The smarter way to cut CO2

Say what you wish about the EV tax credits that have been under discussion by Democrats in Congress, but here's one thing that's unquestionably true: They're a horribly inefficient way to limit the amount of carbon our vehicles are putting into the atmosphere.

Subsidizing electric vehicles to fight global warming is like trying to lose weight by eating more "diet" ice cream.

Why? Because as taxpayers, we're focusing on the wrong end of the value chain. And the reality is that most EV tax credits end up flowing to consumers with means who likely could have purchased an electric vehicle regardless of the government assistance.

According to the EPA, a "typical passenger vehicle" emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually — the equivalent of burning almost 2.5 tons of coal.

But that's a number that can vary widely by the type of vehicle, its condition and the miles driven. While each gallon of gasoline burned produces 8,887 grams of CO2, it's the number of gallons consumed that makes the big difference.

So let's break it down a little by fuel economy, which is a far more telling set of numbers and the key to understanding why Congress' legislative goal ought to be getting older, less efficient vehicles off the roads instead of subsidizing the purchase of new toys.

Removing CO2 has a diminishing return the higher up the fuel efficiency range you start. For example, someone driving 12,000 miles in a vehicle that averages 15 mpg generates 7.1 metric tons of CO2 a year and could cut 1.8 metric tons — the equivalent of 1,990 pounds of burned coal — by moving to a vehicle that gets 20 mpg. But if someone else moved from a vehicle averaging 30 mpg to one that gets 35 mpg, the annual CO2 savings is less than one-third as much, only about half a metric ton.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, average fuel economy has been steadily increasing since 2005, climbing 29 percent to a record 25.7 mpg in 2020. The current trend reversed a decline of 12 percent from 1988 to 2004. Meanwhile, the average age of vehicles on the road has now reached a record 12.1 years, up from 9.6 years in 2002, according to IHS Markit.

Can you see the low-hanging fruit yet? There are more older, less efficient vehicles on the road than ever before, and encouraging those who drive them to move into something more efficient will have a greater overall environmental impact than will spiffing a few thousand $60,000 vehicles into $47,500 vehicles.

The best, fastest way to get older, more polluting vehicles off the road would be for Congress to incentivize their scrappage and reward consumers for transitioning into more fuel efficient — even if not necessarily new — vehicles. Putting a scrappage incentive on higher-polluting vehicles of perhaps $2,500 or $5,000 would make them more valuable decommissioned than they would be still running, and it would give consumers a subsidy to underwrite moving into something more fuel-efficient.

Aside from being money poorly spent, the proposed tax credits — with supercharged discounts for UAW-made vehicles — nearly provoked a needless trade war with our vital continental automotive allies: Mexico and especially Canada.

"The Americans are very aware of Canada's position on this, and our concerns around it, and quite frankly, the threats it poses to over 50 years of integrated automaking in our two countries," Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told reporters in November after meeting President Joe Biden at the White House, according to Reuters. "There are a number of ways to look at solving this," Trudeau said without elaborating, adding that Canada would continue to push to "find solutions." The fate of the whole package is unclear right now because it doesn't seem to have a path to 51 votes in the Senate, for reasons unrelated to this industry.

Yes, I know I'm arguing against federally funded new-vehicle incentives to an industry that believes they are vital. And there may be a good argument for subsidizing electrification. But the goal of the EV tax credits isn't to bolster jobs in a struggling auto industry; it's to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

And right now, even if the politics are muddy, the math is crystal clear: Nothing will cut greenhouse gases more quickly than driving all those dirty old vehicles to the scrapyard.