What types of pollution do cars and light trucks emit?

• The transportation sector accounts for more than 55% of nitrous oxide (NOx) emissions in the U.S.

• In 2020, the national passenger vehicle fleet represented approximately 94 percent of the nation’s on-road vehicles and generated over one million tons of ozone- and particle-forming NOx emissions, and over 33,400 tons of fine particles annually.

​

What are the health effects of exposure to pollution from car and light truck emissions?

• Exposure to air pollution can lead to health problems, including increased risk of asthma attacks, strokes, heart attacks, cancer and premature deaths. 

​​
How is climate change related to pollution from cars and light trucks?​

• Transportation is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. Transportation accounted for the largest portion (27%) of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2020. Cleaning up emissions from cars and light trucks plays a critical role in limiting catastrophic climate change.​

• Greenhouse gas emissions contribute to climate change, which poses threats to Americans’ health and well-being, affecting everything from the air we breathe to the places we live. Extreme weather events caused by climate change create more air and water pollution, destabilize food sources, and put our homes and lives at risk.

​

Will enacting strong pollution limits on car and light truck emissions hurt the economy, auto workers, or manufacturers?​​

• Over the past five decades, adopting clean car standards has been one of the most significant actions the U.S. has taken to reduce its reliance on oil and save drivers money at the pump, according to a 2022 analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

• As of September 2022, automakers and battery manufacturers worldwide will spend more than $626 billion through 2030 to develop new zero-emission cars, passenger trucks, freight trucks, and buses. That is a $110 billion increase from projections in April of 2022. These investments are estimated to lead to more than 18,000 direct U.S. jobs related to the medium- and heavy-duty sectors. 

 

How will the rule work?

• The EPA will not be requiring a transition to EVs per se. The EPA looks at available emissions reduction technologies and has leading experts determine both their logistical feasibility and economic impact. It then creates pollution limits for a given industry/source according to what is achievable through the best available and economically feasible technology, in this case, the best available technology being a transition to electric vehicles. The EPA is required to determine and show that any rule can be met with existing technology, and is required to get that rule past a currently skeptical supreme court. 

• The rule will ONLY apply to new car sales and will impose no restrictions or requirements on the cars people have now. Furthermore, the pollution limits are manufacturer-wide. Even in the most aggressive proposed rule consumers will have the option of buying gas vehicles. 

​

Is meeting this rule logistically feasible and economically beneficial? 

• 50 years of precedent show that EPA rules are generally met quicker, and more easily, with lower cost, more savings, and more benefits than what is anticipated. This shows that the EPA historically has done a good job of not overreaching. Furthermore, evidence suggests a transition as required in Alternative 1 of the EPA’s proposal is logistically feasible both in terms of EV manufacturing and EV charging access. It is within range of where analysts project the market to be headed. It is in line with what leading automakers have already committed to doing, and it is in line with policies enacted by leading U.S. states. Meanwhile, concerns over access to electric vehicle charging are being addressed through a rapid federally funded buildout of charging infrastructure both nationwide and in Wisconsin.

• It is important to consider both direct and indirect costs to consumers of any rulemaking. However, most electric vehicles, despite higher up-front costs, already have significantly lower lifetime costs of ownership when factoring in fueling and maintenance. Furthermore, with competition, government incentives, falling raw materials prices, and overall efficiency improvements, analysts project electric vehicles will soon have cheaper up-front costs as well. Not only will the transition to zero emission vehicle technologies greatly reduce air pollution, improving public health and decreasing significant indirect health costs on the public, it will save American consumers money directly through decreased transportation costs.

​

What effect will proposed alternative 1 have on the transition to EVs and what overall technology mix is likely to be used to meet the rule?

• Per the EPA, Depending on the compliance pathways manufacturers select to meet the standards, EPA projects that EVs could account for 67% of new light-duty vehicle sales and 46% of new medium-duty vehicle sales in 2032. 

  • This compares to projections that even without this rule, half of the light-duty vehicle sales will be electric by 2030.

• Per the EPA, The proposed standards are performance-based, allowing each automaker to choose what set of emissions control technologies is best suited for their vehicle fleet to meet the standards. EPA projects that one potential pathway for the industry to meet the proposed standards would be through: 

  • 67 percent BEV penetration in MY 2032 across the combined light-duty passenger car, crossover/SUV, and pickup truck categories 

  • About 40 percent BEV penetration by 2032 across the combined medium-duty van and pickup truck categories 

  • Wide-spread use of gasoline particulate filters to reduce PM emissions 

  • Improvements in technology to reduce CO2 from conventional gasoline vehicles 

  • Manufacturers may also choose to employ hybrid or plug-in hybrid technologies to help meet the proposed standards. 

 

I have additional questions, who can I talk to?

• Send an email to WHPCAcomms@gmail.com and we would be happy to help!

​

​