Rollback of emissions standards

Scott Pruitt announces plan to revoke the auto-emissions reduction target

Glenn McDonell | Contributor | USD Vista

Earlier this month, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt announced a plan to revoke the auto-emissions reduction target put in place during Obama’s presidency. This required the entire fleet of cars and light trucks produced in the year 2025 to average at least 50 miles per gallon.

Dr. Michael Boudrias, who teaches environmental studies and has specialized in topics surrounding climate change, said that the EPA’s reasoning behind the announced rollback lacks support from the scientific community.

“The regulations put in place under Obama were backed by over 1,200 pages of scientific, technical, and economic analysis which outlines oil and gas costs and how carbon dioxide is going to affect the environment,” Boudrias said. “This new plan to remove these standards is 37 pages long and consisted of information largely from car manufacturers.”

Dr.  Boudrias stated that this contrast is telling.

“It says a lot about how decisions are being made,” Boudrias said.  “They’re no longer based in science and technology, but instead on what the industry says can’t be done.”

Junior and Environmental and Ocean Sciences major Zoe Virta took a class on environmental issues with Dr. Boudrias and is concerned about the path the EPA is taking under Pruitt.

“As industry and technology expands we’re going to see more and more biohazards develop, which is why it’s really important to have a strong EPA,” Virta said. “This is especially true on the issue of regulating carbon dioxide emissions because of the long-term impact on the atmosphere.”

Stepping back from this target will result in substantial changes in the current trajectory of emissions reductions in the U.S. According to a statement in The Washington Post from Dan Becker of the Safe Climate Campaign, retaining the Obama rule would cut carbon dioxide emissions by six billion tons and save 12 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of vehicles complying with these standards.

Virta pointed out that stepping back from a commitment to make these large-scale reductions will diminish the progress made by other nations and will threaten the global outlook on climate change.

“We’re such a large country that if we choose not to act, we will effectively be ruining other countries’ attempts to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” Virta said.  “Scientists aren’t arguing about the fact that carbon dioxide levels are accelerating greenhouse gas cycles and causing average global temperatures to rise.”

Virta studied the environmental impacts of greenhouse gases in many of her classes and said that auto emissions are a major topic of discussion.

“If you’re talking about factory farming you have to consider not only the emissions on the farm but also the emissions from the delivery trucks,” Virta said. “Emissions from cars are constantly the ‘catch-22.’”

Data released in March by the U.S. Energy Information Administration indicated that the transportation sector is now responsible for 28 percent of total emissions, surpassing power plants to become the largest source of greenhouse gases.

Dr. Boudrias stated this issue is of particular importance locally.

“In places like L.A. and even San Diego, just about everybody drives,” Boudrias said. “The latest data shows that emissions from cars and trucks in Southern California is hovering around 45 or 47 percent.”

Junior and Marine Ecology major Grace Cawley studied how carbon emissions lead to melting ice caps and sea level changes in Dr. Boudrias’ environmental issues class.

“It’s going to affect biospheres,” Cawley said.  “If we continue to change the pattern of how the earth is warmed things are going to drastically change and we’re already seeing that.”

According to a study conducted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, emissions will need to decline by more than five percent a year in order for the planet to maintain a 50/50 chance at preventing average global temperature rise above the widely accepted two degree celsius threshold.

Cawley feels that the tendency of politicians to focus only on short-term wins poses a considerable threat to the chances of meaningful progress on climate change.

“Politicians don’t see their lack of action as having any sort of short-term impact,” Cawley said.  “They find it easy to deny the facts whenever it’s convenient for them.”

Pruitt’s rollback has come in part as a result of lobbying efforts from the auto industry. In February, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which includes General Motors and Toyota among others, petitioned the EPA to withdraw the 2025 standard, according to The New York Times. They claim that costs associated with fuel-efficient technologies will drive up the price for cars as Obama’s 2025 deadline approaches.

Dr. Boudrias said that these concerns are inconsistent with the long term outlook.

“The argument that (the existing regulations) are not good for the manufacturers is false,” Boudrias said. “Fuel-efficient technology has advantages to the consumer and the producer because these innovations will mean people will spend less on gas while the industry becomes more competitive.”

While the national standards may have changed, California retains authority under a special provision of the Clean Air Act to seek a waiver to enforce stricter standards and limits on emissions. State officials have threatened to sue the EPA if the waiver is revoked and the state is blocked from imposing stricter targets.

Dr. Andrew Tirrell, who teaches classes on environmental politics and international environmental governance, said that it will be difficult to predict the outcome of the conflict between the state and federal authorities.

“We’ve never had an EPA trying to undermine the very same environmental protections which Congress created the agency to promote and enforce,” Tirrell said.  “We’re in uncharted territory now.”

Cawley, who attended the March for Science and other demonstrations in the past, said environmental activism is especially important in the midst of this political battle.

“It’s so hard to stress that even the small things can make a difference,” Cawley said. “Call your senator or your representative and tell them that they need to take action.”

Dr. Tirrell encouraged students who feel strongly about these issues and want to make a difference to become politically active in other ways.

“The biggest thing you can do is vote,” Tirrell said.  “Aside from that, there are a lot of nonpartisan organizations such as the Environmental Motor Project pushing for candidates who want to help the environment.”

Just last week, 14 states, led by New York and including California, filed suits accusing the EPA of failing to effectively regulate methane emissions from the oil and gas industries, as is required under the Clean Air Act.   Should the agency attempt to revoke California’s ability to set its own standards, it seems likely that political battles like these will only intensify.