Trump's Review on the Fuel Economy Standards

[newbie1]

I am not understanding Trump's intentions of revising the fuel economy standards and autonomous vehicle standards. The electric vehicle is good for the environment and economy. We know through recent studies electric vehicles will not affect the oil companies at all if even ever. How does Trump think revising or abolishing these standards will help or stabilize the American economy. In fact I believe it will hamper it. First many of the electric vehicles have their assembly lines in the United States - job creation for American people. Secondly, the fuel economy standards are part of a much larger picture. The cost to any major revision or abolishment's would be ridiculous. Thirdly, the ongoing investment the has already been made and will continue to be made in regards to electric vehicles and the standards targets has bolstered this segment of the economy greatly. Let us not forget private business is all about making as much money as it can. If private companies are not compelled to make changes and bring forth innovations based on government mandated targets they never will - it costs them too much money. Finally, a quote from Trump made in a speech to industry workers " I will review the fuel-economy rules and other regulations to protect and defend your jobs and factories. WTH!!! Without the fuel standards and other regulations there would be no electric vehicle jobs and factories!!!

Below are two links about this matter if you are interested

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017 ... doubt.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/car ... /94203910/

[citygirl]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/In-Ge ... ctric-cars

Check out this link. I happen to agree with you however there are reasons for the other side too. This article says if you keep building it people will keep buying. There is a strong feeling that so much time and effort has already been put into this area that the momentum shows promise for big pay offs not only to the environment but to pocket books too. I don't believe that. With the standards mandated by government cities make using hybrids and phev or even battery powered buses a priority in times of tight budgets. If there are no targets to meet why would the extra cost be put into these areas? I think electric cars will still carry on but at a much slower pace in the US if things change or are alleviated too much

[citygirl]

I found this on another site. Doesn't have anything to do with Trump but it does for the comment given in one of the articles if you build it they will buy it or something along those lines.

The Pope is now endorsing electric vehicles. This has the potential to be huge. If you take a leader of such a mass following and he tells his followers to buy ev's there may be a huge influx in demand. Maybe not but something interesting to think about.

There is a news cast video on this site that I can't figure out how to post on here that goes over the perspective of the the Pope endorsing EV's

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pop ... ctric-cars

Food for thought

[nogas]

Not everyone is against this. I have come across a lot of articles where certain sectors are really happy for it and believe Trump's ideals are what will create jobs and maintain a growing economy. Check out the link below

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/in- ... ctric-cars

As expected for the past few weeks and after months of lobbying from automakers since Donald Trump was elected, the EPA has confirmed that they will review the fuel consumption rules and decide on whether or not to modify them by April 1, 2018.
Trump made the announcement with new EPA Chief Scott Pruitt and a handful of automotive executives, like GM CEO Mary Barra and Ford CEO Mark Fields, who have both being calling for the EPA to walk back to strict rules.


The standards were set by the Obama administration and the goal is for a fleet average of 54.5 mpg CAFE by 2025, which would require automakers to produce more electric vehicles in their fleet to compensate for popular gas-guzzling pickup trucks and SUVs.
The EPA had to file its midterm review this year and they rushed it to confirm the standards before Trump took over in January. An automaker lobbying group sent a letter to Trump’s transition team just two days after his election to lobby for him to relax the rules.
At the meeting today, Trump said that he is open to relaxing the fuel consumption restrictions if it shows that they could make more “great cars” and “save jobs”.
Mitch Bainwol, President and CEO of the Auto Alliance, was unsurprisingly happy with the direction the administration is going. He said in a statement:
“The Trump Administration has created an opportunity for decision-makers to reach a thoughtful and coordinated outcome predicated on the best and most current data. After all, these decisions impact the more than 7 million Americans dependent on autos for employment, as well as the driving public seeking affordable transportation.”
The new EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt added that “these standards are costly for automakers and the American people.”
Of course, there was no mention of the heart diseases, lung diseases and brain dysfunctions caused by air population from burning those fuels, which are also extremely costly for American people.
Also not clear that it would actually have any negative effect on American jobs – maybe even the contrary would happen. The industry is already going electric and the rules are forcing American automakers to invest in electric vehicles to comply. If the rules are relaxed and if they decide not to invest as much, they could fall behind other companies like VW, Tesla and even China-backed automakers who are all currently heavily investing in electrification.
Since they don’t have to take a decision until next year, maybe the potential success of some upcoming electric vehicles, like the Tesla Model 3, will force them to go electric anyway. We will see.