The Environmental Protection Agency arrives for our gasoline-powered trucks once a week, followed by our diesel-powered trucks once more.
A new law mandates that 25 % of vehicle sales be electrical by 2032, which was chosen by EPA on Good Friday, when many Americans were gearing up for Transgender Day of Visibility ( in other words, when they were preparing to celebrate Easter Sunday ).
Nearly all used by Americans is transported by truck, either directly from the manufacturer or via ports or railroad terminals. The new EPA rule would increase the costs of anything Americans buy, leading to higher prices for goods and services as well as inflationary pressures in the economy, if energy trucks and charging technology were in place.
All this at a time when the Federal Reserve is attempting to reduce inflation by 2 %.
But America does n’t have the electrical grid capacity, the charging stations, or the technology to operate long- haul electric trucks, and the nation wo n’t have them by 2032.
Before electric vehicles could start operating, shipping and utility companies would need to invest nearly$ 1 trillion in charging infrastructure. EPA’s objectives will either have to be abandoned or gradually moved forward.
The electric vehicle rule is in line with rules made public last month that mandate electronic driving in cars and light trucks by 2032. On the grounds that EPA overrevised its authority, both of these laws may face legal challenges.  ,
The EPA’s stated goal is to lower emissions, but exhilarating trucks would have little impact on global temperatures, raising overall costs, and thus increasing prices.
Simply a government established with no prior experience with shipping may compare diesel and electric vehicles to one another because of how much they cost.
A diesel truck costs about$ 120, 000, an electric truck costs in the range of$ 450, 000 to$ 500, 000. Small trucking companies simply could n’t afford the higher costs and would cease operations because of these costs.
Not only that, but a proposed energy plant law from the EPA, shortly to be released in last kind, would make electricity more expensive. This principle, not mentioned in EPA’s car tailpipe laws, may require power plants to detain 90 % of their carbon emissions by 2039 or near in 2040.
Although smaller business trucks, including school buses and utility trucks, usually travel directly and can be charged at depots immediately, weighty- duty trucks transport goods for long distances. Because of their reduced range, these larger electric trucks ca n’t carry as much weight as diesel trucks. Therefore, more trucks are required for a certain quantity of merchandise, which increases costs of transportation.
Electric cars now have a range of 230 to 310 yards, and they must typically stop and refill when battery life falls below 20 %. Drivers would have to recharge every 180 to 250 yards, which can take one to two days.
Because truckers are only allowed to drive for 11 hours, and the battery life is reduced, long-haul electric trucks ca n’t travel as many miles in a day.
Drivers are already in great desire, with 80, 000 estimated job openings. Because of growing e- business, more cars are needed, more than fewer.
Drivers ‘ ability to stop for two days to recover would decline, and these positions would become less desirable. Some owners would leave, and some would need to be paid more to keep their jobs.
EPA calls the costs of vehicle electricity “billions of dollars ‘ worth of investments from shipping fleets, automobile manufacturers, and U. S. states”, as though these investments do have a favorable rate of return. However, all Americans would bear the costs of higher prices.
As manufacturers attempt to comply with regulations and use green tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act to waste resources on products that are unsuitable for companies ‘ needs, EPA’s massive project to reshape America’s transportation system would lower economic growth and lead to a higher budget deficit.
The fact that America would have cleaner air would serve as justification for EPA’s regulation. However, electric trucks do not emit emissions and cost the environment in ways that gasoline-powered cars do.
Coal and natural gas are the only renewable energy sources that power battery-powered vehicles. Other than being fully utilized for other purposes, fossil fuels and hydropower are other sources of energy that are used to meet the demand for electricity.
In China, batteries for electric heavy trucks are produced using energy from coal-fired power plants. Carbon is used to create batteries for electric vehicles, and the more carbon is used the longer the battery’s range.
Large electric trucks need two 8, 000- pound batteries. According to physicist Mark Mills, miners must move 500, 000 pounds of earth to obtain enough essential minerals for one 1, 000-pound passenger car battery, and multiple quantities of these minerals would be needed for electric trucks.
Mining for crucial minerals is disruptive to the environment. America outsources the work to Asia, Latin America, and Africa.
In West Virginia v. EPA in 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA’s 2015 Clean Power Plan had overstepped its bounds by forbidding states to shut down power plants. The plan was described by Chief Justice John Roberts as” a regulatory program that Congress had conspicuously declined to enact itself.”
The Environmental Protection Agency is now adopting a program that Congress has yet to pass into law in a similar sleight of hand.
The EPA wants to compel the purchase of electric trucks because businesses would n’t use them otherwise, just as it aims to require more passenger vehicles to be electric than average Americans.
It is a pure illusion to believe that American business could operate on electric trucks. The size and composition of the batteries, the network of charging stations, and the electricity to run those stations make this whole enterprise fantastical.
Far more people think of the Easter Bunny than think that EPA will succeed in this particular mission.
