Would you be willing to pay more for gas if your car could be a little less annoying?

If you’ve ever noticed a gas-powered engine shutting off during a red light, that’s the start-stop feature. Its adoption has skyrocketed since 2012, when the Environmental Protection Agency started subsidizing the feature with credits to manufacturers.

But under the Trump administration, the agency is threatening to eliminate those credits. In a post on X, the agency’s administrator, Lee Zeldin, said that start-stop technology was just a “climate participation trophy” for companies, and that “everyone hates it.”

Though the technology has its skeptics, research says it does effectively cut fuel consumption and emissions. Most studies on start-stop technology show real-world fuel use reductions of 5 to 10 percent, depending on driving patterns. One study found that start-stop begins to save fuel when the engine is off for as little as seven seconds during an idling period.

But if the E.P.A. ends its credits, could it spell doom for the feature? And where would that leave automakers and drivers?

Just how annoying is start-stop?

Most of the complaints fall in a few categories. Some skeptics believe that it doesn’t really save on gas, or that it adds wear and tear to the engine. Others worry about not having control of the car, or about having the air-conditioning turn off with the engine on hot days.