But U.S. charging infrastructure is not increasing fast enough to keep pace with EV growth. Most EVs for sale right now are luxury vehicles, with relatively fewer options on the cheaper end of the scale. And, significantly, legacy automakers are making far more money on their gas-powered vehicles than their EVs, some of which are not yet profitable at all.
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group representing auto manufacturers, asked the EPA to adjust the timeline for the new rules, dialing down the ambition for the next few years and then cranking up the pace toward the end of the time frame. The United Auto Workers union made a similar appeal.
The approach reflected what the Alliance calls a “Goldilocks problem”: Automakers see huge risks if they move too slowly or too quickly toward EVs.
Of course, the auto industry is not a monolith. All-electric automakers like Tesla and Rivian encouraged the EPA to set even more stringent rules. Dealers, who have generally been more skeptical of EVs than manufacturers, sharply criticized the EPA’s original proposed rules.
The final rules the EPA settled on reflect the input from automakers, labor unions and car dealers, a senior administration official said. Manufacturers will be able to make more gradual cuts to emissions in the early years, the official said, but the rules will ultimately deliver the same reductions as the agency’s initial proposal.
The oil industry is fundamentally opposed
The oil industry, meanwhile, has been an even more vocal critic of these rules and other policies promoting EVs. Rising adoption of electric vehicles is expected to reduce oil demand over time, although it will take decades for the global fleet of vehicles to turn over.
Oil trade groups call the new EPA rule a ban on gas-powered cars, although the regulations allow the continued sale of gas vehicles. The American Petroleum Institute has said the rule “threatens consumer freedom, energy reliability and national security.”
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, which has spent millions on ads against the EPA rules and other policies, also criticized the EPA for not considering the environmental impact of manufacturing a giant battery or charging an EV. A large body of research has found that even with those impacts factored in, EVs are still vastly better for the planet than comparable fossil fuel vehicles. It’s true, however, that larger, less efficient EVs have a bigger environmental footprint than smaller ones.
But the oil industry’s opposition goes even further. The attorney general of Texas has previously filed a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s authority to set rules designed to promote electric vehicles. Multiple oil trade groups backed Texas in the case. The auto industry sided with the EPA, noting that carmakers are investing billions in going electric and that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a “national priority.”
In fact, cutting greenhouse gas emissions is a global priority. The world has now agreed that transitioning away from fossil fuels is key to reducing the devastating impacts of climate change that, even in the best-case scenario, will disrupt ecosystems and human lives around the world.
And as the EPA sets rules designed to accelerate the shift away from fossil fuels, carmakers and oil producers are responding very differently.
The auto industry sees a profitable zero-emissions future — if it can figure out how (and when) to get there. The oil industry is fighting to defend its core product.
On a call with reporters earlier this month, Chet Thompson, the CEO of the AFPM, lambasted media reports that the EPA was considering a “compromise” that would give the auto industry a few more years of more lenient standards, buying companies time to prepare for the EV transition.
Thompson emphasized that the EPA rules would still fundamentally aim to make most cars sold in the U.S. run on batteries.
“At 2032, it’s the same outcome,” Thompson said, frustrated. “This administration should not be calling that a compromise when, in fact, they want to take us to the same place.”