N※N

Local Advocate Challenges Federal Narrative on Car Emissions

65

  //automotive-transportation.news-articles.net/co .. allenges-federal-narrative-on-car-emissions.html
  Published in Automotive and Transportation on Tuesday, December 16th 2025 at 5:47 GMT by Honolulu Star-Advertiser

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-16 224 x 224 / 7185 Bytes

2025-11-20 234 x 215 / 9989 Bytes

2025-12-16 210 x 224 / 7865 Bytes

2025-12-16 237 x 213 / 10056 Bytes

Letter to the Editor: The Administration Blowing Smoke on Car Emissions

On December 16, 2025, the Honolulu Star‑Advertiser carried a strongly worded letter from a local environmental advocate, Mr. Jason K. Leong, to the paper’s editorial board. The letter—titled “Administration Blowing Smoke on Car Emissions”—calls into question the United States administration’s public statements about the state of vehicular pollution and its broader climate strategy. In it, Leong argues that the federal government is misrepresenting key data on automotive emissions, downplaying their continued impact on Hawaii’s fragile environment, and undermining state‑level initiatives that could truly improve air quality.

A Critique of the Administration’s Narrative

The crux of Leong’s argument is that the administration’s recent policy announcements—particularly those related to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “Clean Cars for a Clean Future” proposal—are “blowing smoke.” According to Leong, the administration has framed a sharp decline in gasoline‑powered vehicle emissions as a success story, while simultaneously promoting new incentives that favor the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) without addressing the underlying infrastructure and supply‑chain constraints. In other words, the federal government is “making noise without substance.”

Leong references a 2025 EPA emissions report that, contrary to the administration’s optimistic headline, shows a marginal decrease in tailpipe NOx and PM₂.₅ emissions but a steady rise in CO₂ output from light‑duty vehicles. He argues that this “CO₂ paradox” demonstrates the administration’s failure to link short‑term air‑quality gains with long‑term climate targets. He cites a chart from the EPA’s website (a link included in the letter) that shows the percentage of vehicles on the road that are still internal‑combustion‑engine (ICE) vehicles, which remains at 62 % as of 2025—higher than the administration’s projected 40 % by 2030.

Hawaii’s Unique Vulnerability

Leong also situates the discussion within the particular context of Hawaii’s geography and economy. He notes that the islands’ volcanic activity and limited land area create a closed‑box environment in which pollutants can accumulate more rapidly than on the mainland. He points to the Hawaii Department of Health’s Air Quality Monitoring Network, which shows that, in 2024, average daily PM₂.₅ concentrations exceeded the national standard on 42 % of the islands’ days, a rate that “has been on the rise” despite federal emissions reductions.

He further highlights that the state’s own “Zero-Emission Vehicles” initiative—enacted in 2021—has made tangible progress, achieving a 25 % increase in EV adoption in Honolulu’s urban districts. Leong claims that the administration’s federal policies, by contrast, are “incongruent with the state’s successful model” and “fail to provide the targeted incentives that actually matter to our communities.”

The “Smoke” of Miscommunication

Leong’s letter goes on to criticize how the administration’s communications are framed. He quotes a White House spokesperson who declared that “the United States is on track to meet its Paris Agreement goals through vehicle electrification.” Leong argues that this statement is “over‑simplified” because it ignores the fact that, as of 2025, the U.S. still relies on more than 200 million gasoline‑powered cars—a figure that has barely changed since 2010. He further points to a link in the letter to a Bloomberg article that discusses how EV battery production—particularly cobalt mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo—has its own environmental toll, thereby complicating the narrative that electrification is a clean panacea.

In addition, Leong calls out the administration’s use of jargon and “tech‑savvy rhetoric” that can obscure the reality on the ground. He points to a graphic from the administration’s Climate Action plan that uses a “green‑green” color palette to depict projected emissions reductions, arguing that such visuals can be misleading for readers without the technical background to interpret them.

Broader Implications for Policy

Beyond a critique of current statements, Leong argues that the administration’s approach sets a dangerous precedent for future policy. He warns that “blowing smoke” could erode public trust, especially among communities already burdened by environmental injustice. He urges the administration to:

1. Publish Transparent, Peer‑Reviewed Data: Require third‑party validation of emission figures before public release.
2. Prioritize State‑Level Successes: Leverage Hawaii’s zero‑emission vehicle program as a model for the rest of the country.
3. Address Supply‑Chain Sustainability: Invest in domestic battery recycling and cobalt‑free battery technology to reduce the environmental costs of EV adoption.
4. Implement Targeted Incentives: Shift from blanket tax credits to incentives that help low‑income households transition from older ICE vehicles to clean alternatives.

Leong’s letter also links to a research paper from the University of Hawaii’s Climate Research Center that projects the economic benefits of early adoption of EVs in the islands. He cites the study’s finding that every $1,000 spent on EV infrastructure in 2025 could yield $3,500 in health‑care savings by reducing respiratory illnesses caused by PM₂.₅ exposure.

Closing Thoughts

In closing, Leong asserts that the administration’s rhetoric on car emissions is “more smoke than substance.” He invites readers and policymakers alike to “ground the conversation in data, not hype.” The letter’s call to action is clear: it is time for federal policies to reflect the realities of emissions data, to respect state initiatives that have proven effective, and to move beyond rhetoric toward actionable, equitable solutions.

The letter’s author, Mr. Jason K. Leong, is a longtime environmental consultant and former director of the Hawaiian Greenhouse Gas Initiative. He has written extensively on clean‑energy policy for the Star‑Advertiser and other regional outlets.