Sponsored

New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles

Probity

Active member
Joined
Nov 3, 2022
Threads
3
Messages
39
Reaction score
29
Location
Covington LA
Vehicles
2018 F150 Scab XLT 2.7EB 2wd
Occupation
Retired
Well, info on the “final” rule is available today – all 1100+ pages of it. The official Federal Register version (hopefully shorter) hasn’t been published yet, don’t know when that will happen so we can see the “official” version on what the phase-in periods are, exact target numbers, etc.

Final Rule: Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles | US EPA

Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles – Final Rule (March 2024) (epa.gov)

When I read the ‘proposed’ rule from May 2023 (2023-07974.pdf (govinfo.gov) a couple of things stood out:

#1 - EPA originally wanted to eliminate/prohibit use of “commanded fuel enrichment”. That’s a really big deal for ICE vehicles as we now know them. It sure would have made MY2027 SAE J2807 testing “interesting” and Ford’s 2027 Ford Towing Guide pretty jaw-dropping for all the wrong reasons. Tuners wouldn’t be too happy either. Here’s what EPA wanted:
Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 01


EPA solicited comments from industry. US automakers and industry groups threw a major shoe when they saw this. I’ve read the comments back to EPA from Ford, Stellantis, Alliance for Automotive Innovation (AAI - industry group that represents car companies – their response was the most detailed). GM responded but their comments seem to have all been in attachments which were redacted.

When Ford replied to the EPA on eliminating fuel enrichment, they basically wanted to delay implementation to MY2030 for vehicles above 6000# GVWR.
Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 02


Here’s what EPA now (20 March 2024) says (basically no prohibition now but may happen in 2-3 years):
Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 03

And:
Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 04


#2 – Gasoline particulate filters (GPF’s). The automakers and AAI pushed back on the ‘new’ 0.5 mg/mile PM standard phase-in period, and on the requirement for a new PM test at -7 degrees C., and on the ‘new’ OBD requirements that EPA proposed in May 2023.

AAI had a lot to say on this (too much to cut & paste). Ford wanted to delay implementation of the 0.5 mg/mile requirement until 2029:
Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 05


In the final rule, the new 0.5 mg/mile PM standard is codified (which effectively will require GPF’s), as is the ‘new’ -7 degrees C. PM test. I’m still not sure what the official implementation period will be.
Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 06

Ford F-150 New Final Rule – EPA Emissions Standards for MY 2027 and Later LD/MD Vehicles 07


So we’ll see what the future brings.
Sponsored

 

amschind

Well-known member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Apr 22, 2022
Threads
18
Messages
801
Reaction score
703
Location
Texas
Vehicles
'21 F150 SCrew 4x4 Powerboost
Occupation
Physician
Who do I vote for to get environmental regulations that make sense? I just bought a tractor, and specifically got a 1999, as it is the last model before the "new" diesel emissions regs for tractors kicked in. I don't know where to look to find politicians who care about the environment but can also do basic math. If the options are "rolling coal, except when the truck detects emissions equipment" vs "a powertrain that lasts 3 years max", which choice is "good"? Those options are both bad, and I want to choose "neither".
 

Pedaldude

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Threads
3
Messages
1,371
Reaction score
2,001
Location
Arizona
Vehicles
2001 Lincoln Navigator, 2021 Ford F-150
LOL...requires a component that is susceptible to damage from certain operating conditions.

Manufacturers then create a way to protect that component from damage.

Creates proposal to eliminate manufacturers from protecting the component during certain conditions.

Sounds like the government to me!
 

Boyk1182

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2024
Threads
4
Messages
85
Reaction score
73
Location
Northern Colorado
Vehicles
2023 F-150 Platinum PowerBoost
Who do I vote for to get environmental regulations that make sense? I just bought a tractor, and specifically got a 1999, as it is the last model before the "new" diesel emissions regs for tractors kicked in. I don't know where to look to find politicians who care about the environment but can also do basic math. If the options are "rolling coal, except when the truck detects emissions equipment" vs "a powertrain that lasts 3 years max", which choice is "good"? Those options are both bad, and I want to choose "neither".
We have a uniparty at this point so a garbage can is as good of a place as any for your ballot.
 

Sponsored

OP
OP

Probity

Active member
Joined
Nov 3, 2022
Threads
3
Messages
39
Reaction score
29
Location
Covington LA
Vehicles
2018 F150 Scab XLT 2.7EB 2wd
Occupation
Retired
Who do I vote for to get environmental regulations that make sense? I just bought a tractor, and specifically got a 1999, as it is the last model before the "new" diesel emissions regs for tractors kicked in. I don't know where to look to find politicians who care about the environment but can also do basic math. If the options are "rolling coal, except when the truck detects emissions equipment" vs "a powertrain that lasts 3 years max", which choice is "good"? Those options are both bad, and I want to choose "neither".
The EPA is an independent executive agency with 16,000+ full-time equivalent employees. It’s a “sort of but not really” part of the Executive Branch. A president can remove/replace the EPA head. From our friends at Wikipedia:

“The agency is led by its administrator, who is appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. The current administrator is Michael S. Regan. The EPA is not a Cabinet department, but the administrator is normally given cabinet rank.”

“Generally, the heads of independent regulatory agencies can only be removed for cause, but Cabinet members and heads of independent executive agencies, such as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, serve "at the pleasure of the president" and can be removed without cause.”

Congress has oversight of the EPA but don’t vote on stuff they do. Oversight is all very political, and getting info from the EPA on oversight questions is like getting blood from a turnip.

There will be an attempt to undo the rule but requires some heavy lifting – from The Hill:
“Republicans vowed immediately to try to undo the rule, saying they would try to vote to overturn it.
“This rule is delusional. This is the Biden administration’s attempt to get rid of the internal-combustion engine without congressional authority. Together, we will be introducing Congressional Review Act legislation to overturn Biden’s EV mandate,” said a joint written statement from Sens. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) and Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska).
Their effort is unlikely to be successful, as such action requires either presidential approval or a two-thirds majority from Congress.”
 

Boyk1182

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2024
Threads
4
Messages
85
Reaction score
73
Location
Northern Colorado
Vehicles
2023 F-150 Platinum PowerBoost
The EPA is an independent executive agency with 16,000+ full-time equivalent employees. It’s a “sort of but not really” part of the Executive Branch. A president can remove/replace the EPA head. From our friends at Wikipedia:

“The agency is led by its administrator, who is appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. The current administrator is Michael S. Regan. The EPA is not a Cabinet department, but the administrator is normally given cabinet rank.”

“Generally, the heads of independent regulatory agencies can only be removed for cause, but Cabinet members and heads of independent executive agencies, such as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, serve "at the pleasure of the president" and can be removed without cause.”

Congress has oversight of the EPA but don’t vote on stuff they do. Oversight is all very political, and getting info from the EPA on oversight questions is like getting blood from a turnip.

There will be an attempt to undo the rule but requires some heavy lifting – from The Hill:
“Republicans vowed immediately to try to undo the rule, saying they would try to vote to overturn it.
“This rule is delusional. This is the Biden administration’s attempt to get rid of the internal-combustion engine without congressional authority. Together, we will be introducing Congressional Review Act legislation to overturn Biden’s EV mandate,” said a joint written statement from Sens. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) and Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska).
Their effort is unlikely to be successful, as such action requires either presidential approval or a two-thirds majority from Congress.”
I hope the Supreme Court overturns Chevron and stops letting agencies, made up of unelected bureaucrats, have so much power. That much power should at least have some oversight by elected officials. I think that case is on the chopping block soon.
 

Boyk1182

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2024
Threads
4
Messages
85
Reaction score
73
Location
Northern Colorado
Vehicles
2023 F-150 Platinum PowerBoost
I used to post on another truck forum and if you so much as thought about politics while posting, they banned you. I like this place better.
 

Sponsored


JExpedition07

Well-known member
First Name
James
Joined
Feb 14, 2023
Threads
50
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Buffalo NY
Vehicles
2023 F-150 STX 5.0L V8
I get the EV concern but the USA is going to become the worlds micro-processor and semiconductor powerhouse in the next decade. My company is looking into about $100,000,000,000 (100 Billion) in work building semiconductor and microprocessor manufacturing facilities here in the states for the big companies. Due to non-disclosure agreements details are sparse, but most of this manufacturing is coming to US Soil and will bring tens of thousands of jobs and billions in extra gross domestic product annually. These companies are fleeing Taiwan and China with the unease over there right now, and have decided US soil is the safest place on the planet to build these precious products and protect their profits and intellectual property.

Micron is doing a $20 Billion project for semiconductor manufacturing plant in NY state now. This will be outside of Saracuse. Of course chips act funds come into this. This is only part of the equation, we need to onshore battery production as fast as we can too.
 
Last edited:

fordtruckman2003

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2023
Threads
23
Messages
3,208
Reaction score
2,539
Location
Indy
Vehicles
2021 F-150 FX4 Lariat
Domestic chip and lithium battery production paid for by all of us. I think it will be a good thing over the next decade though. Doesn't mean I want to run out and buy an EV anytime soon. I have to avoid certain gas stations now on my motorcycle trips because of E15 gas being approved by EPA. 🙄
 

Popplemer

Well-known member
First Name
Stu
Joined
Feb 9, 2023
Threads
1
Messages
328
Reaction score
293
Location
New Jersey
Vehicles
'87 F250 460 5 Speed, 2023 302A PB 157"
I get the EV concern but the USA is going to become the worlds micro-processor and semiconductor powerhouse in the next decade. My company is looking into about $100,000,000,000 (100 Billion) in work building semiconductor and microprocessor manufacturing facilities here in the states for the big companies. Due to non-disclosure agreements details are sparse, but most of this manufacturing is coming to US Soil and will bring tens of thousands of jobs and billions in extra gross domestic product annually. These companies are fleeing Taiwan and China with the unease over there right now, and have decided US soil is the safest place on the planet to build these precious products and protect their profits and intellectual property.

Micron is doing a $20 Billion project for semiconductor manufacturing plant in NY state now. This will be outside of Saracuse. Of course chips act funds come into this. This is only part of the equation, we need to onshore battery production as fast as we can too.
Not to sound like a wet blanket on the campfire but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like the covid PPP loan scheme, I forsee the government incentives to build manufacturing plants to be great in theory and poor in execution.

How long until subsidized factories are found to be operating at a loss, closed, and all that expensive tooling sold for pennies on the dollar? Not to mention the sure-to-follow press evisceration the companies' now lost jobs. The cost of labor will kill these dreams, even if the facilities construction come in heavily subsidized. Manufacturing in this country today is akin to forcing a square peg in a round hole. People don't want to do the work at the rate they'll be offered and with the lack of opportunity afforded to those making sub $100k in this country post Covid, I almost can't blame them.

Lest we forget we're on a forum in which perhaps 35-45 percent of the posts are complaints about the build quality and manufacturing practices of an American business over 100 years old. But the newly minted chip factories will get it right? I hope I'm wrong. I'd love to see a righting of the ship, I'm concerned where this country is headed.

Same with EPA standards. In theory, it's helping. In practice, not so much. With the government subsidies not helping to sell nearly the numbers of EV's they'd hoped, these pie in the sky emission dreams scream cart before the horse. Let's work on every vehicle sold being a hybrid before we tax the electric grid even further...
 
Last edited:

Snakebitten

Well-known member
First Name
Bruce
Joined
Jun 19, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
9,223
Reaction score
16,871
Location
Coastal Texas
Vehicles
2022 F150 KingRanch Powerboost
Post not working.
 

JExpedition07

Well-known member
First Name
James
Joined
Feb 14, 2023
Threads
50
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Buffalo NY
Vehicles
2023 F-150 STX 5.0L V8
Not to sound like a wet blanket on the campfire but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like the covid PPP loan scheme, I forsee the government incentives to build manufacturing plants to be great in theory and poor in execution.

How long until subsidized factories are found to be operating at a loss, closed, and all that expensive tooling sold for pennies on the dollar? Not to mention the sure-to-follow press evisceration the companies' now lost jobs. The cost of labor will kill these dreams, even if the facilities construction come in heavily subsidized. Manufacturing in this country today is akin to forcing a square peg in a round hole. People don't want to do the work at the rate they'll be offered and with the lack of opportunity afforded to those making sub $100k in this country post Covid, I almost can't blame them.

Lest we forget we're on a forum in which perhaps 35-45 percent of the posts are complaints about the build quality and manufacturing practices of an American business over 100 years old. But the newly minted chip factories will get it right? I hope I'm wrong. I'd love to see a righting of the ship, I'm concerned where this country is headed.

Same with EPA standards. In theory, it's helping. In practice, not so much. With the government subsidies not helping to sell nearly the numbers of EV's they'd hoped, these pie in the sky emission dreams scream cart before the horse. Let's work on every vehicle sold being a hybrid before we tax the electric grid even further...
I can understand your skepticism. However, you can either pay higher labor in the US and be afforded the safety net of protection from future war/IP theft, or pay low wages in Asia and be largely unprotected. The decisions have been made, I can tell you 3 of these manufacturing plants are coming to US soil all ready. The deal is all ready done. That’s about 50 Billion of the 100 Billion I’ve referenced all ready signed and done. Micron is on the way, it’s not an “if” anymore. At the end of the day it’s hard to find negatives in on-shoring manufacturing.

Corporate barons love to pretend US labor is too expensive to be profitable. They are liars. Even our competitors also say they “cannot afford” to pay the wages we pay, they are also liars. That’s why we have better talent and are a better performing company. The one downside to publicly traded companies is they are incentivized to create shareholder value end all be all, if f*cking the American middle class creates value they’ll do it. That’s where Trump had a great idea with raw material and foreign product tariffs. F*ck those shareholders and executives back so hard they have no choice but to pay American wages or fail to compete with the American companies that stayed and go under. That’s something I agree with Trump on. US govt should protect US based manufacturing interests.
Sponsored

 
Last edited:
 




Top