Latest Breaking News

BumRushDaShow

(165,176 posts) Wed Dec 3, 2025, 11:06 AM Dec 3

Trump administration to announce new fuel economy standards Wednesday, sources say

Source: CNBC

Published Wed, Dec 3 2025 7:49 AM EST Updated 2 Hours Ago

The White House will announce new fuel economy standards on Wednesday, according to administration sources. The Trump administration will propose rolling back the standards implemented by former President Joe Biden last year, sources told Reuters. Biden required passenger cars and light trucks to have a fuel efficiency of about 50 miles per gallon by 2031.

President Donald Trump is scheduled to make an announcement at 2:30 p.m. ET from the Oval Office. Executives from Ford, General Motors and Stellantis are expected to attend the announcement.

The Biden fuel efficiency standards were expected to stimulate the sale of elecric vehicles in the U.S. Trump has sought to roll back all federal support for EVs since taking office.

The oil industry group the American Petroleum Institute has lobbied the Trump administration to repeal the Biden fuel economy standards, arguing that they aim to phase out liquid fuel vehicles.

Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/03/trump-fuel-economy-standards.html

16 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trump administration to announce new fuel economy standards Wednesday, sources say (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Dec 3 OP

Bought and paid for by the Saudis speak easy Dec 3 #1

And popsdenver Dec 3 #9

Gosh, I'd forgotten the Venezuelan angle. speak easy Dec 4 #14

If the US government wants fuel efficiency in cars FredGarvin Dec 3 #2

Exactly. BYD cars are available everywhere except in the US. PSPS Dec 3 #6

The new fuel economy standards are the old fuel economy standards Bayard Dec 3 #3

So does Trump's immunity extend to corruption? Just musing about 2029. KPN Dec 3 #4

Perhaps a better headline would be, "Trump administration to announce new fuel consumption targets." Martin68 Dec 3 #5

I doubt automakers will rush to change things, knowing that will be undone soon. PSPS Dec 3 #7

It has surprised me odins folly Dec 3 #8

They could do it. Another way to f the ag business; approximately 40% of the U.S. corn crop is used for ethanol products twodogsbarking Dec 3 #10

Still Not Getting This ProfessorGAC Dec 3 #11

Automakers won't change a thing Blackjackdavey Dec 3 #12

That's What I Said ProfessorGAC Dec 3 #13

I would not in anyway call it a disagreement Blackjackdavey Dec 4 #15

I Get You ProfessorGAC Dec 4 #16

speak easy

(12,594 posts)

1. Bought and paid for by the Saudis

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 11:48 AM

Dec 3

popsdenver

(1,428 posts)

9. And

Reply to speak easy (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 04:20 PM

Dec 3

a giant, wet, slobbery kiss to the auto corporations and the oil & gas corporations here in the U.S.

If successful in taking over Venezuela, the RepubliCONs want to directly profit from that countries massive oil reserves.

speak easy

(12,594 posts)

14. Gosh, I'd forgotten the Venezuelan angle.

Reply to popsdenver (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 4, 2025, 02:52 AM

Dec 4

It's all so crazy.

FredGarvin

(787 posts)

2. If the US government wants fuel efficiency in cars

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 11:57 AM

Dec 3

They would allow electric vehicle imports from China.

Better engineering and quality at 1/4 the price of the US auto garbage

PSPS

(15,195 posts)

6. Exactly. BYD cars are available everywhere except in the US.

Reply to FredGarvin (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 01:49 PM

Dec 3

Bayard

(28,361 posts)

3. The new fuel economy standards are the old fuel economy standards

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 12:35 PM

Dec 3

We are losing more environmental ground every day.

KPN

(17,119 posts)

4. So does Trump's immunity extend to corruption? Just musing about 2029.

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 12:43 PM

Dec 3

Oh yeah, the dementia thing. He can always claim insanity. Damn.

Either way, there is no other rational explanation for this -- corruption or insanity.

Martin68

(26,942 posts)

5. Perhaps a better headline would be, "Trump administration to announce new fuel consumption targets."

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 01:26 PM

Dec 3

PSPS

(15,195 posts)

7. I doubt automakers will rush to change things, knowing that will be undone soon.

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 01:50 PM

Dec 3

odins folly

(536 posts)

8. It has surprised me

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 02:01 PM

Dec 3

That they haven’t talked about re-introducing leaded fuel, you know, like the good old days….

twodogsbarking

(17,484 posts)

10. They could do it. Another way to f the ag business; approximately 40% of the U.S. corn crop is used for ethanol products

Reply to odins folly (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 05:54 PM

Dec 3

ProfessorGAC

(75,694 posts)

11. Still Not Getting This

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 06:27 PM

Dec 3

The automakers aren't going to retool or alter current marketing strategies.
The costs of redesign & re-engineering are sunk.
There is no financial or economic benefit that I can see.
This is just empty symbolism to feed the "regulations bad" crowd.

Blackjackdavey

(256 posts)

12. Automakers won't change a thing

Reply to ProfessorGAC (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 07:26 PM

Dec 3

You must not live among these people. Automakers won't need to change anything, they'll just keep selling gas guzzling pick up trucks. The clowns around these parts have been successfully brainwashed to believe buying less gas/spending less time at the gas station is a liberal commie trans plot and definitely unpatriotic. I desperately wish I was kidding.

ProfessorGAC

(75,694 posts)

13. That's What I Said

Reply to Blackjackdavey (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 3, 2025, 07:28 PM

Dec 3

Did you think we disagree on something?

Blackjackdavey

(256 posts)

15. I would not in anyway call it a disagreement

Reply to ProfessorGAC (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 4, 2025, 11:52 AM

Dec 4

I'm just bringing some nuance to this pair of phrases: There is no financial or economic benefit that I can see.
This is just empty symbolism to feed the "regulations bad" crowd.

The economic benefit is that they will continue playing both sides, there will still be hybrids and EVs, they will still profit from that, while also profiting from the big pick ups, which they consider their most profitable lines as far as I know -- which is more than symbolism -- it is a concrete action that will continue to enlarge the profits of oil companies, bought politicians and car manufacturers. The symbolism piece comes into play when an idiot buys a 15 mpg vehicle to symbolize they are a patriot who stands firm against the commie trans plot to take away the trucks!

ProfessorGAC

(75,694 posts)

16. I Get You

Reply to Blackjackdavey (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 4, 2025, 11:54 AM

Dec 4

But, that's still the same benefit they already had.
I suppose that not having to pursue long term fleet average efficiency saves capital, but a change in the political climate could restore those same rules with the stroke of a pen.
So, I don't see the automakers doing anything active. Just a passive stance and the status quo

Reply to this discussion