Sean McAlinden, lead author of a new study from the Center for Automotive Research, believes the current 2025 CAFE target will harm the auto industry.

If you think the presidential debate has kicked off some angry debate, that’s nothing compared to the furor generated by the mid-term review of the tough Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards set to phase in between now and 2025.

In fact, some players will get their chance today to express their frustrations – or support – about the looming new standards during the House Energy and Commerce committees midterm review hearing. According to one study, hitting the 54.5 mile per gallon target would cost the country 1.1 million automotive jobs and saddle consumers with significantly higher costs for new vehicles. CAFE proponents, however, dismiss such claims as alarmist and conclude that, if anything, more jobs will be generated while consumers could save billions of dollars on fuel costs.

Who is right? Federal regulators have so far been leaning towards maintaining the targets announced during the first term of the Obama Administration. But it is a definite possibility that the next president could wind up having the final say.

In July, a preliminary report was issued jointly by the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the California Air Resources Board, the first step in a year-long process of examining the CAFE goals set to phase in between 2018 and 2025.

The numbers are, without question, controversial, coming close to doubling the mileage requirements that were in place when President Barack Obama was sworn into office in January 2009. The figures are a bit misleading, however. Officially, manufacturers need to reach 54.5 mpg in less than a decade. But when you factor in adjustments made in testing procedures, credits carmakers can get for things like battery and hydrogen cars, and other factors, the real average will be in the mid- to high-40 mpg range.

Even then, that’s a considerable jump from today considering the window sticker rating of the average new vehicle sold in the U.S. this year has been floating around 25 mpg, according to the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, or UMTRI. And after a decade of generally steady gains, the figure has been relatively flat this year, largely reflecting the massive market shift from passenger cars to SUVs, crossovers, pickups and other light trucks, notes UMTRI.

A sharp jump in fuel prices could move the needle in an upward direction, but few analysts expect that anytime soon. So, automakers are worried they could face serious challenges getting their future products into compliance. They’re already taking a number of steps, such as shifting away from big V-8s to more efficient turbocharged six- and four-cylinder engines, and adding more gears to their transmissions. Switching from steel to lightweight materials, such as aluminum, also will help.

But there’s broad consensus that most vehicles, by the middle of the next decade, will need to use some form of electric propulsion technology, from stop-start all the way up to pure battery-electric. That could be good news for manufacturers like Tesla. But the concern is that this will sharply drive up vehicle prices.

(Lyft founder predicts death of car ownership in large cities by 2025. For more, Click Here.)

In turn, “If the value of fuel savings to the new vehicle buyer falls short of the cost of mandated fuel economy technologies then U.S. automotive sales, production and manufacturing and retail employment will fall with serious consequences for the U.S. economy,” says Sean P. McAlinden, lead author of a new study by the Center for Automotive Research, in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

The CAR report warns that as many as 1.1 million U.S. automotive jobs could be at risk if the CAFE rules aren’t relaxed.

The study doesn’t even take into account the rapid development of autonomous and driverless vehicle technologies that could further reduce new vehicle demand as the cost of ride-sharing makes services like Uber and Lyft more competitive with private vehicle ownership.

But not everyone buys this doom-and-gloom scenario. For one thing, many experts anticipate that today’s cheap gas is more aberration than long-term reality. If they’re right, and prices surge back to $4 a gallon or more, the savings from high-mileage vehicles for consumers could be huge.

“Maintaining robust fuel economy standards helps ensure that consumers can keep transportation costs down,” says Shannon Baker–Branstetter, energy policy counsel for Consumers Union, the policy and mobilization arm of Consumer Reports.

(Click Here for more on Uber’s autonomous test program.)

“Automakers have made great progress in meeting, and in many cases beating, standards for today – all while maintaining record sales and profits,” she says, in response to the draft Technical Assessment Report the government released in July. “We want to see this progress continue through 2025 so that consumers can benefit from fuel savings and increased consumer choice.”

Proponents contend that forecasts, such as the one from CAR, have repeatedly overstated the cost of technology needed to improve fuel economy. Advocates point to the ongoing decline in battery drive systems — in particular the plans by both General Motors and Tesla to launch mainstream electric models with ranges of at least 200 miles for less than $40,000.

But critics remain unconvinced. CAR used a variety of scenarios to come up with its gloomy forecast, and only one had a positive result: with gas at $4.64 a gallon, and with the cost of getting 54.5 mpg adding a mere $2,000 to the price of a vehicle. The other options resulted in major job losses and a decline in annual U.S. sales of as much as 3 million vehicles.

“An important conclusion of this study is the overwhelming and direct importance of fuel prices in forecasting the economic effects of the 2025 fuel economy mandates,” writes McAlinden.

(With autonomous guidelines, feds take step toward transportation revolution. Click Here for details.)

The EPA and other government regulators plan to wrap up their own analysis by mid-2017. That would take them into a new administration and, possibly, a new Congress. Politics thus could play as much a role in determining the mileage of mid-decade models as science.