Trump’s EPA Surprises Critics by Toughening Rules on Big-Rig Truck Pollution

“We are doing it because it’s good for the environment.”

Yana Paskova/The Washington Post via Getty Images

This story was originally published by HuffPost and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced a new effort to slash pollution from heavy-duty trucks, surprising critics who say the move is the Trump administration’s first to increase regulations on emitters.

Flanked by the heads of trucking industry associations, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the push, dubbed the “Clean Trucks Initiative,” will include a rule to toughen standards on nitrogen oxides, the emissions that cause asthma-triggering smog.

“We are under no regulatory or court-ordered requirements to launch this initiative,” Wheeler said on an embargoed call with reporters Monday night—remarks he echoed in Washington on Tuesday afternoon. “We are doing it because it’s good for the environment.”

Details are hazy on the plan, which is expected to include eliminating other trucking regulations the EPA deems onerous to lowering emissions. At the press conference, Wheeler touted the EPA’s efforts to gut regulations that cost industry players a combined $1.6 billion, and said he planned to propose 49 additional “deregulatory actions estimated to provide up to $100 billion in savings.” 

Still, environmentalists hailed the announcement as the administration’s first concrete move to ramp up rules on a heavily-polluting industry.

“It looks as if Team Trump will make it one in a row for the environment,” said Daniel Becker, the director of the Washington-based Safe Climate Campaign’s Center for Auto Safety. “Or as the French say, even the blind pig sometimes finds the truffle!”

The industry itself rallied behind the announcement. On Tuesday, the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association called the initiative “a tremendous opportunity.’

“We—EPA and the manufacturers—have done this before, and we’re ready to step forward to do it again,” Jed Mandel, the trade group’s president, said in a statement. “We ask the Agency to follow that same successful roadmap by leading a collaborative, open regulatory process involving all stakeholders.”

The announcement comes three months after the administration proposed dramatically weakening fuel economy standards, clearing the way for vehicles—the nation’s top source of climate pollution—to emit an addition 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, equivalent to Canada’s entire annual emissions, by 2030. On Monday’s call, Bill Wehrum, the head of the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, said “the situation” with cars and light-duty trucks “is much different from heavy-duty trucks.” 

“It’s an apples and oranges thing,” he said, without going into detail. 

Yet the effort bears remarkable similarities to the fuel economy rule. The move came in response to a petition submitted in late 2016, for which California is already racing to draft regulations. In hopes of creating a 50-state standard, the EPA is now stepping in. 

“If the agency is legitimately responding to the petition that was submitted in 2016 and moving forward to look at the technologies now available to greatly reduce NOx emissions, that would be a positive for air quality and public health,” Janet McCabe, Wehrum’s predecessor under Obama, said in an email.

But the policy could also undercut the EPA’s stalled effort to cut Obama-era air pollution limits for trucks with rebuilt engines. Wheeler reversed former Administrator Scott Pruitt’s decision to halt enforcement of the so-called “glider rule” in July after 16 states sued to force the agency to regulate the “super-polluting” trucks. 

The final rule is now listed in the Federal Register as “to be determined.” 

“What will EPA’s final position be on glider kits?” said Stan Meiburg, a former acting deputy EPA administrator who spent 39 years at the agency. “It would be inconsistent for the agency to regulate new engines more tightly while allowing a loophole for discounted, older, more polluting engines to remain in commerce.”  

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate