Senate republicans just voted to poison you. Again.
Senate republicans, joined by Joe Manchin, have voted to roll back the first update to heavy truck pollution standards in 22 years. The new soot standards are estimated to save thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars.
President Joe Biden has indicated that he will veto this action, so it’s unlikely to go into effect. But it’s just another sign from Senate republicans that they want to kill Americans and cost them money.
Heavy duty trucks are a primary contributor to harmful air pollution. This is particularly true for the types of pollution that harm human health, like ozone, particulate matter and NOx. While light duty vehicles do make up the majority of global warming emissions (CO2), heavy duty vehicles make far more than their fair share of these other harmful pollutants.
And so, in December, the EPA finalized a rule updating heavy truck emissions standards, the first update to these standards since 2001. The rule goes into place starting in model year 2027 and would reduce NOx emissions by 48%. But they are still significantly lighter regulations than those in some states, like California, which is due to update its truck regulations further in a vote happening imminently (Electrek will be covering that vote tomorrow).
The EPA’s 2027 rule would save 2,900 lives, prevent 18,000 cases of childhood asthma and prevent 6,700 hospital admissions. It would also lead to 78,000 fewer lost days of work, 1.1 million fewer lost school days and save $29 billion per year by 2045, and when accounted for in net present value, the benefits are greater than the costs today. These benefits would go disproportionately to disadvantaged communities who live closer to truck routes and depots.
So, these rules are an unequivocal benefit. Like most environmental regulations, they would both reduce costs and improve quality of life. It’s a no-brainer, a win-win for everyone.
And so, yesterday, Senate republicans voted to reverse them. The republicans were joined by Joe Manchin (D-WV), but otherwise the 50-49 vote was entirely along party lines. All 49 republicans and Manchin voted to poison America and waste money, and 48 Democrats and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) voted to clean the air and save money.
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is currently on an extended absence and missed the vote, which is what allowed the republicans to push this measure through.
The vote was a resolution under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to block federal regulatory actions. The Act was passed in 1996 but rarely used until 2017, when Congress used it several times, mostly notably to reverse consumer protections implemented under President Obama.
After going through the Senate, the resolution will have to reach the House, where the slim republican majority is likely to approve of poisoning Americans and costing them money. Then, if that happens, it would move on to President Biden, who has signaled that he does not approve of poisoning Americans and costing them money, and will veto it if the effort to do so reaches his desk.
So this effort is unlikely to become law, and everyone knows it. But, seizing on the extended absence of the oldest member of the Senate, republicans still pushed through this rule.
Republicans argued that the reason they want to poison everyone and cost them money is because the cost of complying with these new rules – which, once again, would save, not cost, $29 billion annually – was too high.
Senator Deb Fischer (R-NE), who led the effort, said that since past regulations have worked very well to get emissions down, then new regulations to get emissions down are not necessary – an argument that explicitly acknowledges that regulations work to reduce pollution. She also said that the cost of complying – which could be as little as $2,568 per truck, a small fraction of the price of heavy duty vehicles (which crest six figures easily) – would be too high. Despite, again, calculations showing that this rule would result in not only health benefits, but net financial benefit for the US.
Electrek’s Take
Whenever we write articles like this, we end up getting a few comments saying “stop getting political! it’s not fair that you target one party!”
But all we’re doing here at Electrek is advocating for electric vehicles. We do this openly – you know that this is the position we’re coming from, and you know why we’re doing it. We’re doing it because we like clean air, we like energy efficiency, we like technology, we like better cars. We don’t make a secret about this. We want to live in a better world, and we’re pretty sure you do, too.
But in our coverage of these efforts to live in a better world, there is one party which seems to be unequivocally against doing so. When we cover efforts to make things better, these efforts are not being led by republicans. And when we cover efforts to make things worse, those efforts are being led by republicans.
So when we point out, time and time again, that republicans are voting to poison you, this is not an example of us being partisan. This is an example of republicans picking the side of poison, and us reporting on it factually.
And in this case they aren’t even going to get it into law. They know this, and yet they still voted for it, as if to say: “hey, if given the chance, we want everyone to know that our goal is to kill you and make things worse.” It wasn’t even necessary for them to do so, they could try to keep it a secret or something, but it’s all out in the open.
And so, we have to call these efforts what they are: efforts to poison you and cost you money. We would be happy to see republicans stop these efforts, and they can choose to do so anytime, and we will gladly and fairly report on it if they do.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
In the US in 2024, wind and solar accounted for 17% of total electricity generation, surpassing coal, which fell to a record low of 15%, according to a new report from global energy think tank Ember.
Since US coal power peaked in 2007, wind and solar have overtaken coal in 24 states, with Illinois the latest to join the ranks in 2024, following Arizona, Colorado, Florida, and Maryland in 2023, the report finds. It’s the first analysis of full-year US electricity data, which was published by the EIA on February 26.
After being stagnant for 14 years, electricity demand started rising in recent years and saw a 3% increase in 2024, marking the fifth-highest level of rise this century. The increase in demand and fall in coal was met with higher solar, wind, and gas generation. Natural gas grew three times more than the decline in coal, increasing power sector CO2 emissions slightly (0.7%). Coal fell by the second smallest amount since 2014, as gas and clean energy growth met rising electricity demand, whereas historically, they have replaced coal.
Despite growing emissions, the carbon intensity of electricity continued to decline. The rise in power demand was much faster than the rise in power sector CO2 emissions, making each unit of electricity likely the cleanest it has ever been.
Solar grew faster than natural gas
Solar generation rose by 64 TWh in 2024, compared to natural gas, which rose 59 TWh. It remained the fastest-growing source of electricity, with its generation rising by 27% in 2024, surpassing hydropower generation for the time. It made up 81% of all new annual power capacity additions in the US. Gas added no net capacity, as new plants were offset with closures.
California and Nevada both surpassed 30% annual share of solar in their electricity mix for the first time (32% and 30%, respectively). California’s battery growth was key to its solar success. It installed 20% more battery capacity than it did solar capacity, which helped it transfer a significant share of its daytime solar to the evening. Texas installed more solar (7.4 GW) and battery capacity (3.9 GW) than even California. Yet the growth of solar was uneven – 28 states generated less than 5% of their electricity from solar in 2024, highlighting significant untapped potential – even before adding battery storage.
As solar grew massively, wind saw a modest 7% increase in generation, adding the least capacity in 10 years. However, it still generated 50% more power than solar in 2024, making 10% of the US electricity mix.
Solar and wind can meet rising demand
With the adoption of EVs, air conditioning, heat pumps, and rapid expansion of data centers, demand for electricity is guaranteed to grow in the coming years.
To meet the rise in demand, clean generation needs to grow faster. Unlike solar, wind’s growth has been slow. Clean energy is able to meet rising electricity demand alone – without raising bills, sacrificing security of supply, or further relying on gas.
“As the demand remained unchanged for years, solar, wind, and gas together worked to replace coal, transforming the US electricity system,” Dave Jones, chief analyst at Ember, said. “But now that electricity demand is rising fast, the battle is between solar and gas to meet this. And solar is winning – it added more generation than gas in 2024, and batteries will ensure that solar can grow more cheaply and quickly than gas.”
Daan Walter, principal at Ember, said, “Electricity demand is rising as new uses emerge across the US economy, from data centers to transportation and heating. This makes the case for solar and wind today even stronger – they are not only fast to deploy and cheap but also help stabilize energy costs in the long run.”
To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to 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 you 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.
Elon Musk said today that Tesla will double its electric vehicle production in the US in the next two years.
What would that look like? Let’s do the math.
Today, during a press conference to promote Tesla at the White House, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the following:
“As a function of the great policies of President Trump and his administration, and as an act of faith in America, Tesla is going to double vehicle output in the United States within the next two years.”
This raises many questions, as Musk’s phrasing of the statement suggests that Tesla is planning to add previously unannounced production capacity in response to Trump’s policies.
However, the reality could be different.
What is Tesla’s current production capacity in the US?
We only know Tesla’s installed capacity, which is much different than its actual production rate.
This is Tesla’s latest disclosed global production capacity at the end of 2024:
| Region | Model | Capacity | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| California | Model S / Model X | 100,000 | Production |
| Model 3 / Model Y | >550,000 | Production | |
| Shanghai | Model 3 / Model Y | >950,000 | Production |
| Berlin | Model Y | >375,000 | Production |
| Texas | Model Y | >250,000 | Production |
| Cybertruck | >125,000 | Production | |
| Cybercab | — | In development | |
| Nevada | Tesla Semi | — | Pilot production |
| TBD | Roadster | — | In development |
In the US, it adds up to 1,025,000 vehicles per year.
In reality, Tesla’s factories are operating at a much lower capacity.
Based on sales and inventory from 2024, Tesla is currently building fewer than 50,000 Model S/X vehicles per year compared to an installed capacity of 100,000 units.
As for Model 3 and Model Y, Tesla is currently building them in the US at a rate of about 600,000 units per year compared to claimed installed capacity of over 800,000 units.
Finally, the Cybertruck is being produced at a rate of less than 50,000 units per year compared to an installed capacity of over 125,000 units.
This adds up to Tesla producing 700,000 units per year in the US in 2024.
What will be Tesla’s new capacity?
Considering Musk mentioned that it will happen “within the next two years”, it is unlikely that he is referring to installed capacity.
The CEO is most likely talking about Tesla’s actual production, which would also make sense, especially considering he mentioned “output.”
Tesla currently outputs roughly 700,000 vehicles per year in the US.
Doubling that would mean bringing the total to 1.4 million units per year, which would be an incredible feat, but it’s not entirely a new plan for Tesla.
First off, Tesla has already announced plans to unveil two new, more affordable models this year. These models are going to be built on the same production lines as Model 3/Y, which would potentially enable Tesla to fully utilize its installed capacity for those vehicles.
That’s another 200,000 units already.
As already mentioned in Tesla’s installed capacity table, the company is currently developing its production facility for the Tesla Semi electric truck in Nevada.
Production is expected to start later this year and ramp up next year. Tesla has previously mentioned a goal of 50,000 units per year. It would leave Tesla roughly a year and half to ramp up to this capacity, which is ambitious, but not impossible.
Then there’s the “Cybercab”, which was unveiled last year.
The Cybercab is going to use Tesla’s next-gen vehicle platform and new manufacturing system, which is already being deployed at Gigafactory Texas.
Production is expected to start in 2026, and Musk has mentioned a production capacity of “at least 2 million units per year”. However, he said that this would likely come from more than one factory and it’s unclear if the other factory would be in the US.
Either way, Tesla would need to ramp up Cybercab production in the US to 450,000 units to make Musk’s announcement correct.
It’s fair to note that all of this was part of Tesla’s plans before the US elections, Trump’s coming into power, or the implementation of any policies whatsoever.
Electrek’s Take
Based on my analysis, this announcement is nothing new. It’s just a reiteration of Elon’s plans for Tesla in the US, which were established long before Trump came to power or even before Elon officially backed Trump.
It’s just more “corporate puffery” as Elon’s lawyers would say.
Also, if I wasn’t clear, we are only talking about production here. I doubt Tesla will have the demand for that, especially if Elon remains involved with the company.
The Cybercab doesn’t even have a steering wheel, and if Tesla doesn’t solve self-driving, it will be hard to justify producing 450,000 units per year.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The average incentive package for a new EV was 14.8% of the average transaction price (ATP), or approximately $8,162, the highest level in more than five years, according to the latest monthly new-vehicle ATP report from Cox Automotive’s Kelley Blue Book.
Incentives for EVs are more than twice the overall market. A year ago, EV incentives were 10.2%. EV incentives, as a percentage of ATP, have increased by 44% in the past year.
In February, at $55,273, new EV prices were lower by 1.2% from January – generally aligned with the industry – and higher by 3.7% year-over-year. The January EV ATP was revised higher by 0.06% to $55,929.
Compared to the overall industry ATP of $48,039, EV ATPs in February were higher by 15.1%, an increase from the 14.9% gap recorded in January.
EV market leader Tesla increased ATPs by 1.8% year-over-year in February to $53,248 but decreased by 3.7% month-over-month from $55,315. Model 3, Model Y, and Cybertruck posted price declines in February compared to January; Model S and Model X saw month-over-month increases.
As sales cooled, the Cybertruck ATP in February dropped by more than 10% from January to an estimated $87,554.
Read more: You can lease a 2025 Polestar 3 for the same price as a Polestar 2 right now
To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to 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 you 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.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 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
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway