Congress ordered the changes in its energy bill last year, responding to consumer complaints that the fuel economy they get is often less than advertised. It is the first time EPA has revised its fuel economy ratings in 20 years.

The White House is ready to alter its proposed 2025 fuel economy mandates to let auto makers improve pickups and crossovers at a slower pace than cars, says a report in the Wall Street Journal citing sources familiar with the talks.

That would help Detroit automakers meet the targets and also help allay the job fears of Obama administration allies in the United Auto Workers union. The makers and the union, as well as foreign makers, have pushed back on Obama plans to double the current industry mpg average to a mandated 56.2 mpg by 2025. The rules now call for a rise to a 35.5 mpg average by 2016.

The White House, which has a lot of things on its plate right now, wants to get broad agreement on the proposal for the 56.2 mpg mandate, according to the report, and to get it apparently is willing to show some flexibility on the pace to 56.2.

The WSJ report says that one option the White House offered to gain support this week was to order the fuel economy of light trucks to rise 3.5% a year, less than the 5% requirement for cars.

Whether the state of California, which the administration has included in the talks, will go along or make trouble for the White House by walking out (a lot of that going on lately) and setting its own standard remains to be seen. California, and environmentalists , are likely to recoil at any flexibility on light trucks and what they see as help for U.S. automakers.

The dilemma for the Obama administration: Detroit automakers make much of their profits on their light trucks and can afford to build these higher-margin vehicles in the U.S. A standard that forces them to cut back on those to make and sell more smaller-margin small cars likely means more vehicles made, like Ford's new Fiesta, in Mexico and other lower-wage countries. Even Asian makers, with more car-heavy lineups, don't make their smallest models in North America.

With an election coming and the U.S. jobless rate rising, rules seen as potentially cutting sales by raising the price of a new $2000 or more by some estimates and pushing production out of the U.S. are a political problem.

Our colleagues at the Detroit Free Press, reported that United Auto Workers officials met with automakers this week to express concerns about the effects of the proposed new rules on jobs. Here is their report:

DETROIT -- The UAW, which is concerned about how automaker profits, jobs and wages could be impacted by higher fuel economy standards, met with Detroit automakers this week to discuss regulations proposed by the Obama administration.

Among those meeting with the union were Pete Lawson, Ford's vice president for government relations, and executives from General Motors and Chrysler, according to people familiar with the session.

UAW officials could not be reached for comment.

The automakers, UAW and the National Automobile Dealers Association have argued that the proposed corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standard of 56.2 mpg would add thousands of dollars to the cost of vehicles and eliminate jobs assembling larger and heavier vehicles such as full-size pickups and SUVs.

While the Detroit Three have made progress with their small cars, a large percentage of sales and profits still comes from trucks and larger SUVs.

The UAW is concerned about the potential impact the higher CAFE standard would have on profitability, jobs and wages, Sean McAlinden, chief economist for the Center for Automotive Research, said last week.

The Obama administration's push for higher fuel economy standards by 2025 comes on the eve of national contract talks between the UAW and the Detroit automakers, which formally begin later this month.

Proponents of the Obama administration's plan to require 56.2 miles per gallon by 2025 say dealers' lots wouldn't look much different then: from trailer-towing trucks to subcompacts, with only a few of electrics. But innovations from better gas engines to hybrid technology could save drivers on fuel, helping to offset higher sticker prices.

Opponents see a 2025 in which buyers are forced into small vehicles they don't want and where, regardless of fuel savings, costly technologies price some buyers out of the market. An alliance of 12 foreign and U.S. automakers will begin airing radio ads on Tuesday against what it fear are rules that could cripple the industry recovery and cost jobs.

"If auto companies could hit the standards and have the same price, nobody would care," said Jeremy Anwyl, CEO of Edmunds.com. "But when you raise the requirements, there's a point at which things can fall out of alignment."

So who is right? Are the ads fair? To help you judge, here is a primer from our colleague Aaron M. Kessler of the Detroit Free Press on what a required 56 mpg average in combined city/highway driving might mean for you:

WASHINGTON -- Automakers have a lot of work to do to meet higher mileage standards

From the models that hit showrooms in September -- when the federally required fleet average will be 29.7 mpg -- to those that will be out in 2025, car companies will have a lot of work to do. Under the about 56 mpg standard for 2025 that the Obama administration is pushing, engineers, marketers and consumers would be required to build, sell and want cars and trucks that squeeze every drop of gas about twice as hard.

Already the fight is on and it's made for unusual coalitions. National security hawks wanting to cut America's dependency on foreign oil are joining with environmental groups. Automakers lobbying for less-stringent rules find themselves aligned with the UAW, which fears job losses.

Judging based on 'footprint'

The government's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards remained essentially frozen for years, as political maneuvering by Congress blocked the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from raising them.

In 2007, legislators overhauled the program (bringing the Environmental Protection Agency into the mix along with NHTSA itself), and made fundamental changes.

Most dramatic: large and small vehicles are no longer in competition with each other.

Instead, each is judged based on its "footprint" -- a formula based on the distance between the axles and a vehicle's width. There is a curve, and each footprint has its own fuel economy requirement on that curve.

The result is that automakers don't have to balance sales of SUVs with poor fuel efficiency and subcompacts that get better mileage to meet CAFE targets. If the SUV meets the fuel standard for its own footprint, the automaker can sell all it wants.

If a vehicle does better than its benchmark, an automaker gets credits it can apply to other vehicles in its lineup that might not hit their targets. It can bank them for the future, apply them to the three previous years, or even sell them to another manufacturer.

There are other aspects that might surprise consumers. The CAFE number a vehicle scores in the EPA lab tests is not the same as the more familiar window sticker number that's adjusted downward by about 25% to reflect expected real world results. So a required 56 mpg combined score in 2025 would be closer to 40 mpg.

Air-conditioning is also important. The AC can be source of greenhouse gas pollutants, the government gives credit for cleaner systems. Just with those credits, a 56 mpg CAFE target becomes 50 mpg.

The CAFE program also uses what it calls a "harmonic average" because small improvements in the worst performers can cut fuel use more that a bigger mpg rise in an already-efficient vehicle. And SUV going from 15 to 20 mpg saves more fuel per 100 miles -- and counts for more in the CAFE system -- than a subcompact going from 50 to 65 mpg.

Efficiency produces savings

An analysis last year by EPA and NHTSA calculated four cost scenarios for 56.2 mpg, and estimated that while the added cost for the typical vehicle available in 2025 could be $2,100 to $2,600, a consumer would make that all that back from fuel savings in two to three years based on about 15,000 miles driven a year.

But automakers and dealers are not convinced and say vehicles could wind up being even more expensive.

Edmunds.com CEO Anwyl said some consumers may simply have trouble seeing past a higher sticker price. But there are some "easy wins," Anwyl said, that wouldn't raise costs much -- like boosting efficiency of gasoline engines.

A mandate for electrics

But conventional engines only get you so far.

Automakers have publicly suggested that a higher CAFE target would leave the public with no choice but to adopt electrics in large numbers.

"Fifty-six miles per gallon is really a mandate for electric vehicles," said Gloria Bergquist, vice president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. "It's a significant increase that no matter which yardstick you use, achieving those gains won't be possible without electrification in a big way."

Supporters of 56 mpg don't see that. "It's not electrics that are going to get us there," said the Union of Concerned Scientists' Friedman, predicting they might reach 5% of the market. He says it would be met with improvements on conventional gas and diesel engines and more hybrids.

Hybrids -- in many forms -- could be the biggest change. Three of the four federal scenarios for 2025 see few plug-in or pure electrics -- but 25% to 65% hybrid vehicles. Not all would be like Toyota Priuses, but would also include stop-start technology and so-called mild hybrids.

This year, General Motors is unveiling its new Buick LaCrosse and Regal with a feature called eAssist -- a battery, regenerative brakes and small electric motor that, along with aerodynamic and other improvements, boosts the four-cylinder engine's mileage about 25% rating to 36 mpg on the highway. It's a mild hybrid and will now be the base LaCrosse at $30,820 with shipping, $2,830 more than the 2011 non-hybrid base model.

The Obama administration has reached a compromise with automakers on the target for significantly boosting fuel efficiency for cars and light-duty vehicles by 2025, ending months of negotiations on this pivotal mandate for the auto industry.

Automaker fleets will have to average 54.5 miles a gallon by 2025, according to a source familiar with the plan. U.S. President Barack Obama will officially announce the new guidelines on Friday, the White House said.

The compromise would be slightly less than the administration's original proposal, but a major step up from current standards that require automakers to achieve 35.5 mpg by 2016.

The administration had considered increasing average fuel efficiency to 56.2 mpg between 2017 and 2025, but that plan ran into opposition from the industry and some lawmakers.

The push to boost fuel efficiency has forced automakers to redesign vehicles and use lighter but more expensive materials. These efforts are likely to raise the cost of vehicles and may pinch automakers' margins. [ID:nN26144187]

That has caused resistance from lawmakers in states with a heavy auto manufacturing presence, as well as the United Auto Workers union, which is concerned about jobs. [ID:nN1E76B1TN]

The new proposal includes average increases in fuel economy of 5 percent for cars and 3.5 percent for light trucks through 2021, with a 5 percent increase for all vehicles after that. [ID:nN1E76P15C]

STILL IRONING OUT DETAILS

Ford Motor Co (F.N) spokeswoman Meghan Keck said there are still some issues that need to worked out regarding the new standards.

"We continue to believe that the talks are productive, that there are a couple of details that we're still ironing out and that we hope to be able say more soon," Keck said.

While declining to discuss the 54.5 mpg figure, Toyota Motor Corp (7203.T) spokeswoman Martha Voss said discussions on the new rules have been "positive."

Environmental groups and Democratic leaders have pushed for strong fuel economy standards to lower carbon dioxide emissions and decrease U.S. oil use.

"These new fuel efficiency standards represent the single greatest step our country has taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to encourage a new generation of advanced vehicle technology entrepreneurs," said Representative Edward Markey in a statement.

U.S. passenger vehicles emit about 20 percent of the nation's carbon emissions and consume about 44 percent of its oil, figures show.

The nation has set lofty goals to increase gas mileage in cars, but does the Environmental Protection Agency's unrealistic standards for testing negate the gains?

The government's highway test, for example, involves a top speed of 60 miles per hour, an average speed of 48.3 mph, no use of heaters or air conditioners and an "achingly slow" initial acceleration in which it takes more than a minute to go from zero to 50 mph, Bloomberg News points out in an editorial.

Who drives like that?

Because of these outmoded testing procedures, good, gas-saving technology gets swept under the rug. For instance, the editorial cites John Voelcker, the editor of Green Car Reports, as pointing out that stop-start technology would be scored far too low on the EPA's scoring to be of value, yet in the real world, it's a pretty good gas saving feature. Shutting an engine off at stoplights can save up to 5% on gas.

As a result, says Bloomberg, the 54.5 mile per gallon goal by 2025 set by the administration may be met on paper only -- since it is not tied to the real world.

WASHINGTON -- The Trump administration is readying proposals to weaken Obama administration automotive fuel economy standards for release as early as next week, a person familiar with the matter told Bloomberg.

The proposals from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will offer several options to pare back the current rules and recommend freezing mileage standards from model years 2020 through 2026, according to the person, who asked not be identified discussing the plans.

NHTSA’s proposal will also say that a 1975 law prohibits California from setting its own vehicle efficiency standards, the person added. The state has coordinated its standards with federal regulators for several years.

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget has been reviewing the EPA and NHTSA proposals since late May. The timing of the release was reported earlier on Thursday by E&E News.

The timing could change if additional questions are raised that need review by the White House, the person said.

The Trump administration will seek to revoke California’s authority to regulate automobile greenhouse gas emissions -- including its mandate for electric car sales -- in a proposed revision of Obama-era standards, according to three people familiar with the plan.

The proposal, expected to be released this week, amounts to a frontal assault on one of former President Barack Obama’s signature regulatory programs to curb greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. It also sets up a high-stakes battle over California’s unique ability to combat air pollution and, if finalized, is sure to set off a protracted courtroom battle.

The proposed revamp would also put the brakes on federal rules to boost fuel efficiency into the next decade, said the people, who asked to not be identified discussing the proposals before they are public. Instead it will cap federal fuel economy requirements at the 2020 level, which under federal law must be at least a 35-mile-per-gallon fleet average, rather than letting them rise to roughly 50 mpg by 2025 as envisioned in the plan left behind by Obama, according to the people.

As part of the effort, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will propose revoking the Clean Air Act waiver granted to California that has allowed the state to regulate carbon emissions from vehicle tailpipes and force carmakers to sell electric vehicles in the state in higher numbers, according to three people familiar with the plan.

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will likewise assert that California is barred from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from autos under the 1975 law that established the first federal fuel-efficiency requirements, the people said.

The proposal is still in the final stages of a broad interagency review led by President Donald Trump’s Office of Management and Budget, but these major elements of the plan were not expected to change, the people said.

Messages seeking comment from OMB, NHTSA and the EPA were not immediately returned. California Air Resources Board head Mary Nichols declined to comment. Once the agencies formally unveil the proposal, the public will have a chance to weigh in, with those comments used to develop a final rule that could be implemented as soon as the end of the year.

Although the proposal will outline other options, the administration will put its weight behind the dramatic overhaul, including the revocation of California’s cherished authority, the people said.

The state’s 2009 waiver under the Clean Air Act has allowed California to set emissions rules for cars and trucks that are more stringent than the federal government’s. But the state has aligned its rules with those set by the EPA and NHTSA in a so-called national program of clean-car rules. Negotiations toward another set of harmonized rules has not yet yielded agreement.

If Trump’s plan sticks, it could be his biggest regulatory rollback yet. Agencies are expected to claim it will reduce traffic fatalities by making it cheaper for drivers to replace older, less-safe cars, while paring sticker prices for new vehicles even if motorists have to spend more for gasoline.

California, for its part, rejects the idea that its 48-year ability to write its own tailpipe emission rules should end. “We have the law on our side, as well as the people of the country and the people of the world,” said Dan Sperling, a member of the state’s Air Resources Board.

The most-populous U.S. state and 16 others plus the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit on May 2 seeking to block the Trump administration’s effort to unravel the Obama-era emissions targets. Sperling said that number will grow as more and more people come to realize how fundamentally Trump is attacking the idea of states’ rights.

Caught somewhere in the middle are automakers, which in recent months have stressed they would not support freezing the federal targets and want Washington and Sacramento to continue linking their vehicle efficiency goals. While they spent the first year of the Trump administration attacking Obama’s rules as too costly, they fear the regulatory uncertainty that a years-long court battle over a rollback would create. In addition, other major auto markets such as China and Europe are pressing forward with tougher mandates of their own for cleaner cars.


"This is nothing less than an outrageous attack on public health and states’ rights," said Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch. "It’s a dumb move for an administration that claims it wants peace, because this will lead to an emissions war: progressive states versus a reactionary federal government. The big question: who will the car companies back?"

Some conservatives have long chafed at the rare authority granted California and welcome the effort to revoke.

"Congress didn’t intend for California to set national fuel economy standards," said Steve Milloy, a policy adviser for the Heartland Institute, a group critical of climate science. "It’s nutty it’s been allowed to develop. National fuel economy standards are set by the federal government so that’s what we are going to do."

DETROIT (AP) — Fuel economy for 2021 model year vehicles in the U.S. stayed flat with 2020 as people continued to buy less-efficient trucks and SUVs, according to an annual government report published Monday.

The fleet of new vehicles got 25.4 miles per gallon (10.8 kilometers per liter) for the model year, while greenhouse gas emissions dropped by 2 grams per mile to a record low of 347, the Environmental Protection Agency said in its annual Automotive Trends Report. The 2021 fuel economy figure ties a record set in model year 2020.

The performance came under fuel economy and emissions standards that were relaxed when Donald Trump was president. Requirements will start to increase at a higher rate in 2026 under standards adopted by the Biden administration.

The EPA said in a statement that all vehicle types are at record low carbon dioxide emissions, but “the market shift away from cars and toward sport utility vehicles and pickups has offset some of the fleetwide benefits.”

In the 2021 model year, cars and station wagons, the most efficient vehicles, fell to 26% of U.S. new vehicle production, well below the 50% market share as recently as 2013, the EPA said. SUVs were a record 45% of new vehicle sales for the 2021 model year, while pickup trucks hit 16%.

Stellantis, the former Fiat Chrysler, had the lowest fuel economy and the highest emissions of all manufacturers at 21.3 mpg (9.1 kilometers per liter) and 417 grams per mile of carbon dioxide. Tesla, which makes only electric vehicles, had the highest mileage equivalent at 121.5 mpg (51.7 kilometers per liter), and zero carbon dioxide emissions.

Nine manufacturers were above their EPA carbon dioxide emissions standard: BMW, Volkswagen, Kia, Nissan, Hyundai, General Motors, Mazda, Stellantis and Mercedes. Five were below their standards, meaning they emitted less than allowed: Tesla, Subaru, Ford, Honda and Toyota. Automakers can meet the standards with credits they accrued or bought from other manufacturers.

The EPA said that since the 2004 model year, average fuel economy in the U.S. is up 6.1 miles per gallon (2.6 kilometers per liter), or 32%.

It said that gas-electric hybrid production reached a new high of 9% of all vehicles in the 2021 model year. while electric, plug-in hybrid and fuel cell vehicles were 4% of nationwide production.