Does a ‘just right’ scenario for an EV transition exist?

According to Bozzella, that just-right scenario means moving “quickly and aggressively” to reduce vehicle emissions but doing so in a way that maintains consumer choice across EV types and recognizes the U.S. still needs to build up the supply chain and charging infrastructure.

“Right now, despite significant policy direction from the federal government, we haven’t seen that materialize,” he said.

Bozzella argued that the EPA’s rule, as proposed, puts the U.S. on the “too fast” route, consequently giving China an advantage and threatening a just-right transition to electrification.

In comments submitted this month to the EPA, the alliance called the draft rule “a de facto battery-electric vehicle mandate” that is “neither reasonable nor achievable in the time frame provided.”

Among its recommendations, the alliance wants the EPA to align the standards more closely with President Joe Biden’s 2030 target by adopting requirements that would lead to full-electric and other electrified models — including plug-in hybrids and fuel cells — making up 40 to 50 percent of new-vehicle sales by the end of the decade.

Other automakers also weighed in on the proposal, with Ford, GM, Hyundai, Toyota and Stellantis among the commenters raising concerns over its stringency. The UAW, which has not yet endorsed Biden for reelection, also called for the EPA to soften the proposal and conduct more analysis on its impact to union auto workers.

Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate have urged the EPA to rescind its proposal, arguing that the rapid EV adoption needed to meet the requirements could force the U.S. to rely on adversaries such as China.

This month, a House subcommittee voted in favor of a bill led by Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Mich., that would block the EPA from finalizing the proposal. The bill heads to the full committee for consideration; however, it is unlikely to become law, as it would need Biden’s signature.

The alliance said it has not taken a position on the bill.

In a statement to Automotive News, the EPA, which is expected to finalize the rule by spring 2024, said it “welcomes input on the proposal.”

At a House hearing in June, the EPA’s Joseph Goffman argued that the standards are supported by investments spurred by the Inflation Reduction Act and bipartisan infrastructure law and are aligned with commitments already made by automakers and states.

“Because the proposed standards are performance-based emissions standards, it is the car companies who would choose the mix of technologies they believe would be best suited for their fleet,” Goffman, principal deputy assistant administrator at the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, said in prepared remarks. “The proposal is not a national electric vehicle mandate or an internal combustion engine ban.”

He said the EPA estimates about 42 million to 48 million new ICE vehicles would still be sold from 2027 through 2032, with anywhere from 5 million to 6 million new ICE vehicles sold in 2032 and beyond.

However, Bozzella has argued the proposal — especially the stringency in the early model years — would require automakers to “eke out some incremental improvements by installing expensive new technology” on all ICE vehicles.

“That capital allocation has to come from someplace, and it will come at the expense of EV investment,” he warned.