New EPA rules will upend industry as automakers’ EV plans are too low
The US Environmental Protection Agency is set to announce sweeping new EPA rules on Wednesday intended to bring EV market share to ~60% in the US by 2030 and 67% by 2032. The rules are a big step forward for electrification, and represent an improvement from President Biden’s previous commitment of 50% electric by 2030. But it’s also far ahead of what many automakers are planning, leaving millions of EV sales up for grabs come 2030.
While the new rules have not yet been finalized (or even formally announced), the expectation based on sources within the EPA is that it will set emissions levels low enough that two thirds of vehicles would need to be electric by 2032.
The rules would bring federal guidelines close to California’s new guidelines, though it looks like this won’t quite harmonize them. California’s “Advanced Clean Cars II” (ACC2) regulation aims for 68% EV by 2030 and 82% by 2032, significantly more than the rumored EPA rule.
The California rule also bans sales of combustion-only cars in 2035, though EPA’s rules don’t seem to look that far into the future yet. California deliberately set its goals a little lower than what the state itself could achieve, in the hopes to bring other “section 177” states, and perhaps even the federal government, onboard. It wanted these rules to be “a floor, not a ceiling.”
Aligning minimum requirements would be important, as automakers have long stated a desire for a unified set of guidelines across the country. Automakers had this wish granted in 2012 when President Obama (with then-VP Biden) and the state of California agreed on emissions rules. But then they couldn’t help themselves and lobbied the EPA to fracture the rules, and later begged for a reversal of the fractured rules they lobbied for.
We’ll have to see what the proposed rules look like when they come out on Wednesday, but from what we’ve seen so far, it looks like the rules won’t quite align. Which begs the question: could the auto lobby even ask EPA to strengthen these rules, to align them with California, in keeping with their previously-stated desires for a unified regulatory scheme? It would be consistent with their stated goals anyway… but perhaps don’t hold your breath (unless a high-emitting gas car is going by, then you probably should hold your breath, at least until the smog clears).
All that said, the auto industry’s biggest lobbying organization did most recently support the government’s 2023-2026 emissions standards, so let us hope that they are turning a new leaf.
The proposed rules also lag behind public opinion. According to a recent poll, a majority of US voters support a requirement that 100% of new cars sold be electric starting 2030. The idea was “strongly” or “somewhat” supported by 55% of respondents, and opposed by just 35%. This is one reason we ask “why not sooner?” about a 2035 target for 100% electric car sales.
Automakers’ current 2030 commitments are too low
Until we see these new EPA rules, we can compare each automaker’s current stated production plans against what the EPA seems to be proposing, and see how things might shake out in the next decade based on those commitments. For the final column, we’ve multiplied current annual US sales by the company’s stated 2030 EV sales percentage (US where possible, global for companies that haven’t announced a US-specific goal). Some brands will sell more or less cars by then, and the market may grow or shrink as a whole, but we should be able to learn some things with rough math:
| Automaker | 2030 EV % | 2022 overall sales (rounded) |
2030 EV sales (est.) |
| GM | 40-50% | 2.2m | 880k-1.1m |
| Toyota | <50% (or 15%?), ~1/3 (global) | 2m | <1m (300k?) |
| Ford | 40-50% | 1.8m | 720-900k |
| Stellantis | 40-50% | 1.5m | 600-750k |
| Honda | 40-50% | 975k | 390-487k |
| Nissan | 40% “electrified” | 815k | 326k |
| Hyundai | 50% | 724k | 362k |
| Kia | 37% (global) | 654k | 241k |
| Subaru | 40% (global) | 556k | 222k |
| VW | 50% (80% global) | 498k | 249k |
| BMW | >50% (“well ahead” of 2030) | 361k | >180k |
| Daimler | 100% (Mercedes, Smart) | 342k | 342k |
| Mazda | 25-40% | 294k | 73-117k |
| Volvo | 100% | 101k | 101k |
| Jaguar Land Rover | 100% (2025) | 69k | 69k |
| Subtotal of non-EV manufacturers | (44%, averaged/ weighted) | 12.8m | ~5.7m (midpoint) |
| EV brands (Tesla, Rivian, Polestar, Lucid, etc) |
100% | ~550k | the rest |
| US total | 54-60% | 13.7m | 7.4-8.2 million |
Several smaller companies, or sub-brands of the above companies, have targeted 100% electric by 2030. Alfa Romeo, Lotus, Bentley, Cadillac, Mini, and Rolls-Royce have all committed to eliminating combustion by 2030.
From the rough math in this table, we can see a few things:
- Only three automakers, Daimler, Jaguar and Volvo, have planned to exceed the EPA’s rumored new goals.
- BMW is in the same ballpark with its >50% commitment, and a few other brands aren’t lagging too far behind with their 50% commitments.
- Kia makes good EVs. How is it in the second or third worst place on this table?
- Automakers’ current 2030 commitments only account for about 44% EV sales, averaged/weighted for their current sizes. This means overall EV commitments would need to increase by about a third to meet the Biden admin’s reported 60% goal.
But here’s what I would consider the most important takeaway: there is a gap of 1.7-2.5 million cars just waiting to be filled. Those are cars that need to be electric in order to meet the EPA’s rumored guidelines, and which automakers are currently not planning to make.
The auto industry is up for grabs
So, someone is going to have to build those cars. Who’s it gonna be?
A full car development cycle takes about 7 years. So if automakers want to get ready for these new EPA rules, they need to start today, if they haven’t already.
Some automakers may adopt a wait-and-see attitude, or may hope for legal challenges or an eventual softening or reversal of the regulation. But those automakers will be ceding time and leadership to a number of companies who would be happy to gobble up those millions of vehicle sales.
Those companies are listed at the end of the table: the EV brands. The likes of Tesla, Rivian, Polestar, and Lucid may not all have the capacity yet, but they’re eyeing this blue ocean, this sea of vehicles that have to be sold but which nobody seems to want to sell, and actively positioning themselves to grab as many of those free sales as possible. They’re not just starting their 7-year development cycles now, they already started them years ago. They won’t just be ready in 2030, they’ll be on the move well before then.
And even BYD and NIO, or other Chinese brands, may make inroads into the US market for the first time ever due to this not-sufficiently-tapped demand. Americans are wary of Chinese cars, but they were wary of Japanese cars, too, until a crisis in the 70s forced a realignment of the auto industry. And it certainly seems like a realignment is due to happen now.
But they won’t just grab those free vehicles, they’ll also eat into the incumbent automakers’ sales. We’ve seen this happen in every segment that Tesla goes into – incumbent automakers’ ICE sales go down in proportion to Tesla’s sales going up.
So unless automakers want that to happen, they better ratchet up their 2030 goals. And they better do it right now, not in a few years while they wait to see if these rules get challenged. We should see a lot of announcements in the coming weeks, if automakers know what’s good for them.
Are the new EPA rules achievable?
EV sales have grown quite rapidly for the last decade. In 2013, the first year that Tesla Model S sales started in earnest and when Nissan Leaf sales rose sharply, 47k EVs were sold in the US. In 2022, 762k EVs were sold. Using just these two data points, that’s a compound annual growth rate of 36%.
In 2022, US EV market share was 5.8%. To reach 60% by 2030, that means we need to grow EV sales at a compound annual growth rate of 34% between now and then – a similar growth rate to what we’ve already seen. So these EPA numbers are attainable, if we continue efforts at this rate.
Of course this will take a lot of investment, supply chain work, and deployment of chargers and other associated laws and regulations even down to the local level in order to prepare the country for the shift to electric cars. But many of those investments are in the process of being made by the Biden administration, through allocation of funds from the Inflation Reduction Act, and states and cities have slowly been removing roadblocks to charger installation as well (e.g. through Right to Charge).
The EPA move isn’t being made in a vacuum, and while it’s a step further than the early ambitions of the administration, work has been done and the market has evolved since that early executive order. With EV demand through the roof and so many new investments into EV production, it looks like the administration seems confident that these targets are achievable.
Besides, these targets are necessary. The IEA says that all new passenger car sales need to be electric, globally, by 2035, if we’re to avoid the worst effects of climate change. So there’s really no question over whether we should do this, or whether we can. We have to, so we better figure out a way to do it, because this is not something we have a choice over.
And while many automakers will complain about how hard it is, perhaps a change in perspective is warranted: electric cars are coming, and automakers who don’t shape up will be caught with their pants down, even moreso than they already have been. A swift kick in the rear by regulators might just force them into action they never would have taken on their own.
And as customer desires continue to shift more towards better, cleaner vehicles and sales of worse, dirty vehicles dry up, laggard automakers will find themselves in a better situation than if they had just sat there twiddling their thumbs, hoping for it all to pass.
Besides, we’ve seen EV goals get exceeded elsewhere. Norway is handily meeting even the most ambitious goals in the world, The UK has pushed forward its timeline (twice), and in China some gas cars are already becoming valueless. There are plenty of examples of EV adoption happening faster than expected. So maybe a can-do attitude would behoove us, here in America… where we used to value that sort of thing.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
More than $14 billion in US renewable and EV investments and 10,000 new jobs have been scrapped or put on hold since January, according to a new analysis from E2 and the Clean Economy Tracker. The reason: growing fears that the Republican-majority Congress will pull the plug on federal clean energy tax credits.
In April alone, companies backed out of $4.5 billion in battery, EV, and wind projects right before the House passed a sweeping tax and spending bill that would gut the federal tax incentives fueling the clean energy boom. E2 also found another $1.5 billion in previously unreported project cancellations from earlier in the year.
Now, with the Senate preparing to take up the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” E2 says over 10,000 clean energy jobs have already vanished.
“If the tax plan passed by the House last week becomes law, expect to see construction and investments stopping in states across the country as more projects and jobs are cancelled,” said Michael Timberlake, E2’s communications director. “Businesses are now counting on Congress to come to its senses and stop this costly attack on an industry that is essential to meeting America’s growing energy demand and that’s driving unprecedented economic growth in every part of the country.”
Ironically, it’s Republican-led congressional districts – the biggest beneficiaries of the Biden administration’s clean energy tax credits passed in 2022 – that are feeling the most pain. So far, more than $12 billion in investments and over 13,000 jobs have been canceled in GOP districts.
Through April, 61% of all clean energy projects, 72% of jobs, and 82% of investments have been in Republican districts.
Despite the rising number of cancellations, some companies are still forging ahead. In April, businesses announced nearly $500 million in new clean energy investments across six states. That includes a $400 million expansion by Corning in Michigan to make solar wafers, which is expected to create at least 400 jobs, and a $9.3 million investment from a Canadian solar equipment company in North Carolina.
If completed, the seven projects announced last month could create nearly 3,000 permanent jobs.
To date, E2 has tracked 390 major clean energy projects across 42 states and Puerto Rico since the Inflation Reduction Act passed in August 2022. In total, companies plan to invest $132 billion and hire 123,000 permanent workers.
But the report warns that momentum could grind to a halt if the House tax plan becomes law. Since the clean energy tax credits were signed into law, 45 announced projects have been canceled, downsized, or closed entirely, wiping out nearly 20,000 jobs and $16.7 billion in investments.
What’s more, Trump’s Department of Energy announced today that it was killing more than $3.7 billion in funding for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and decarbonization initiatives. Eighteen out of 24 projects were awarded through DOE’s Industrial Demonstrations Program (IDP), which was made law in the Inflation Reduction Act. It aimed to strengthen the economic competitiveness of US manufacturers in global markets demanding lower carbon emissions, while supporting US manufacturing jobs and communities.
Executive Director Jason Walsh of the BlueGreen Alliance said in a statement in response to today’s DOE announcement:
The awarded projects that DOE is seeking to kill are concentrated in rural areas and red states. American manufacturers are hungry to partner with the federal government to bolster US industry. The IDP saw $60 billion worth of applications during the program selection process, a ten-times oversubscription.
President Trump claims to be a champion of American manufacturing, but today’s announcement is further evidence that he and his Secretary of Energy are liars.
Read more: Global energy giant RWE halts US offshore wind because of Trump
If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
A Tesla prototype was spotted at the Fremont factory in California, sparking speculation that it’s the new “cheaper Tesla”, but it looks like a regular Model Y.
A drone operator flew over the Fremont factory this week and spotted a Tesla prototype with light camouflage on the front and back ends.
The vehicle is making a lot of people talk on social media and the media as many think it could be a new “affordable model” coming to Tesla.
Other than the camouflage, the vehicle looks just like a regular Model Y:
It’s likely one of two things: a new “stripped-down Model Y” or a Model Y Performance.
Model Y Performance is the only version that Tesla hasn’t launched since the design changeover earlier this year.
The “stripped-down Model Y” is what will replace Tesla’s upcoming “affordable models.”
We have been reporting on this new vehicle program from Tesla for a while now.
It came to life just over a year ago as a pivot for Tesla after CEO Elon Musk canceled two cheaper vehicles that Tesla was working on, commonly referred as “the $25,000 Tesla”. Those vehicles were codenamed NV91 and NV92, and they were based on the new vehicle platform that Tesla is now reserving for the Cybercab.
Instead, Musk saw that Tesla’s Model 3 and Model Y production lines were starting to be underutilized as Tesla faced demand issues. Therefore, Tesla canceled the vehicles program based on the new platform and decided to build new vehicles on Model 3/Y platform using the same production lines.
We previously reported that these electric vehicles will likely look very similar to Model 3 and Model Y.
In recent months, several other media reports reinforced that, and Tesla all but confirmed it during its latest earnings call.
Considering this looks like a regular Model Y, it could be the new cheaper and less feature rich Model Y:
Some people are claiming that this vehicle looks smaller than the Model Y, but it’s difficult to tell as the black camouflage on the ends can confuse the eye.
It looks like a very similar size when it passes near other Tesla vehicles:
What do you think it is? Let us know in the comment section below.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
![Lumina hopes this 32-ton dozer makes them the Tesla of heavy equipment [video]](https://i0.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/05/lumina_2.png?resize=1200,628&quality=82&strip=all&ssl=1)
San Francisco-based founder Ahmed Shubber wants to emulate Elon Musk’s success in the electric construction equipment world – and he hopes his new, 32-ton electric bulldozer is enough to make the world sit up and take notice.
Since launching his company, Lumina, in 2021, Shubber has raised more than $8 million and grown the company’s global (!?) headcount to 26 people. That fruit of that team’s labor is the machine seen here. Dubbed “Moonlander,” the first-of-its-kind prototype occupies the physical footprint of something like a Caterpillar D6, but packs the blade and performance of the larger, more powerful Cat D9.
“A D6 could not push that blade,” David Wright, Lumina’s head of UK operations, told the assembled media at the Moonlander’s launch last week. “We can have that blade full of material, full dozing seven to nine cubic meters of material, for eight to 10 hours.”
Moving all that mass takes a lot of power – but getting that power back into the Moonlander’s batteries won’t take a lot of time, thanks to the machine’s 300 kW charging capability.
“Even if you spend all morning heavy dozing and you’re a bit worried about how much juice you’ve used — well, your operators are going to take a union-mandated lunch break, right?” asks Wright. “Plug it in, and in 30 minutes, you’ve put 50% of power back in again.”
Shubber says Lumina is working to raise from $20-40 million for its Series A round to develop the company’s next electric equipment asset: a 100-ton electric excavator called Blade Runner. And, in a truly Tesla-like fashion, Shubber says he’s on track to hit an ambitious $100 million revenue target sometime in the next 24 months.
And, of course, the Blade Runner will feature state-of-the-art autonomous operating technology (because: of course it will).
We’ll see how that unfolds in 2 year’s time, I guess. In the meantime, check out this Lumina promo video for Moonlander, below, then let us know what you think of Shuber’s take on an electric job site in the comments.
Lumina ML6 electric dozer video
SOURCE | IMAGES: Lumina; via Business Insider, Earthmovers Magazine.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. The best part? No one will call you until after you’ve elected to move forward. Get started, hassle-free, by clicking here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway