Archive

How Big a Deal Is Trump’s Fuel Economy Rollback? For the Climate, Maybe the Biggest Yet

But pollution from cars and trucks has proved much trickier for states to take on. Transportation now accounts for one-third of America’s carbon-dioxide emissions, surpassing power plants as the largest source, and vehicle emissions have been steadily rising over the past few years. Federal fuel-economy standards were widely seen as a vital tool for curbing gasoline use.

“We’ve seen nowhere near the same progress in transportation as we’ve seen in electricity,” said Jordan Stutt, a policy analyst at the Acadia Center, a group in New England that is pushing for cleaner energy.

Read the full article from the New York Times here.

White House Pollution Proposal Puts Big Government Ahead Of States’ Rights

“It’s gutting these foundational environmental laws,” said Emily Lewis, a policy analyst at the Acadia Center, an environmental advocacy group. “Transportation is the biggest chunk of emissions that we’re trying to deal with right now. We’ve brought down emissions significantly in the electricity generating sector. We really need to be addressing transportation. So this is just a complete 180-reversal from where we need to be going.”

Driving in Wrong Direction? Reaction to Rollback of Clean-Car Standards

The standards, finalized in January 2017, require new cars to average 50 miles per gallon by 2025. Bowing to pressure from manufacturers, the Trump administration now says it will start a new rule-making process to set “more appropriate” standards. But according to Mark LeBel, a staff attorney at the Acadia Center, rolling the standards back is far from a “done deal.”

“This is just the first step in a longer process,” he said, “and the Trump EPA is going to be resisted by some very good lawyers from the states and other organizations, every step along the way.”

Read the full article from Public News Service here.

EPA Relaxes Tough Fuel-Economy Standards for Cars, Light Trucks

“Clean car standards protect all Americans from unnecessarily high fuel costs and from pollution that is dangerous to public health,’’ said Daniel Sosland, president of the Acadia Center, an advocacy group for a clean-energy future. “Rolling back these standards will damage the country’s economy and its competitive position, contrary to erroneous assertions by EPA.’’

Read the full article from NJ Spotlight here.

Reversal of Federal Clean Car Standards Will Harm Consumers and Climate

BOSTON — Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt announced that the agency will attempt to roll back federal clean car standards, reversing a decision in January 2017 that reinforced those standards. The clean car standards require automakers to limit the amount of pollution emitted by the vehicles they produce. In response, Acadia Center has released the following statement:

“Clean car standards protect all Americans from unnecessarily high fuel costs and from pollution that is dangerous to their health. Rolling back these standards will damage the country’s economy and its competitive position, contrary to erroneous assertions by EPA. EPA’s decision will cost consumers a net savings of about $1,600 over the lifetime of a car, increase pollution that causes and exacerbates asthma, and unnecessarily pour more emissions that cause climate change back into the atmosphere,” said Daniel Sosland, Acadia Center’s president.

“In undermining fuel efficiency standards, EPA leadership has defied its own experts, who have evaluated them extensively and confirmed their effectiveness. Once again, EPA rejects sound science and frustrates the growth of technology improvements for vehicles, which are already available and which consumers deserve.”

The Obama Administration approved the latest clean car standards in 2012, with the support of automakers. In January 2017, the EPA concluded that these standards are working, achievable, and should not be rolled back.

“In the absence of federal leadership, it’s essential that the nation’s coalition of clean car states exercise their right to safeguard the health of their residents and the planet,” said Emily Lewis, policy analyst and coordinator of Acadia Center’s Electrification of Transportation and Heating Initiative.

The clean car states include nearly all states in New England as well as New York, and together they represent 113 million Americans and more than one-third of the auto market.

“The clean car states will not be immediately affected by EPA’s decision, but millions of Americans in neighboring states will pay more at the pump while suffering the consequences of increased pollution — pollution which cannot be limited by state lines and affects us all,” said Lewis.

“The Northeast can redouble its commitment to reducing pollution from the transportation sector by embracing a new cap-and-invest program,” said Jordan Stutt, policy analyst. “Seven Northeast states and Washington, D.C., are now holding listening sessions to explore opportunities for regional collaboration to modernize and decarbonize the transportation sector. A multi-state cap-and-invest program can reduce transportation pollution and raise money to support cleaner and more modern ways of moving people and goods, including through low- and zero-emissions vehicles. The necessity and urgency of this step is further emphasized by the EPA’s abandonment of national policies to support a low-emissions system.”


Media Contacts:

Emily Lewis, Policy Analyst & Coordinator, Electrification of Transportation and Heating Initiative
elewis@acadiacenter.org, 860-2467121 x207

Krysia Wazny, Communications Director
kwazny@acadiacenter.org, 617-742-0054 x107

Connecticut Environmentalists Urge Grass-Roots Campaign To Block Trump’s Pick for EPA

Activist groups represented at Monday’s event included Environment Connecticut, the Sierra Club, the Connecticut Audubon Society, Citizens Campaign for the Environment and the energy watchdog group Acadia Center.

William Dornbos, Connecticut director for the Acadia Center, said Pruitt as EPA head would “have a real impact on Connecticut” by restricting access to key air and water pollution records. “Connecticut could lose fundamental resources even without a law being passed,” Dornbos said.

Read the full article from the Hartford Courant here.