Reflections on Elections, Internal Combustion Engines, and Electric Vehicles

October 30, 2024

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Allen Schaeffer (Engine Technology Forum) ... (T)his year vehicle and fuels policy - mostly aimed at electric vehicles (EVs), but also some proposed bans on internal combustion engines (ICEs) - has been a campaign-year issue at the national and state levels.

Not the vehicles themselves mind you (they have their own fan bases both for and against), the disagreements are about the policies that effectively require and incentivize the purchase and use of EVs. Or in the case of internal combustion vehicles, ban future sales.

What is being done has serious implications for sure. But how it is has been done – the appearance of “picking winners and losers” that has created the most debate. It is a departure from the traditional “technology neutral” role of the federal government. Whether the current approach is successful is still out for judgement.

For their part, at least a dozen states have made moves to restrict the sale of ICE vehicles. Nine states are working toward a total ban. Joining Congress and its efforts to preserve vehicle choice, 15 states have responded by passing their own legislation and resolutions that protect the right of consumer choice of vehicle and fuel type.

For heavy-duty vehicles the actions follow a similar pattern. With the recent addition of Illinois, there are now 24 states in court challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s most recently issued rules requiring an increasing percentage of our future commercial trucks to be zero emission vehicles. And that will be a challenge, since about 97% of the big rigs on the road today are powered by diesel.

The days of hammering out consensus views and finding a middle ground in Congress, as well as at the agencies and in the states, seem fleeting. It’s a departure from what used to work. California has mostly been driving national policy. And now we wait to see if the U.S. Supreme Court will be filling in policy gaps between Congressional action and Agency interpretation, thanks to a recent landmark ruling (Loper Bright). That’s a departure from only the most significant and landmark cases rising to the attention of the nation’s highest court.

...

For more than half a century, government policy has played an important role in making vehicles safer on the road and better for the environment. No one can deny that. There have always been opposing points of view and disagreements along the way; some have risen to the level for the courts to settle; others were recognized and accommodated in final rules. But we’ve never had a time like this one where technologies – ICE vs. EVs – are pitted against each other in public debate.

...

Neither ICEs or EVs are going anywhere; both are here to stay in some form because we need what the best of each offer for our vehicles, our trucks, machines, and equipment that run our economy. Each has too much to offer and there is too much invested in each to fail.

...

Let’s hope our next chapter brings the best people and ideas together, not pushes them further apart. A time where we can all respect differing points of view. And a time where EVs, ICEs, and all technologies compete and are challenged to continue to improve and help us meet our energy, environment, climate, and other goals.

We’ll need all of them and that will make us all winners.

Don’t forget to vote. Election Day is November 5! READ MORE

Related articles

Excerpt from E&E News Energywire: Across this battleground state, the electric vehicle has become a front-line issue in elections that could swing control of the presidency and Congress, firing up Republicans and putting Democrats on the defensive.

Bringing EV investment to Michigan used to be a bipartisan idea. But in this election cycle, Republicans have turned hard against it, launching a slew of advertisements meant to convert public concerns about the technology into a larger argument that Democrats’ support means they are soft on China and will kill auto jobs.

The counterargument — that the Biden administration made historic EV investments that are bringing new factories to Michigan and combating climate change — is taking a back seat to defensive claims like one from Democratic Rep. Elissa Slotkin, who declared “I don’t own an electric car” in an ad.

The EV has “become a central issue,” said Marick Masters, an emeritus business professor at Detroit’s Wayne State University about the state’s elections. “And the Republicans promised they would make it one.”

The political dynamic reflects ongoing skepticism among the public about the viability of EVs and shows that the economy — not climate change — is a top issue of voters, analysts say. The EV also is rising to prominence in Michigan’s elections because the state has so much at stake in a shift away from gasoline-powered cars.

Any job losses or gains because of EV technology will be felt strongly here because Michigan employs almost 165,000 in auto and auto parts manufacturing, far more than any other state, according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

According to the American EV Jobs Alliance, an EV advocacy group founded by longtime Republican consultant Mike Murphy, 75 percent of $15.5 million spent nationally as of mid-October on EV-related messa ging in this election cycle is negative. More than two-thirds of ad money has been spent in Michigan.

The opinions of Michigan voters on EVs — and the candidates’ opposing views on them — could influence who holds power in Washington, D.C., next year. Several races that will determine Democratic or Republican control of Congress are in the state — and each is replete with EV messaging, mostly driven by Republicans attacking opponents.

EVs also have been a key part of the Michigan battle between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. At a rally in suburban Detroit this fall, Trump vowed to “end the electric vehicle mandate on day one” if he is elected, referring to EPA regulations on tailpipe emissions. Harris introduced her rebuttal during a Flint, Michigan, rally a week later, saying, “I will never tell you what type of car you have to drive.”

One of the races where EVs could have the biggest impact is for a Senate seat, where former seven-term Republican House member Mike Rogers is taking on Slotkin, who is vacating a seat in the House. The race is rated by the Cook Political Report as a toss-up.

Two House races featuring EVs are likewise considered too close to call. One is Michigan’s 7th District, which represents Lansing, the state capital. In that race, two former state senators, Democrat Curtis Hertel and Republican Tom Barrett, are competing for Slotkin’s old seat.

The other is the 8th District, covering Flint and Saginaw, where longtime Democratic Rep. Dan Kildee is retiring. Democratic state Sen. Kristen McDonald Rivet is up against Republican Paul Junge, a former prosecutor and TV news anchor who also worked in public relations for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency during the Trump administration.

EV-related ads also are blanketing the 10th District, which covers Macomb County, north of Detroit. There, incumbent Republican Rep. John James, the scion of an auto logistics firm, is in a rematch with Democrat Carl Marlinga, a former judge whom James beat narrowly for the seat two years ago.

...

The ‘EV mandate’

No issue has animated Republicans and put Democrats on the defensive like regulations finalized by the Biden administration that intend to slash carbon emissions from vehicles by early next decade.

While Republicans from Trump on down have taken to calling those EPA regulations an “EV mandate,” the final tailpipe emissions issued earlier this year don’t require anyone to buy, or for automakers to make, an EV.

However, there’s virtually no way for automakers to meet the stringent emission levels required without producing lots of electrics. EPA has modeled that its rules could be met if 67 percent of passenger vehicles are electric by 2032.

Republicans have used a barrage of ads to frame the transition away from internal combustion engines in apocalyptic terms. More than 70 percent of all EV advertising in this election cycle cites an “EV mandate” or a “gas car ban,” according to the American EV Jobs Alliance analysis.

In the Senate race, Rogers, the Republican, points out in ads that Slotkin voted in the House to sustain the EPA regulations when the Republican majority tried to void them this year. In a debate with Slotkin on Oct. 14, Rogers claimed Democrats are “killing the car business.”

In the 10th District, Republican James similarly put out an ad claiming that under Marlinga and a Harris administration, “the auto industry would die” and lead to large job losses. James did not respond to requests for an interview.

“If you’re out there incentivizing people to make electric vehicles that really most people in the marketplace don’t want, you’re effectively driving jobs away from Michigan,” Junge said in a debate with Rivet on Oct 22.

In response, Democrats say that Republican arguments are false and setting the state up for long-term economic failure.

...

“There are obviously fuel economy standards and goals which would make it harder to match if you don’t have an EV,” Marlinga said, “but it’s far enough in the future that it leaves the auto industry with room for innovation.”

In defense of their support for the Biden administration’s approach to EVs, Democrats often pivot to arguing that the state needs to embrace EVs to stay ahead of global competitors.

...

Masters, the former Wayne State professor, said that the EPA rules are a clear vulnerability for Democrats because “you can’t fool” voters that restrictions aren’t coming when government rules are clearly clamping down on gas-powered cars.

“There’s going to be a mandate, no matter how you sugarcoat it,” he said. “That’s what Democrats don’t get.”

The China factor

In their messaging, Republicans in the state have said that Democrats have been overly accommodating to China. In a time of rising U.S.-China tensions, the Asian country dominates production of EVs, their batteries and the supply chain — a fact that Republicans are using to tap into fears that China will use that EV dominance against Americans.

Those fears mostly revolve around one particular company, Gotion, which last year got $175 million of incentives from the state to build a factory in southwest Michigan. READ MORE

Excerpt from Inside Climate News: U.S. automakers are welcoming federal money and want to ramp up their EV lineups to compete globally, which is creating a wedge in the alliance between an auto industry and the oil industry. Auto workers are watching the changes with both trepidation and hope. Car dealers, meanwhile, are trying to figure out how to sell EVs and facing reluctance, especially in rural areas.

The tensions are made even greater by the growing awareness that a geopolitical rival is knocking at the door in the form of Chinese EVs.

Vice President Kamala Harris is likely to continue the Biden administration’s policy of using tax credits to jump-start a U.S.-based supply chain for EVs and emissions policies to nudge automakers away from internal combustion engines, while also using tariffs to keep Chinese imports off of U.S. dealer lots.

Former President Donald Trump, who calls himself “Mr. Tariff,” has proposed astronomical duties to keep Chinese EVs out of the United States. While Trump now says he likes EVs since Tesla CEO Elon Musk became one of his campaign’s megadonors, he sees them as suitable for only a “small slice” of the public. He has pledged to undo the policies that support domestic production of EVs.

...

The main policy lever that is driving the forecast is the difference in how Trump and Harris would likely handle tailpipe emissions rules, which do not require congressional approval. Harris likely would continue Biden policies that make rapid increases to emissions standards, which automakers are expected to follow by increasing the share of their fleets that use plug-in vehicles. Trump has blasted the pollution policies as an “EV mandate” that he has pledged to end on Day One of his second term. Harris “wants to end all gas-powered cars,” say the ads he is running in Michigan.

Another big contrast is in the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act. Trump has said he wants to repeal aspects of the law that give tax credits to consumers who buy EVs and to manufacturers. Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, dismissed as “table scraps” a $500 million grant that GM had received to save 650 jobs and create 50 new ones by converting a Michigan Cadillac plant to EV production.

Weaker emissions standards and a reduction in incentives from the IRA would mean that the EV and battery factories automakers are currently building would have less local demand for their products. Automakers that sell most of their products in this country would be in the awkward position of managing a slow shift to EVs here while other major markets are moving much more quickly.

“If you’re transitioning a little bit slower than the rest of the world, then you can basically forget being competitive on a global stage,” said William Roberts, senior research analyst for Rho Motion, interviewed at the conference.

This would be a big step away from the idea that the United States is a global leader in the auto industry.

China, meanwhile, has built an EV industry, led by BYD, that already is leaving others in the dust. READ MORE

Excerpt from Inside Climate News: At another level, it also appears that Democrats, in their push to accelerate the U.S. transition to more climate-friendly vehicles, may have over-promised.

As EV sales plateaued worldwide in recent months, major automakers—including Ford, General Motors, Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen—began scaling back or delaying their electric vehicle plans, leaving many Michigan autoworkers feeling uncertain about the future. Earlier this month, Stellantis, maker of Jeep and Ram, laid off more than 400 workers at its Detroit logistics facility, attributing its decision in part to “slowing EV adoption.” The company previously laid off more than 1,000 workers at its Warren, Michigan, truck assembly facility.

Amid those developments, the GOP message about the dangers of EVs appeared to gain traction among Michigan voters, perhaps more so than arguments from Democrats defending EVs as good for the economy, political analysts told Inside Climate News.

...

In Michigan, where Trump won by nearly 80,000 votes, Republicans were relentless in their attacks on EVs ahead of the election.

“It was consistently a top five issue in Michigan politics in candidates for federal office and candidates for state office,” Rabe (Barry Rabe, a political science professor at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy) said.

...

In one ad, which the Trump campaign spent nearly $1 million to air in Michigan in the weeks leading up to the election, it said: “Attention auto workers: Kamala Harris wants to end all gas powered cars. Crazy, but true!”

Democrats fought back against that message by pointing out that the new regulations aren’t technically “mandates” in the strictest definition of the word.

...

But carbon capture and hydrogen fuel remain highly expensive options as it stands today, leaving electric vehicles as the only realistic option, said Adrian Hemond, a longtime political strategist and CEO of the consulting firm Grassroots Midwest.

“Those sorts of word games are exactly why the Democratic brand is in tatters right now,” Hemond said. “You call it a fuel efficiency standard, where there’s only one option, those are functionally the same thing. And for people who do not participate in the discourse—i.e. most voters—they think that’s all bulls–t.”

...

“EVs are expensive, not just the purchase price of the automobile, but the expense of installing charging infrastructure,” Hemond said. “And for folks on the lower end of the income scale who rent, that may not be available to them.” READ MORE