Massachusetts postpones rule requiring truck makers to sell electric vehicles 

TO THE FRUSTRATION of environmentalists who argue that states must take stronger action on climate in the absence of federal leadership, Massachusetts last week postponed enforcement of a rule requiring truck manufacturers to sell a minimum percentage of electric vehicles by two years.

Representatives for the trucking industry applauded the move, arguing there isn’t enough demand or infrastructure to support electric trucks. But, environmental advocates said that the state’s decision will set Massachusetts back in its climate goals and prolong exposure to harmful emissions for the state’s residents.

“We’re very disappointed to see the state of Massachusetts, which is really considered a leader on climate, kowtowing to truck manufacturers in this instance,” said Emily Green, a senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation who works on climate change, clean energy, and transportation. “The transportation sector is a huge contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in Massachusetts, and delaying enforcement of this regulation will make it all the more difficult for Massachusetts to comply with its binding climate limits.”

The Advanced Clean Trucks rule requires that manufacturers of medium and heavy-duty trucks sell an increasing percentage of zero-emission vehicles year over year starting in 2025, the year the state was to begin enforcing fines. Starting this year, Massachusetts would have required seven percent of trucks and tractors sold in the state to be electric vehicles. (Pickup trucks are not included in the requirements.) The percentages must increase each year until more than half of the trucks sold in the state are electric.

Massachusetts adopted California’s vehicle emission standards, which are more strict than federal regulations, in 1990.

Massachusetts announced on April 14 that it will not enforce percentage requirements for the model years 2025 and 2026 as long as manufacturers, who have been withholding diesel trucks unless dealers agree to buy a certain amount of electric trucks, supply trucks to dealerships in the state without restrictions.

“Some manufacturers are limiting…truck sales as a means to ensure their compliance with ACT sales requirements, reducing availability to a wide range of users,” said a memo from the state’s Department of Environmental Protection. “Further, the current federal administration has created significant uncertainty around [zero-emission vehicle] incentives, charging investments, manufacturing, and tariffs, each of which threatens a smooth transition to medium- and heavy-duty ZEVs.”

The nation’s leading truck manufacturers provided input when California developed the rule and agreed to meet the requirements. But now, they are arguing that the industry will not be able to meet the requirements because of high costs and a lack of electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

Kevin Weeks, executive director of the Trucking Association of Massachusetts, applauded the Healey administration’s decision to delay the rule.

“Even if the manufacturers could provide the trucks, nobody would buy the trucks because you can’t charge the trucks,” said Weeks. “[They have] range issues, battery issues, cost issues, and on and on. It’s just not feasible for people to purchase medium and heavy-duty trucks that are electric at this point.”

But, Green and other environmental advocates say that holding the line on climate policy at the state level has become more important as the Trump administration attempts to roll back key environmental protections designed to transition the country off of fossil fuels. 

“At a time when the federal administration is shirking its responsibilities with respect to environment and climate and environmental justice and health and air pollution, it’s more important than ever that states hold their ground and not over-comply and not bend to the will of the Trump administration until they are forced to do so,” said Green.

Currently, the Trump administration is working on “reconsidering” the clean trucks rule along with two other emissions waivers that Massachusetts has also adopted: the Heavy-duty Omnibus Regulation, which requires manufacturers to sell lower emissions engines for heavy-duty vehicles like trucks, and the Advanced Clean Cars II Regulation, which has a goal of reaching 100 percent zero-emissions vehicle sales by 2035.

“This is a moment where the states should stand up to the federal government rather than doing their work for them,” said Anna Vanderspek, the electric vehicle program director at Green Energy Consumers Alliance. “Let’s force the federal government to go through the [rollback] process, which will likely end up in the courts, so that we don’t weaken the Clean Air Act and its provisions for them.”

Late last year, Massachusetts delayed enforcement of the Heavy-duty Omnibus rule for the model year 2025 and pushed enforcement back to 2026. 

Vehicle emissions from trucks have an outsize impact on public health, according to public health experts. An October analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists showed that the delay in enforcing the Advanced Clean Trucks rule to 2027 will lead to a cost of somewhere between $97.2 and $127.8 million in health impacts from things like emergency room visits and school days lost to asthma in Massachusetts.

The transportation sector accounts for the largest amount of greenhouse gas emissions – about 40 percent – in Massachusetts. Medium and heavy-duty trucks and buses make up about seven percent of the state’s registered vehicles, but contribute a disproportionate 46 percent of nitrogen oxide, 40 percent of fine particulate matter, and 20 percent of global warming emissions, according to a 2021 analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists. 

Doug Brugge, the head of the public health sciences department at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine, said vehicle emissions from trucks that run on fossil fuels lead to many different adverse health outcomes, including respiratory ailments, cardiovascular conditions, and neurological harm.

“Airborne particulate matter is probably the most common and the most serious environmental health concern that we know of, especially for people who live near busy roadways or major highways,” said Brugge. “They will have elevated exposure to these particles. Lower-income, racial or ethnic minorit[ies], and immigrant communities tend to be in areas where these exposures are higher.”

Massachusetts’s move to delay enforcement on Advanced Clean Trucks has environmentalists worried that other states will follow its example, and the benefits of the rule will be kicked back by two years.

Initially, the Healey administration refused to back down and said the rule would go into effect on Jan. 1, 2025, but there was heavy pushback from the trucking industry. State and local agencies faced difficulties in purchasing new vehicles for snowplowing, snow removal, street sweeping, storm response, and other essential uses.

Some flexibility was built into the Advanced Clean Trucks rule through a system of credits to help with compliance. There are ways that manufacturers can get credits for “early-action” before 2025, swap credits with other businesses, or carry forward deficits for up to three years. 

“The government is investing to support this market, and there are clearly scores of models of these vehicles that are working in the field today and are working really well,” said Jason Mathers, the associate vice president at the Environmental Defense Fund. “It is illogical to think that the trucking manufacturers and dealers are so incompetent as to not be able to structure deals with customers who want to purchase these vehicles.”

Mathers said that the minimum percentage of seven or eleven percent is very achievable with the infrastructure and the technology that currently exists.

Rules like Advanced Clean Trucks set the trajectory of the transportation sector market in the state, and delays inject uncertainty into the electric vehicle market, according to Green.

“Even if they continue to plow ahead with other supportive things, there will be something missing in terms of not [enforcing] this rule” for another two years, said Green. “They’re also…bending to the demands of the truck manufacturers and giving power over to the industry, which is not a great look. This will result in there being less zero-emission vehicles on the road at least in the short term.”