Trump administration relied on flawed logic to justify scrapping vehicle emission rules, study says

The Trump administration's decision to scrap vehicle emission rules has been criticized for relying on flawed logic, according to a new study by a group of economists. The study, published in the journal Science, found that the administration's errors in accounting for fuel savings, technology costs, and mileage make the economic case for the rollback "fall apart."

The EPA's cost-benefit analysis, which estimated that eliminating the standards would save Americans $600 to $790 billion, was found to be incorrect. The authors of the study determined that correcting these errors would "overturn" the administration's justification for scrapping the rules. The study authors argue that the EPA underestimated the value of consumer benefits from fuel savings, failed to account for changes in fuel prices, and made faulty assumptions about the impact of efficiency improvements on vehicle costs.

The EPA maintains that its analysis is valid and that it is providing consumers with more choices, including the option to purchase electric vehicles.