ADVERTISEMENT

U.S. Postal Service finalizes plans to purchase mostly gas-powered delivery fleet, defying EPA, White House

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,113
58,289
113
Deplorable:


The U.S. Postal Service finalized plans Wednesday to purchase up to 148,000 gasoline-powered mail delivery trucks, defying Biden administration officials’ objections that the multibillion dollar contract would undercut the nation’s climate goals.
10 steps you can take to lower your carbon footprint
The White House Council on Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency asked the Postal Service this month to reassess its plan to replace its delivery fleet with 90-percent gas-powered trucks and 10-percent electric vehicles, at a cost of as much as $11.3 billion. The contract, orchestrated by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, offers only a 0.4-mile-per-gallon fuel economy improvement over the agency’s current fleet.
Vicki Arroyo, the EPA’s associate administrator for policy, issued a statement calling the Postal Service’s decision a “crucial lost opportunity.”






ADVERTISING


“Purchasing tens of thousands of gasoline-fueled delivery trucks locks USPS into further oil dependence, air pollution, and climate impacts for decades to come, and harms the long-term prospects of our nation’s vital mail provider,” Arroyo said.
President Biden has pledged to transition the federal fleet to clean power, and apart from the military, the Postal Service has more vehicles than any other government agency. It accounts for nearly one-third of federally owned cars and trucks, and environmental and auto industry experts argue that the agency’s stop-and-start deliveries to 161 million addresses six days a week was an ideal use case for electric vehicles.
Federal climate science officials said the Postal Service vastly underestimated the emissions of its proposed fleet of “Next Generation Delivery Vehicles,” or NGDVs, and accused the mail agency of fudging the math of its environmental studies to justify such a large purchase of internal combustion engine trucks.



But DeJoy, a holdover from the Trump administration, has called his agency’s investment in green transportation “ambitious,” even as environmental groups and even other postal leaders have privately questioned it. When DeJoy repeated the characterization at a public meeting of the Postal Service’s governing board earlier in February, his remarks were met with chuckles from the audience.

Environmental advocates assailed the agency’s decision, saying it would lock in decades of climate-warming emissions and worsen air pollution. The Postal Service plans call for the new trucks, built by Oshkosh Defense, to hit the streets in 2023 and remain in service for at least 20 years.
“Right now, putting aside the climate benefits and the air quality benefits, it is a smarter business decision to transition to electric vehicles,” Katherine Garcia, acting director of the Sierra Club's clean transportation campaign, said in an interview. “Given our climate commitments, given our public health commitments, it is completely unacceptable for the USPS to cling to an overwhelmingly fossil fuel fleet.”







“DeJoy’s plans for the postal fleet will drag us back decades with a truck model that gets laughable fuel economy. We may as well deliver the mail with hummers,” said Adrian Martinez, an attorney for the environmental law firm Earthjustice. “We’re not done fighting this reckless decision.”
DeJoy said in a statement that the agency was open to pursuing more electric vehicles if “additional funding — from either internal or congressional sources — becomes available.” But he added that the agency had “waited long enough” for new vehicles.
The White House and EPA had asked the Postal Service to conduct a supplemental environmental impact statement on the new fleet and to hold a public hearing on its procurement plan. The Postal Service rejected those requests: Mark Guilfoil, the agency’s vice president of supply management, said they “would not add value” to the mail service’s analysis.



Now that the Postal Service has finalized it agreement with Oshkosh, environmentalists are expected to file lawsuits challenging it on the grounds that the agency’s environmental review failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. They will probably base their case on the litany of problems Biden administration officials previously identified with the agency’s technical analysis.
The EPA and top White House environmental regulators have accused the mail agency of signing a contract for the new trucks and then using a faulty study to support its decision. Officials said the resulting analysis, which should have been written before a deal was made, relied on incorrect calculations of the new trucks’ greenhouse gas emissions, the cost of fuel and the estimated cost of buying a larger share of electric vehicles.
EPA officials have also criticized the mail agency for basing its analysis of electric vehicles on current charging infrastructure, which is in a nascent stage, and for only considering either shifting to an entirely electric fleet or switching over just 10 percent of its delivery vehicles. The Postal Service’s own analysis showed that about 95 percent of mail carriers’ routes could be electrified.







Regulators and activists had asked the agency to study more alternatives, especially since the agency has said that budget concerns are its main impediment to a cleaner fleet. The administration and lawmakers are considering giving the Postal Service more funding to buy electric vehicles. Biden’s Build Back Better plan, for example, would provide $6 billion for a fleet of 70 percent electric vehicles.
Here's what Biden is doing to tackle climate change
Analyzing more purchasing plans is important, critics say, because the environmental study is supposed to look beyond the fleet’s emissions or the pollution it would cause. It should also look at how and where vehicles will be deployed, argued said Sam Wilson, senior vehicles analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
“What would be reasonable to do would be to have a high-level scenario of 95 percent battery-electric vehicles, which matched [the Postal Service’s] own assumptions,” Wilson said. “Even a 75- or 55-percent analysis would be reasonable.”

 
"Biden administration officials’ objections that the multibillion dollar contract would undercut the nation’s climate goals."

I call total BS on the Biden Administrations objections. Total BS. They haven't developed the technology to safely dispose of the batteries current in use here in the U.S.
 
Will they purchase climate friendly vehicles for all the rural route carriers who use their own vehicles?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Speedway1
"Biden administration officials’ objections that the multibillion dollar contract would undercut the nation’s climate goals."

I call total BS on the Biden Administrations objections. Total BS. They haven't developed the technology to safely dispose of the batteries current in use here in the U.S.

HEY GUYS, HOWIE FELTERSNATCH CALLS BS ON WHAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATIONS OBJECTIVES ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Why? They don't buy vehicles for rural carriers now, do they?
In my neck of the woods rural carriers drive their own cars.

my guess is charging and actual availability to buy the vehicles is a big reason.

this isn’t going to kill anybody. Electric is the future but the transition isn’t going to be that fast.

GM and Ford hype the jell out of EV but you can’t actually buy one from them. They had that Hummer commercial over a year ago and you still can’t buy one.
 
The fact that Dejoy hasn’t been canned over a year into this administration is grounds for a congressional investigation….

C’Mon Joe….I know there is a lot going on and you have to replace board members first or whatever….but delegate a lawyer or two to get it done and bring the papers to you to sign. Who cares how messy it is….
 
The fact that Dejoy hasn’t been canned over a year into this administration is grounds for a congressional investigation….

C’Mon Joe….I know there is a lot going on and you have to replace board members first or whatever….but delegate a lawyer or two to get it done and bring the papers to you to sign. Who cares how messy it is….
Joe doesn't have the authority to can him nor does he have the energy to find someone who can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
This sounds bad, and I want to add this to the list of reasons the current postmaster general needs to be removed, but I could see a lot of legit reasons not to go electric yet. Most post offices probably don't have the infrastructure to support a dozen charging stations (or more) for vehicles. To my knowledge, I haven't seen an electric version of a postal vehicle. They are special made jeeps anyway with the driver on the right side of the vehicle. Even if there are electric versions, I'm betting they are significantly more expensive because of the limited market.

Maybe I'm wrong on these things, but I'd like to see the reasons. We are probably one generation too soon before they switch.
 
This sounds bad, and I want to add this to the list of reasons the current postmaster general needs to be removed, but I could see a lot of legit reasons not to go electric yet. Most post offices probably don't have the infrastructure to support a dozen charging stations (or more) for vehicles. To my knowledge, I haven't seen an electric version of a postal vehicle. They are special made jeeps anyway with the driver on the right side of the vehicle. Even if there are electric versions, I'm betting they are significantly more expensive because of the limited market.

Maybe I'm wrong on these things, but I'd like to see the reasons. We are probably one generation too soon before they switch.
I agree with you on this one but I think the USPS may be able to transition before a generation passes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
This sounds bad, and I want to add this to the list of reasons the current postmaster general needs to be removed, but I could see a lot of legit reasons not to go electric yet. Most post offices probably don't have the infrastructure to support a dozen charging stations (or more) for vehicles. To my knowledge, I haven't seen an electric version of a postal vehicle. They are special made jeeps anyway with the driver on the right side of the vehicle. Even if there are electric versions, I'm betting they are significantly more expensive because of the limited market.

Maybe I'm wrong on these things, but I'd like to see the reasons. We are probably one generation too soon before they switch.
Nah, wait another generation to replace a third of all federal rides and see how much more chaotic our weather patterns are. Truthfully, these rides will be used for longer than 20 years, which is a generation.
Are y’all not embarrassed to see a new fleet, replacing one from the ‘70s, that gets less than 1 MPG better than the old one?
Who is paying off the American public to support this boondoggle?
This is a chance to make a real difference in what our kids will experience in weather patterns, societal migration, food supplies, and many other critical areas.
Don’t settle for this BS. Do better. It is within reach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lucas80
The fact that Dejoy hasn’t been canned over a year into this administration is grounds for a congressional investigation….

C’Mon Joe….I know there is a lot going on and you have to replace board members first or whatever….but delegate a lawyer or two to get it done and bring the papers to you to sign. Who cares how messy it is….
It is frustrating, but one of the reasons America elected Joe Biden is because unlike the Mango Mussolini he doesn't rage tweet against everyone he disagrees with, or lambast them at press events. Or, just flat out do illegal/unethical things and dare someone to hold him accountable.
Biden is following the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkNester
Deplorable:


The U.S. Postal Service finalized plans Wednesday to purchase up to 148,000 gasoline-powered mail delivery trucks, defying Biden administration officials’ objections that the multibillion dollar contract would undercut the nation’s climate goals.
10 steps you can take to lower your carbon footprint
The White House Council on Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency asked the Postal Service this month to reassess its plan to replace its delivery fleet with 90-percent gas-powered trucks and 10-percent electric vehicles, at a cost of as much as $11.3 billion. The contract, orchestrated by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, offers only a 0.4-mile-per-gallon fuel economy improvement over the agency’s current fleet.
Vicki Arroyo, the EPA’s associate administrator for policy, issued a statement calling the Postal Service’s decision a “crucial lost opportunity.”






ADVERTISING


“Purchasing tens of thousands of gasoline-fueled delivery trucks locks USPS into further oil dependence, air pollution, and climate impacts for decades to come, and harms the long-term prospects of our nation’s vital mail provider,” Arroyo said.
President Biden has pledged to transition the federal fleet to clean power, and apart from the military, the Postal Service has more vehicles than any other government agency. It accounts for nearly one-third of federally owned cars and trucks, and environmental and auto industry experts argue that the agency’s stop-and-start deliveries to 161 million addresses six days a week was an ideal use case for electric vehicles.
Federal climate science officials said the Postal Service vastly underestimated the emissions of its proposed fleet of “Next Generation Delivery Vehicles,” or NGDVs, and accused the mail agency of fudging the math of its environmental studies to justify such a large purchase of internal combustion engine trucks.



But DeJoy, a holdover from the Trump administration, has called his agency’s investment in green transportation “ambitious,” even as environmental groups and even other postal leaders have privately questioned it. When DeJoy repeated the characterization at a public meeting of the Postal Service’s governing board earlier in February, his remarks were met with chuckles from the audience.

Environmental advocates assailed the agency’s decision, saying it would lock in decades of climate-warming emissions and worsen air pollution. The Postal Service plans call for the new trucks, built by Oshkosh Defense, to hit the streets in 2023 and remain in service for at least 20 years.
“Right now, putting aside the climate benefits and the air quality benefits, it is a smarter business decision to transition to electric vehicles,” Katherine Garcia, acting director of the Sierra Club's clean transportation campaign, said in an interview. “Given our climate commitments, given our public health commitments, it is completely unacceptable for the USPS to cling to an overwhelmingly fossil fuel fleet.”







“DeJoy’s plans for the postal fleet will drag us back decades with a truck model that gets laughable fuel economy. We may as well deliver the mail with hummers,” said Adrian Martinez, an attorney for the environmental law firm Earthjustice. “We’re not done fighting this reckless decision.”
DeJoy said in a statement that the agency was open to pursuing more electric vehicles if “additional funding — from either internal or congressional sources — becomes available.” But he added that the agency had “waited long enough” for new vehicles.
The White House and EPA had asked the Postal Service to conduct a supplemental environmental impact statement on the new fleet and to hold a public hearing on its procurement plan. The Postal Service rejected those requests: Mark Guilfoil, the agency’s vice president of supply management, said they “would not add value” to the mail service’s analysis.



Now that the Postal Service has finalized it agreement with Oshkosh, environmentalists are expected to file lawsuits challenging it on the grounds that the agency’s environmental review failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. They will probably base their case on the litany of problems Biden administration officials previously identified with the agency’s technical analysis.
The EPA and top White House environmental regulators have accused the mail agency of signing a contract for the new trucks and then using a faulty study to support its decision. Officials said the resulting analysis, which should have been written before a deal was made, relied on incorrect calculations of the new trucks’ greenhouse gas emissions, the cost of fuel and the estimated cost of buying a larger share of electric vehicles.
EPA officials have also criticized the mail agency for basing its analysis of electric vehicles on current charging infrastructure, which is in a nascent stage, and for only considering either shifting to an entirely electric fleet or switching over just 10 percent of its delivery vehicles. The Postal Service’s own analysis showed that about 95 percent of mail carriers’ routes could be electrified.







Regulators and activists had asked the agency to study more alternatives, especially since the agency has said that budget concerns are its main impediment to a cleaner fleet. The administration and lawmakers are considering giving the Postal Service more funding to buy electric vehicles. Biden’s Build Back Better plan, for example, would provide $6 billion for a fleet of 70 percent electric vehicles.
Here's what Biden is doing to tackle climate change
Analyzing more purchasing plans is important, critics say, because the environmental study is supposed to look beyond the fleet’s emissions or the pollution it would cause. It should also look at how and where vehicles will be deployed, argued said Sam Wilson, senior vehicles analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
“What would be reasonable to do would be to have a high-level scenario of 95 percent battery-electric vehicles, which matched [the Postal Service’s] own assumptions,” Wilson said. “Even a 75- or 55-percent analysis would be reasonable.”


Which will make USPS less competitive than private sector deliverers, like Amazon, which will have EV trucks, over the next 30+ years.

And will require the taxpayer to replace all those fuel burning vehicles with billions more $$ in less then a decade to keep up.
 
It needs years to iron out, not just a full overhaul. Amazed at people who think things just happen overnight.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sheahawk
It needs years to iron out, not just a full overhaul. Amazed at people who think things just happens overnight.
I am amazed at people who miss that this is a generational purchase that would have been dumb years ago. .4 more MPG on a fleet that will last for years. Would you do that to your family’s financial future?
This fleet is large enough to truly make a difference in world wide climate concerns, besides being a linchpin in efforts to keep the USPS financially relevant.
 
I am amazed at people who miss that this is a generational purchase that would have been dumb years ago. .4 more MPG on a fleet that will last for years. Would you do that to your family’s financial future?
This fleet is large enough to truly make a difference in world wide climate concerns, besides being a linchpin in efforts to keep the USPS financially relevant.
Irrespective of "climate change", it's locking in inefficiencies for fuel powered vehicles for a few decades.

Private competitors will be able to deliver for less in probably 5-10 years; and that is by design. DeJoy is giving them the key to eliminating USPS for a privatized entity which will have all-electric vehicles.
 
Will they purchase climate friendly vehicles for all the rural route carriers who use their own vehicles?
A lot of the offices that have more then 1 or 2 rural routes have actually already been starting to supply vans for rural routes instead of having carriers use their own vehicles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
Nah, wait another generation to replace a third of all federal rides and see how much more chaotic our weather patterns are. Truthfully, these rides will be used for longer than 20 years, which is a generation.
Are y’all not embarrassed to see a new fleet, replacing one from the ‘70s, that gets less than 1 MPG better than the old one?
Who is paying off the American public to support this boondoggle?
This is a chance to make a real difference in what our kids will experience in weather patterns, societal migration, food supplies, and many other critical areas.
Don’t settle for this BS. Do better. It is within reach.
Do you even think before you post your drivel? Gas mileage? Just watching our local mail person I noticed they idle at every box for about a minute or more then scoot to the next box and repeat. I asked how many deliveries the avg carrier has and was told between 700 - 900 a day. MPG doesn't become a factor with all that stop and go including Idling.
 
Do you even think before you post your drivel? Gas mileage? Just watching our local mail person I noticed they idle at every box for about a minute or more then scoot to the next box and repeat. I asked how many deliveries the avg carrier has and was told between 700 - 900 a day. MPG doesn't become a factor with all that stop and go including Idling.
Shut up. When the gasoline engine is running, it is using fuel, clown.
Shut up.
 
Do you even think before you post your drivel? Gas mileage? Just watching our local mail person I noticed they idle at every box for about a minute or more then scoot to the next box and repeat. I asked how many deliveries the avg carrier has and was told between 700 - 900 a day. MPG doesn't become a factor with all that stop and go including Idling.
So you're saying we should be looking at MPKw.

Great idea.
 
Eventually we will find that DeJoy took a payoff, or will join some board of some company that is profiting from this move after he leaves the USPS.
I said this months ago...Trump would have gotten somebody that he didn't want in this position out pretty damn quickly. The whole country knows DeJoy is trash but he still has that position. This should have been taken care of months ago.
 
It can be done now.

City buses are able to run a day’s route. Most USPS delivery routes could be easily served via EV, saving a massive amount of fuel usage, allowing the purchases to essentially pay for themselves over the vehicle lifespan.

Another big factor is that this large of a fleet converting from imported (Russian) oil would again help position the US as closer to energy independent.
Currently, approx. 7 % of our oil imports come from Russia, giving them huge leverage…
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT