The official case for repealing car fuel-economy rules is so full of errors it will be hard to defend in court.
Robinson Meyer shares details of the curious case of the Trump administration's attempt to appeal car fuel-economy standards put in place during the Obama administration.
The Trump administration’s official case for repealing car fuel-economy rules is riddled with calculation mistakes, indefensible assumptions, and broken computer models, according to economists, environmental groups, and a major automaker. The errors may seriously endanger the rule, hampering the White House’s ability to prove the proposal’s benefits exceed its costs and raising questions about whether it can survive an almost inevitable court challenge.
The mistakes range in scope from the comical to the bizarre, from the obviously accidental to the how-did-they-miss-that. In one case, federal employees have forgotten to divide a crucial figure by four. In another, officials have assumed that raising the cost of cars will lead more people to buy them, a violation of the principle of supply and demand. In a third case, the proposal asserts that freezing fuel-economy standards for new cars will lead the owners of old cars to drive their vehicles less.
What's more, every single error seems to tilt the analysis in the Trump administration's favor, according to Meyer's sources. Mistakes like that will make it very difficult to support the Trump administration's proposal when it inevitably faces a lawsuit.
In some cases, the mistakes are so large—and so central to the rule’s legal justification—that remedying them may destabilize the entire argument for the proposal. Public documents also make it clear that the Trump administration knew about some of the errors before the rollback was published.
Meanwhile, General Motors and Honda have broken ranks from the previous universal support for the Trump administration's moves to undo the Obama-era fuel economy rules. Ryan Beene and John Lippert report in a separate article:
General Motors Co. plans to propose that instead of opposing California’s so-called zero emission vehicle sales mandate, federal regulators should instead embrace a nationwide electric-car sales program starting in 2021. Honda Motor Co., meanwhile, took exception to Trump’s proposed freeze on mileage standards and called for steadily increasing requirements to continue.
Read the full story: The Trump Administration Flunked Its Math Homework
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
California plans to bury El Niño’s downpour
If the state plays its cards right, it may be able to store a billion acre-feet of El Niño’s water in aquifers.
Chicago breaks ground on $3 billion megadevelopment
The new neighborhood, titled Foundry Park, will one day host 3,700 residences.
Satanic place names
From streams and lakes to valleys and canyons, I mapped more than 1,000 places named after the Devil.
California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO resigns after $600,000 scandal
Under Ian Choudri, the authority used taxpayer dollars to fund first class flights and trips to nightclubs.
Want to study the Missouri River? Soon, you may need unanimous approval from 10 states
Legislation would require 10 governors’ permission to study or build projects moving water outside the basin.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
City of Rosemead
Rutgers University, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy
One Hundred Miles
Hunter College, City University of New York (CUNY)
The Architects Foundation
University of Cincinnati Online
City of Cambridge
Montrose County
The Pocatello Development Authority