California, EPA trade barbs on fuel efficiency as deadline looms

Bloomberg

US and California officials agreed on one thing about auto emissions standards: they’re still miles from an agreement, with a crucial deadline just two months away.
In separate comments, Sacramento and Washington’s top environmental regulators said they’ve yet to overcome a long-running impasse over the Trump administration’s proposal to cap auto emissions and fuel economy standards after 2020 and strip California of its authority to regulate tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions.
“We certainly hope to have a 50-state solution but at the end of the day we have to move forward with regulation,” Environmental Protection Agency Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler told Bloomberg Television in an interview, saying the agency and the state remain “pretty far apart” on the issue. “California is an important player — an important part of this — but this is not a two-sided negotiation for a national standard.”
After briefly meeting with Wheeler in San Francisco, California Air Resources Board Chairman Mary Nichols said the two sides remain at odds over the proposal and that a fundamental philosophical disagreement exists over the federal proposal to unwind California’s power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from autos.

LEGAL DISAGREEMENT
“That disagreement may turn into a legal disagreement at some point,” Nichols said during remarks at the Bloomberg New Energy Finance Mobility Summit in San Francisco. “I think it’s also correct to say that we have some reason to hope that we could possibly reach a resolution, not so much because I think we’re going to change their minds through the force of our arguments, as that the auto industry itself has made it very clear that they don’t want this fight. “
The dueling statements highlight the standoff between the Trump administration and California officials over fuel economy and tailpipe carbon emissions standards for automobiles, one of former President Barack Obama’s signature policies to ward off climate change.
Wheeler said he would prefer to reach a deal with California, but said the state shouldn’t be able to dictate the requirements.
The EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have already proposed stripping California of its authority to set its own tailpipe greenhouse gas emission limits for new cars and trucks, a potent bargaining chip to extract concessions from the largest state for US auto sales.
CALIFORNIA’S WAIVER
In the interview, Wheeler said California should not have that authority. “That’s why we would love to have a 50-state solution so we wouldn’t have to pull that trigger,” Wheeler said.
He dismissed an earlier counteroffer by California to extend the timeline of the existing requirements, saying it would not lower vehicle prices and improve road safety enough.
The dispute began last August, when the EPA and NHTSA proposed capping efficiency standards at a roughly 37-mile- per-gallon fleet average from 2020 through 2026 — instead of allowing them to rise to almost 50 miles per gallon by 2025 under the existing rules written by the Obama administration.
“But we do have some hard deadlines,” he said, adding “and we are pretty far apart.” Wheeler gave no hint of a middle ground before his meeting with Nichols. The administration argues that freezing future fuel economy increases after 2020 would cut car prices and encourage more people to buy newer, safer and cleaner cars.
Nichols dismissed the thrust of the EPA and NHTSA’s argument. “The analysis doesn’t make any sense,” she said. “It’s just a flat-out a bad argument and they should give it up.”
Wheeler said the administration must finalize the requirements by early April. California officials, he said, are focusing only on energy efficiency, an indication that the state is prioritizing reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. But Wheeler argued that the impact of California’s rules — which are followed by at least 12 other states — on greenhouse gas emissions is “negligible.”
Wheeler also distanced himself from President Donald Trump’s repeated suggestions that cold winter weather undermines arguments the planet is warming.