If you think the federal government’s fuel standards are onerous and unrealistic, perhaps this headline will change your mind: “Report says U.S. vehicles on target for 2025 fuel economy goals.” That’s according to an Associated Press article appearing in The Medina-Gazette. Meanwhile, if you think the federal government’s fuel standards are easily reachable and prove why the EPA should be making business decisions, perhaps this headline will change your mind: “US says fuel economy likely won’t meet 2025 targets.” You’re not delusional. That’s according to the same Associated Press article, only this version appears on the website of News 3 Las Vegas. Same report, two different conclusions. Welcome to the baffling world of government affairs!

Here’s the rundown to help explain the variance: “Under standards set in 2012,” the AP explains, “automakers’ fleets were expected to get an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.” But there’s a catch. “That’s not the real-world mileage vehicles will get,” the AP reveals. “[I]t includes credits for things like more efficient air conditioning systems. The real-world mileage is closer to 40 miles per gallon.” In other words, unbeknownst to most drivers, the standards are inflated; cars aren’t actually going to average 54.5 mpg. But hey, if artificially adjusting the measurements makes you feel better about your carbon footprint, all the better, right? (More on that below.)

Here’s another problem: “As gas prices have fallen, truck and SUV sales have risen,” the AP continues. “That means the 54.5 mpg standard may no longer be realistic, since automakers are selling more trucks and SUVs and fewer cars than the government anticipated in 2012.” Consequently, the feds this week reduced its 2025 forecast to 50-52.6 mpg with additional changes possible. Democrats won’t admit it, but the government bet against oil. And it lost.

Back to “real-world mileage” claim of 40 mpg. Even this is erroneous. According to an article in Wired Magazine (H/T: Hot Air), “[T]he EPA’s test to make sure automakers are hitting their CAFE [corporate average fuel economy] numbers — the sole federal, legal requirement that cars get more efficient — probably doesn’t work. At all. … [W]hen it comes to CAFE, the system is bonkers. When the EPA tests for CAFE compliance, it still uses that laughable two-cycle system. It’s got no choice: The 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act specifies that ‘the Administrator shall use the same procedures for passenger automobiles the Administrator used for model year 1975.’ In other words: When it comes to enforcing the only law [that] demands cars get better for consumers’ wallets and lungs, the EPA tests like your grandfather.”

As Hot Air retorts, “The EPA is great at making up rules and issuing mandates. … [I]f you want to know what the actual mileage you’re getting from your car is, go back to keeping a notebook in your glove box, jotting down your mileage and how much gas you put in your car. Then you’ll have a real answer and it probably won’t be anywhere near what the EPA is telling you.” Put bluntly, the latter headline is most accurate: “US says fuel economy likely won’t meet 2025 targets.”

Which brings up a final point. What Volkswagen did was clearly wrong, and the company should face penalties for deceiving customers by inflating fuel efficiency numbers. But how is what it did any different from what the EPA is doing?