EVs: Political Pushback (151 Republicans vs. Big Brother)

“Specifically, over its lifetime, an EV only has lower emissions than an internal combustion engine vehicle if it travels between 28,069 and 68,160 miles and remains in service for more than 10 years – circumstances which are not being realized today.” [4]

The illusion of electric vehicles as economically viable and ecologically blessed is part of the “magical thinking” and shared narrative of our day. Progressive environmentalists themselves are driving EVs in bad conscience. Thankfully, many members of one major political party here in the U.S. are on the side of the economy and the environment when it comes to transportation. May other members of other political parties join in–and in other countries.

The latest on EV politics comes from a Press Release from May 22, 2023, and it reads:

151 House Republicans, led by Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), today sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan urging him to rescind the agency’s proposed emissions standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty trucks. The EPA’s ill-conceived effort is just their latest attempt to carry out President Biden’s radical rush-to-green agenda, which will take away Americans’ choice when it comes to the kind of vehicle they drive—and arm-twist people into buying vehicles they can’t afford.

————–

The full letter to Michael S. Regan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, follows:

Dear Administrator Regan,

We write to express deep concerns with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty trucks.1 The proposals are the latest effort by the Biden administration to commandeer America’s transportation sector and force its complete vehicle electrification under the guise of mitigating climate change.

The light- and medium-duty vehicle proposed standards are unworkable and impractical. EPA estimates that the proposed standards would lead to electric vehicles (EVs) accounting for 67 percent of new light-duty vehicle sales and 46 percent of new medium-duty vehicle sales in the United States by model year 2032. The projected statistics are a far cry from the current EV market share of 4.5 percent,2 making these standards a deliberate market manipulation to prop up EVs. Furthermore, a rapid shift towards EVs would benefit only the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as China has a stranglehold on the critical minerals supply chain and manufacturing of EV batteries. For example, China currently controls 50 to 70 percent of global lithium and cobalt refining that are necessary for EV batteries.3

Additionally, EVs are not necessarily better for the environment in terms of emissions reductions. Specifically, over its lifetime, an EV only has lower emissions than an internal combustion engine vehicle if it travels between 28,069 and 68,160 miles and remains in service for more than 10 years – circumstances which are not being realized today.4

Worst of all, the proposed standards would make life harder and even more unaffordable for Americans and their families. According to Kelley Blue Book, the average price of an EV is $65,291, which is $17,197 more than the average price of an internal combustion engine vehicle.5 Insurance for electric cars costs $206 per month on average, which is $44 more per month than insuring a gas-powered car.6 Pricing is especially important, because access to a car is tied to improved economic outcomes for low-income households.7 Americans should not be forced into paying an excessive amount for a car they do not want and cannot afford. Also, the lack of driving range continues to be a problem with EVs. Forcing rural America into a largely EV future is condemning these communities into isolation.

Given that the recent EPA announcement was only a proposal, we strongly urge you to rescind this ill-considered effort. Americans want the ability to choose the vehicle that best meets their needs, that is reliable, and that they can afford — not be forced into buying an EV.

—————–

1 The two proposals announced on April 12, 2023 by the EPA are the “Multi-Pollutant Emission Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles” (EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0829) and the “Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles – Phase 3” (EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0985).

2 See “Electric Vehicles,” International Energy Agency, September 2022.

3 See “The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions: Executive Summary,” International Energy Agency, March 2022.

4 See Written Testimony of Ashley Nunes, Director, Federal Policy, Climate and Energy, The Breakthrough Institute, before the Committee on Energy and Commerce, April 26, 2023.

5 See “Electric Car FAQ: Your Questions Answered,” Kelley Blue Book, October 31, 2022.
6 See “Electric Car Insurance 2023 Guide“, Policygenius, December 29, 2022.
7 See “Driving to Opportunity,” The Urban Institute, March 2014

The post EVs: Political Pushback (151 Republicans vs. Big Brother) appeared first on Master Resource.