67 Mustang w/289. It did 0-60 in about a weekend. My 1st new car was a ’87 Mustang with an ‘eye-watering’ 202-hp 302 that could maybe do the quarter in 14 with the wind. The current base model, 4-cylinder Mustang will do 0-60 in 4.5-seconds. I have a 992.1 Porsche 911 Targa 4 GTS. The published 0-6 time is 3.5. But, in reality it’s close to 3.3. The entry-level, mid-engine Ferrari (296 GTB) – a 6-cylinder hybrid – will do the quarter-mile in the 10s and will lap Ferraria’s own test-track at virtually the same time as the LaFerrari, Ferrari’s last 12-cylinder hypercar. Sports cars have never been faster and more capable than they are today. As a car enthusiast who owns too many (according to my wife), I can confidently say we’re in the Golden Age of performance automobiles. They’re engineering marvels.


       
       0 
       
       0
      OwenKellogg-Engineer in reply to TargaGTS. | February 5, 2025 at 6:48 pm

      While I don’t disagree, that era of the ’60’s to ’72ish, in both design, and motorsports, was in a class by itself. Hence the fo d memories of those cars


 
 0 
 
 13
bigskydoc | February 5, 2025 at 7:34 am

Good first step. Now let’s eliminate all the emissions crap that has been added to diesel engines (EGR, DPF) that kill the fuel economy and longevity of these engines, and add thousands to the cost of maintenance.

At the very least, let’s make it legal for the customer to remove them.


 
 0 
 
 1
E Howard Hunt | February 5, 2025 at 7:49 am

I wish he’d eliminate mixing weasel piss (ethanol) into gasoline. It decreases mileage, fouls small engines and was long ago established as an environmental fraud. If farmers must be given money, designate them honorary BIPOCS and pay them direct welfare. Leave my engines the hell alone.


 
 0 
 
 6
ThePrimordialOrderedPair | February 5, 2025 at 7:57 am

On Tuesday, Jan. 28, Duffy directed the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to begin the process of rolling back updated corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards established by the previous administration.

Awesome!! This is major. I believe this is the first time that anyone has even talked about loosening CAFE standards since this idiotic, un-Constitutional(!) regulatory framework was spawned in the 70s.

You know … there are a lot of really stupid things from the 70s that either have just been unwound or are in the process of being tossed aside. It’s about friggin time!

Trump is on a cleaning mission of historic proportions and he seems to be putting together a great team to carry it all out.


 
 0 
 
 4
CommoChief | February 5, 2025 at 8:23 am

Good step. The next should be to restrict the ‘waiver’ CA has had in creating tougher CAFE standards. Simply restrict their ability to apply any such non Federal standards to only autos which are entirely; produced, sold, financed and used within CA.

For decades diesel was a few cents less than gasoline. Then they imposed a huge fine for exceeding 15ppm sulfur.
Let’s find out
a) Whether it was EPA or which agency
b) who is in charge of that agency

I’m not qualified to comment on ‘environmental’ results, so the number should be run y experts (not men who think they’re women


 
 0 
 
 2
inspectorudy | February 5, 2025 at 8:53 am

Except for the ports, which can be nationalized, we should allow CA to enact all of their crazy tree-hugging ideas. Like the fires in LA, these ideas are very destructive, maybe then the voters will come to their senses and elect normal people.


     
     0 
     
     0
    DSHornet in reply to inspectorudy. | February 5, 2025 at 9:28 am

    It hasn’t happened yet. I’m not sure how slapping the upside the head with reality any more will change their point of view. Other than giving them double vision due to ocular miscoordination.
    .


 
 0 
 
 2
George S | February 5, 2025 at 10:20 am

What it (frustratingly) comes down to is the president basically dictates fuel economy standards. Federal agencies can make rules, but things like mpg or gun barrel accessories are not rules but laws. And as such, any proposed rule that has the effect of law on people should be voted in the Congress. That’s the way it should have bee from day one before it could put all that power into the President’s hands, but that ship has sailed as we become used to being ruled by administrators.


     
     0 
     
     1
    JackinSilverSpring in reply to George S. | February 5, 2025 at 11:03 am

    I agree with you fully on Congress’s having abdicated its legislative authority by allowing the executive branch to create rules that affect citizens outside the executive branch. I also think that abdication by Congress of its legislative authority is downright unconstitutional. It is one thing to offload the formulation of rules to expert bodies in the executive, it’s quite another thing to allow those bodies to implement those rules without Congress legislating those rules into law. It should be Congress’s responsibility to pass legislation to implement the rules. The executive branch cannot be allowed the leeway to usurp Congress’s legislative function, and Congress cannot be allowed to abdicate it. The current modus operandi is slowly putting us on the path of one-man rule.


     
     0 
     
     0
    gibbie in reply to George S. | February 5, 2025 at 11:04 am

    But then politicians would have to vote one way or the other – either way angering one or the other part of their constituency.


     
     0 
     
     0
    paracelsus in reply to George S. | February 5, 2025 at 11:21 am

    question is:
    do we have a dictatorship (a country run by executive orders) or a Constitutional Republic?

MCAA – Make Cars Affordable Again.


 
 0 
 
 1
Voco Veritas | February 5, 2025 at 11:17 am

I will NEVER get tired of wining! Thank God for Trump & Musk! It is OUTSTANDING to see intelligent, realistic people in government rather than the corrupt ideologues of the past 100+ years!

Bring down the DS! MAGA!


 
 0 
 
 2
Oregon Mike | February 5, 2025 at 11:23 am

Is there any reason why we can’t eliminate CAFE altogether?


 
 0 
 
 1
Roy in Nipomo | February 5, 2025 at 3:33 pm

I just wish they could/would produce relatively inexpensive, basic, small, gas powered pickups. I live on only a small plot of land and don’t need a $100,000+ Earthf*%ker 500 that can tow a 747 and carry 6 people in the cab. From all I’ve read, “CAFE Standards” prevent auto manufacturers from making the small pickups.


     
     0 
     
     0
    CommoChief in reply to Roy in Nipomo. | February 6, 2025 at 7:18 am

    Find an old Ranger or even an old Escape (built on the Ranger chassis and is basically an SUV version Ranger). New built? Nope the low weight of those v engine basically eliminated their production due to how CAFE is.calculated. At least that’s my understanding of the disappearance of small pick ups.

Next, Eliminate the provision in the clean air act that gives California independent authority to Emission standards and gas mileage standards on cars. That provision violates the interstate commerce clause of the constitution..

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.