Environment & Climate
Economists say Trump administration relied on flawed math for vehicle emissions rollback
A study in Science claims correcting errors in the EPA's analysis turns hundreds of billions in touted consumer savings into a net economic loss.
The short version
- A study published in Science by academic economists found that the Trump administration used faulty assumptions to justify revoking vehicle greenhouse gas standards.
- While the EPA estimated the rollback would save Americans $600 billion to $790 billion, researchers calculated that fixing analytical errors reveals a net cost of $670 billion.
- The EPA defended its analysis, stating it relies on established models updated for current market conditions and consumer EV demand.
- The findings arrive as the administration faces legal challenges over its repeal of the endangerment finding.
Key facts
- A study published in the journal Science by economists from universities including Yale, MIT, and Penn concluded that the Trump administration made accounting errors regarding fuel savings, technology pricing, and mileage.[Associated Press]
- The EPA previously estimated that revoking the emissions standards would save consumers between $600 billion and $790 billion in the coming decades.[Associated Press]
- Researchers estimated that correcting the administration's analytical errors decreases projected benefits by $1.5 trillion, resulting in a net national cost of $670 billion.[Associated Press]
- The study noted that the EPA credited car buyers with receiving only $0.23 of every $1 saved at the gas pump, which researchers argued omitted billions in benefits.[Associated Press]
- The EPA stated in response that it stands by its analysis, citing established models updated to reflect consumer EV demand and revised fuel price projections.[Associated Press]
What remains uncertain
- The ultimate economic impact remains disputed, with the EPA maintaining its projections based on updated market assumptions while outside researchers argue the model contains fundamental errors.[Associated Press]
- The legal outcome of ongoing lawsuits challenging the administration's repeal of the endangerment finding is unresolved.[Associated Press]