On September 5, a U.S. federal appeals court invalidated a rule established during the Biden administration that altered how the fuel efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs) is measured in petroleum-equivalent terms. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis ruled that the Department of Energy overstepped its legal authority by phasing out, between the 2027 and 2030 model years, a ‘fuel content’ factor that had previously inflated the calculated efficiency of EVs. n nJudge Duane Benton, writing for a three-judge panel, emphasized that the agency failed to adequately notify the public about the full range of options under consideration when soliciting feedback on the March 2024 regulation. This lack of transparency, the court found, prevented stakeholders from offering meaningful input. n nThe petroleum-equivalency metric plays a key role in determining whether automakers comply with the Department of Transportation’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. While the final version of the rule was less aggressive than initial proposals, the Energy Department had argued that retaining the fuel content factor would support short-term EV manufacturing and promote broader adoption of electric vehicles during a critical transition period. n nA coalition of 13 Republican-led states, spearheaded by Iowa, challenged the rule, asserting that inflating EV efficiency ratings allowed automakers to produce more gas-powered vehicles with lower fuel economy, potentially increasing greenhouse gas emissions while still meeting federal benchmarks. They also contended that higher EV sales could raise road maintenance costs due to the heavier weight of these vehicles, leading to increased infrastructure wear. n nStates involved in the lawsuit included Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah. Neither the Department of Energy nor Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird’s office responded to requests for comment following the ruling. n nOral arguments were heard just days before the anticipated start of a potential second term for Republican President Donald Trump. n nThe legal case is docketed as Iowa et al. v. Wright et al., No. 24-1721, before the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. n— news from Reuters n
— News Original —nUS appeals court voids Biden-era electric vehicle fuel economy rulenSept 5 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Friday voided a Biden administration-era rule that changed the calculation of the petroleum-equivalent fuel economy of electric vehicles, a victory for 13 Republican state attorneys general who said the rule overstated EVs ‘ efficiency. n nThe 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis said the Department of Energy exceeded its authority by deciding to phase out during the 2027 to 2030 model years a “fuel content” factor that artificially inflated EV fuel economy, rather than eliminating that factor. n nSign up here. n nWriting for a three-judge panel, Circuit Judge Duane Benton said the department also failed to provide notice of the range of alternatives it was considering when it sought comments for the March 2024 rule, depriving commenters a chance to provide “informed criticism.” n nPetroleum equivalency is used in calculating whether manufacturers meet the Department of Transportation ‘s corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. n nWhile the final rule was watered down from an earlier proposal, the Energy Department said keeping the fuel content factor would likely encourage EV production in the near term, while “accelerating the widespread adoption of EVs in the United States during this pivotal time.” n nLed by Iowa, the 13 states and the nonprofit American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce said overstating EVs ‘ efficiency caused harm by allowing manufacturers to produce less-efficient gas-powered vehicles, thereby increasing greenhouse gas emissions, and still meet CAFE standards. n nThey also said encouraging EV sales makes it more costly to maintain roads, because EVs are heavy and cause more wear and tear. n nNeither the Energy Department nor the office of Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird immediately responded to requests for comment. n nArkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah also opposed the rule. n nOral arguments took place five days before Republican President Donald Trump began his second term. n nThe case is Iowa et al. v. Wright et al., 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-1721. n nReporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York Editing by Rod Nickel