Draft EPA and NHTSA Response to Interagency Comments on Upstream GHG Emissions 

Draft Preamble Section II.B.4.a 

a. Fuel Production-Related Upstream GHG Issues 

This section discusses how the agencies plan to address the issue of upstream emissions, 

in the context of a program designed to provide consumers with information that will be useful 

when purchasing a vehicle. The agencies’ approach takes into account the limited amount of 

information that can be provided on a label, the great deal of required information that must be 

presented on the label, and the ability to provide additional and comprehensive information in a 

consumer friendly format on a web site. This discussion focuses on, but is not limited to (for 

example, the discussion also touches on the use of renewable fuels), the advanced technology 

vehicles that use electricity from the grid to power the vehicle, such as the electric vehicles and 

plug-in hybrids that are expected to enter the market in larger numbers in the coming years. 

The agencies recognize that all automotive fuels have upstream GHG emissions 

associated with the production and distribution of the fuel used by the motor vehicle. This 

includes gasoline, diesel, and other fuels such as natural gas, electricity, and renewable biofuels. 

They also recognize that a significant number of consumers may want access to information on 

the total GHG emissions associated with the operation of their vehicles, not just the tailpipe only 

emissions, and that access to such information can help consumers understand the full amount of 

GHG emissions that result from operation of the vehicle. However, the agencies emphasize that 

developing such information and providing it to consumers in a manner that is both accurate and 

useful for the consumer will raise a number of challenging issues that are discussed below. 

For example, while a full lifecycle evaluation could potentially include an evaluation of a 

comprehensive set of GHG and energy impacts associated with both the vehicle (extraction and 

processing of materials, energy used in assembly, distribution, use, and disposal, etc.), and the 

fuel (feedstock extraction, feedstock transport, fuel processing, fuel transport, indirect effects, 

etc.), even the more limited accounting for upstream GHG emissions from production and 

distribution of the fuel, including electricity, is a complex challenge. Unlike fuel economy that 

has been the central metric on labels in the past, EPA does not and cannot measure upstream 

GHG emissions in its vehicle testing. However, modeling can be performed to assist in 

estimating these emissions. Relying on modeling in developing upstream GHG emissions values 

would need to be done carefully to avoid inaccuracy and consumer confusion. For example, 

upstream GHG emissions from electricity generation will vary significantly in the future, based 

on the different fuels used at generating stations, by as much as an order of magnitude between 

coal and non-fossil feedstocks. Additionally, while the Agency has undertaken extensive 

lifecycle modeling of biofuels for the Renewable Fuel Standard rulemaking in response to the 

requirements of the Energy Independence and Security Act, that assessment was done in the 

context of the particular mix of biofuels required nationally in 2022 by the Act. Applying that 

analysis to renewable fuel used in a particular vehicle at a particular time raises many challenges. 

1
One overriding consideration is whether the agencies would provide a single, national 

value for upstream GHG emissions from electricity generation or different values customized for 

various regions of the country.1

 For individual owners, a single national value would generally 

not be accurate, and the individual would need access to additional information, such as regional 

values, to evaluate the impact of their specific vehicle.2 In addition, the agencies would have to 

determine whether to use average or marginal (i.e., reflecting that increased vehicle demand 

might change the overall mix of electricity sources) upstream GHG emissions factors, and if the 

marginal approach is used, whether to assume all nighttime charging or a mix of daytime and 

nighttime charging. Finally, another major consideration for the web site is whether to base 

upstream GHG emissions values on today's electricity markets or on projected changes in the 

electricity market that might occur by 2020 or some other year since vehicles produced in the 

next few years will remain in the fleet for 15 or 20 years or more. Some states have already 

passed legislation that could require major changes in how electricity is produced in those states 

in the future, and Congress has considered landmark legislation as well, and it is clear that the 

question of how electricity will be produced in the future is a very fluid issue. Additionally, with 

respect to lifecycle emissions from biofuels, as a result of the Energy Independence and Security 

Act biofuel mandates, the agencies expect the amount of biofuel in the transportation fuel market 

to increase significantly over time, and the contribution of feedstocks to change over that time as 

well. Information that addresses lifecycle emissions of biofuels would need to take these 

considerations into account. 

The agencies believe that all of these factors can be appropriately addressed by providing 

a variety of information on a website, which can go into much more depth and be changed and 

updated whenever needed. In addition, we unfortunately do not have a full lifecycle analysis 

sufficient to draw from for labeling purposes across the full range of vehicles and fuels. The data 

reported to EPA on emissions from upstream fuel production varies across fuel types, is much 

more detailed for gasoline production, and it would be difficult to represent emissions from 

energy generation on a national label in a way that is both useful and accurate for consumers, 

given regional variations, how generation within regions is dispatched, and access to green 

power purchases. 

 Therefore, EPA and NHTSA are proposing that the label should limit itself to tailpipe 

only emissions and include a more complete discussion on energy generation and lifecycle 

analysis on the webpage at this time. We believe that this approach is sufficiently informative to 

consumers. It also allows us the opportunity to more fully discuss GHG emissions associated 

with energy generation for alternative vehicles, as well as upstream fuel production (gasoline and 

biofuels). For example, a web site could provide calculator tools that could reflect regional 

variations in the GHG emissions associated with electricity generation as well as to use national 

averages. Additionally, a web site could provide information on the projected fuel lifecycle 

impacts associated with biofuels. The web page could be updated over time as the mix of 

electricity fuel sources and biofuels changes. This could help the consumer understand over the 

                                                           

1

 See http://www.eia.doe.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electricity_in_the_united_states for an overview of the national U.S. electric 

power industry net generation by fuel type. 

2

 Regional values could be provided on a web site. EPA has a website (http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/how-clean.html) on 

which consumers can enter their zip code and find out what fuel mix is used to produce the electricity they use.

2
lifetime of their vehicles how their upstream emissions impacts might be changing. At this point 

in time the web is the better place, compared to the label, to address these complex issues. 

This is consistent with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended by 

the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, which states that NHTSA must 

require vehicles to be labeled with information “reflecting an automobile’s performance ... [with 

respect to] greenhouse gas ... emissions ... of the automobile.”3

 NHTSA believes that a 

reasonable interpretation of this provision is that only GHG emissions directly from the vehicle 

itself are required for the label. Those would be the direct “automobile’s performance” with 

respect to “greenhouse gas emissions.” NHTSA believes that it would be reasonable to interpret 

the statutory language such that the required label information on GHG emissions would include 

information on the upstream GHG emissions associated with electricity or other fuels used by the 

vehicle, insofar as the upstream GHG emissions are indirectly related to the automobile’s GHG 

performance. 

We invite comment on the proposal to provide such upstream information on a web site. 

We encourage commenters to be as specific as possible with any recommendations on how to 

address upstream GHG emissions on the web. For example, the agencies invite comment on 

whether information on upstream emissions should be provided on websites? In general, if 

information on upstream emissions is provided on a web site, what information? The agencies 

specifically invite comment on how to address upstream emissions associated with the electricity 

used to power the advanced technology vehicles starting to enter commerce, electric vehicle and 

plug-in hybrid vehicles. The agencies also invite comment on how to address lifecycle 

emissions from biofuels on a web site. Should upstream emissions be provided specifically for 

the emissions associated with the combustion of fuel to produce electricity? Should such 

upstream emissions be determined on a regional or a national basis? Should upstream emissions 

be provided as a relative comparison to a gasoline or diesel fuel, the current predominant fuels? 

For the convenience of commenters, we have prepared the table below as an illustrative example 

of one simplified way that some upstream emissions information could be accounted for on a 

web site, based on certain assumptions.4

 Consistent with the discussion above, it is important to 

emphasize that the tailpipe + upstream values in the table below are based on 2005 national 

average electricity upstream GHG emissions, and could be very different for certain regions of 

the country today and for the nation in the future if there are major changes in the mix of 

methods used to generate electricity or in the GHG emissions associated with its generation. 

Proposal--TailpipeOnly Tailpipe + Upstream

                                                           

3

 49 U.S.C. 32908(g)(1)(A)(i). 49 U.S.C.32908(g)(1)(A)(ii) also refers to GHG “emissions of automobiles,” and further requires a designation of 

automobiles “with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions over the useful life of the vehicles.” 4

    The key assumptions underlying the illustrative numbers in the right-hand column are that:EV and PHEVs all assumed to use 200 Watt-hours 

per mile when operating on electricity over the EPA test and assuming a 30% range (43% electricity consumption) shortfall from test to road. 

• PHEV 1 assumed to operate on electricity 50% of the time. 

• PHEV 2 assumed to operate on electricity 25% of the time. 

• Uses 2005 nationwide average value of 0.642 grams of upstream GHG per Watt-hour at powerplant (adjusted to include GHG 

emissions from feedstock extraction, transportation, and processing as well) from MY2012-2016 light-duty vehicle GHG final rule (75 

Federal Register 25437). 

• Assumes typical 7% electricity grid transmission losses. 

• Uses 2250 grams upstream GHG per gallon of gasoline.

3
4

Vehicle CO2/mile CO2/mile 

EV 0 197 

PHEV 1 89 210 

PHEV 2 133 217 

Toyota Prius HEV 178 224 

Honda Civic HEV 212 266 

Honda Insight HEV 217 273 

Ford Fusion HEV 228 287 

In general, for purposes of providing information on the web, the agencies invite 

comment on the appropriate metrics to use and the specific suggestions for content and format, if 

appropriate. The agencies also request comment on which web resources it should prioritize for 

development that would provide the most useful information to consumers. 

With respect to the label itself, the agencies are requesting comment on an alternative 

option for the label for EVs and PHEVs that is under serious consideration, similar to a coproposal. This alternative would further highlight that the label includes tailpipe only 

information. Under this alternative, the EV label would continue to reflect the "0" CO2g/mile 

number currently displayed on the co-proposed labels (Figures III-2, III-10) but the label would 

be modified by adding either a symbol or an asterisk and explanatory text which states, "The 

only C02 emissions are from electricity generation". Likewise, the agencies would modify the 

co-proposed PHEV labels (Figures III-3, III-6, III-1, III-12) inserting either a symbol or asterisk 

next to the current CO2g/mile number displayed with the following explanatory text, “Does not 

include CO2 from electricity generation.” This alternative may provide more clarity for 

purchasers by more explicitly indicating that the CO2 emissions from generation of electricity 

are not reflected in the CO2 numbers on the label. The agencies request comment on this 

alternative option. 

In addition, the agencies invite comment on a different approach which would include 

information on lifecycle emissions on the label. In view of the above discussion, we are not sure 

what information, if any, would be appropriate and seek ideas from the public. We also ask for 

comment on how each of the challenges outlined above for consideration for a web site could be 

addressed if considered for a label. In addition, commenters should take into consideration the 

limited amount of information that can be provided on a label. NHTSA specifically invites 

comment on the effects of incorporating into a label additional information concerning upstream 

emissions from vehicle production and fuel production and distribution.