Australia lags behind on emission control

[jpd80]

Sounds like the knives are out for our local Falcon and Commodore under
the guise of improved fuel economy and better international CO2 figures..

Australia lags behind on emission control
Link
The pressure is mounting for a government-mandated ceiling on carbon emissions from cars.

Australia's car fleet remains one of the world's big polluters, with average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions roughly 40 per cent worse than Europe and Japan.

Recently released figures show that the average CO2 output of a new passenger car sold in Australia is 197.5 grams of CO2 per kilometre, compared with 145.9g/km in Europe and 130g/km in Japan.

Some of that discrepancy can be traced to Europe's preference for diesel-powered passenger cars and the popularity of tiny "kei" cars in Japan but the rest is likely to be the result of Australians' long-standing love affair with large, thirsty cars.

While the comparison with Europe is unflattering, Australia still compares well with the US, which has an average CO2 output of 255g/km.

But the CO2 figures put pressure on the federal government to come up with a mandatory emissions target for vehicles, rather than the existing voluntary target.

The Department of Transport is believed to be leaning towards a mandatory target but any decision is some months away.

The department is about to release a regulatory impact statement (RIS) on the topic, responding to a working group recommendation for mandatory CO2 targets.

Europe has set an aggressive compulsory average CO2 output target of 120g/km by 2015. The US, Japan and China also have mandatory targets for reducing CO2 output for cars.

Australia's voluntary code, agreed between the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) and the government, has drawn criticism from the Greens and environmental groups.

The Greens deputy leader, Senator Christine Milne, says the RIS is overdue and the government is dragging the chain on the issue of vehicle emissions in an attempt to protect the local car industry, which builds large six-cylinder sedans, utility vehicles and four-wheel-drives.

"Australians have the right to know, before the election, what the government plans to do to help them get more efficient cars in the face of rising oil prices, the climate crisis and peak oil. Is the government going to finally introduce mandatory vehicle fuel efficiency standards?" she says.

Milne claims the government is aiming at a "woeful" target of 195g/km by 2015, well short of overseas standards.

"This might be what car and oil companies want but it is no help to all those Australians facing rising oil prices and long commutes without convenient public transport alternatives," she says.

"Not only are emissions of the Australian car fleet far behind where they should be but cars manufactured in Australia perform particularly poorly.

"All of the cars manufactured locally have emissions far in excess of the industry's already-lax voluntary target. Australian manufacturers are building cars that Australians don't want.

"In 2007, only about a quarter of the cars made here were sold to private buyers - the rest went to government [many of whom are trying to support local manufacturers] and business fleets."

But a spokesman for the Department of Transport says the Greens' criticisms are "hypocritical" given their role in the scrapping of the carbon trading scheme.

"The criticism from the Greens is a bit rich given they voted with Tony Abbott's Liberals last December to block this government's efforts to put a price on carbon," he says.

The chief executive of the FCAI, Andrew McKellar, says the industry has "an open mind" about mandatory emission targets but argues the voluntary targets have worked well so far.

"We're not dragging the chain. There's enormous investment going on," he says.

Meanwhile, stable fuel prices have seen fleet, government and private buyers flock back to thirsty 4WDs.

In the first five months of this year, sales of the biggest, thirstiest 4WDs in the market are up by more than 25 per cent, while Toyota's petrol-electric Prius is one of the few cars in Australia to record a drop in sales (down 22 per cent).

Sales of the Nissan Patrol are up 28 per cent, Toyota LandCruiser sales were up 27 per cent, Mitsubishi Pajero sales grew 67 per cent and Toyota Prado sales rose 53 per cent. Overall, sales of SUVs are up by a third this year.

[Franco Cozzo]

Australia lags behind in everything, technology is a big one.

Who cares about emissions, lets get the things that directly effect our lives NOW, up to scratch.

Also WHY do we compare ourselves to overseas all the time? We're Australians, not Europeans. Oh the Europeans do this, oh the Japanese do that? Last time I recalled, we live in Australia. How about we do the things that suit our market, so what if we make cars that pollute and use heaps of fuel, thats what we buy and enjoy.

[GS608]

[pottery beige]

Other than giving the professional whingers something to whinge about.... who really gives a rats bum..

[dannyhilton]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Who cares about emissions, lets get the things that directly effect our lives NOW, up to scratch. Also WHY do we compare ourselves to overseas all the time?

You see their is a key flaw in your theory. To change today, we need to change tomorrow. Making changes without a well thought plan normally results in the changes falling over and things becoming worce. And we compare our country to others because it's the logical thing to do. Would you rather Australia to elephants? Progress doesn't happen comparing elephants buddy.

While I'm not a massive believer in the whole 'Global Warming' theory, there are elements that I can relate to. Our world is going to warm naturally regardless of is we pollute or not, just like our world warmed from the last Ice Age, and how our world cooled from the last stage in our ever evolving cycles. But we are adding to Global Warming. The world is changing, just like it has changed before, but it's happening at a bloody fast pace this time. Comments like the one above don't help anyone. The fact is we could all be helping in our own little way, and saying the government should be doing it for us is stupidity. They are useless, so how about we make our own little steps and let's educate each other about what lobal Warming actually is.

[FGII-XR6]

lets have a big cruise to support the global warming cause

[SteveJH]

Doesnt the average car in Euroe have 4 cylinders? And don't they pay double the price we do for petrol?

Similarly, the US pays half the price we do for petrol, and isnt the best selling "car" in the US some sort of massive *truck*?

[chevypower]

fuel consumption and exhaust emissions are two different things

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by SteveJH

Doesnt the average car in Euroe have 4 cylinders? And don't they pay double the price we do for petrol?

Similarly, the US pays half the price we do for petrol, and isnt the best selling "car" in the US some sort of massive *truck*?

Yep comfortably in between diesel Fiesta and F150 truck sits our Falcon...

I'm all for letting the market decide which cars it wants depending on the cost of fuel and income of buyers.

Australia normally lags on emissions and technology advances for good reasons,
one of them is to let the rules and technology to meet them mature and become
financially viable. I don't see why we should race off at the lead when Europe
and the US are still deciding where they go beyond 2016.

The big hurdle will be CO2 reductions and for a given vehicle size, this can only be
achieved by burning less fuel by reducing power or weight or both.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

so what if we make cars that pollute and use heaps of fuel, thats what we buy and enjoy.

I’m sure Ford marketing would love this....

[ltd]

Eco-mentalists really grind my gears.
When the hell did we give up being men and start becoming a bunch of nancy-boy, hippy vegans so concerned and consumed with mother Gaia?
This is the biggest load of crap I have read (even bigger than when I was forced to read Kevin Rudds childs book to a mates niece).

Facts are, C02 is plant food. Plants use it up, photosynthesise and prosper. The world produces more food and we end up alleviating some of the starvation in the world.
Further, WTF is wrong with us getting a little warmer should this flawed science of global fearmongering....... errr.... warming take place? Didn't all the proponents of it suggesting melting ice and sea levels 100 metres higher than now just all buy coastal properties?

In the name of CO2 I've decided I am gonna buy a F250 and mod the ever loving crap out of the powerstroke so it not only goes hard, but blows columns of black smoke.

[UNR8D]

LOL, yea ok, ill believe that when they show the CO2 vs per 100,000 population and see if we are still the biggest polluters, they might have more efficient cars, but they travel FAR less and have alot more population.

and how can they be saying that car manufactures would/could be happy? we have a 1800kg falcon that is capable of Camry fuel economy?... they have gone mad.

LTD that post is 100% my feelings as well.

[fg_nitro]

Originally Posted by ltd

In the name of CO2 I've decided I am gonna buy a F250 and mod the ever loving crap out of the powerstroke so it not only goes hard, but blows columns of black smoke.

Yeah plenty of Utoob vids on that very topic.

You know what that story is Alluding too dont you? TAX

[SVTVNM]

We'll people be prepared to "bend over and take it" cause it will soon be impossible IMO to afford anything over a 4cyl unless you are on a 100k+ salary because it will cost an arm and a leg to register and keep running because it will be seen as politically incorrect to drive a 6 or 8 down the track. My opinion is probably a bit excesive but it really annoys me because I'm certain there will come a point were it will be impssible to own more than one V8 because of all this ECO crap, and I know i'm not the only one in this situation. RANT over!

[castellan]

These are just "figures".
But in reality the commodore & falcon just need to lose some weight.
And if we got rid of red lights in the citys and had over pass and under pass systems we would save on a lot of wasted CO2.
The gov could tax rego on weight & emissions.
I am sure that in some scenarios, that the common belief that a 4 cyl verse 6 & V8 is that the 4 cyl will always win, is false.

[vztrt]

Its funny when Australia is compared to other nations in terms of CO2. The output is a smidge on a global scale. China and India are where the biggest CO2 threats are coming from. Yet the sky is falling because were not putting bigger strain on an Automotive industry to push a change that will make little difference.

[UNR8D]

Amber lights on flash after 11pm *similar to in the states and some euro countries*, countdown timers on traffic lights, Less speed limit changes for no apparent reason would be a good start to saving CO2 with what we already have.

more to the point just have a genuine effort to move to solar energy, and a decent rebate system for people contributing to putting renewable power back on the grid would make a more size able difference than any 2% change in CO2 emissions of a brand new FG/VE.

[Road_Warrior]

Australia's cars are cleaner now than ever before...it's just the Greens trying to stir sh-t up (as usual). Start getting rid of these coal fired power stations and start using other energy sources for domestic electricity if you're that concerned about emissions in Australia...

More to the point, Ford, Holden and Toyota all offer 'clean' fuel options on their locally made volume sellers so it just shows that all they are interested in is putting down Australian industry (again) just for a quick attention grab. Douchebags.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by UNR8D

Amber lights on flash after 11pm *similar to in the states and some euro countries*, countdown timers on traffic lights, Less speed limit changes for no apparent reason would be a good start to saving CO2 with what we already have.

more to the point just have a genuine effort to move to solar energy, and a decent rebate system for people contributing to putting renewable power back on the grid would make a more size able difference than any 2% change in CO2 emissions of a brand new FG/VE.

Agree, just allow people to make sensible choices with available vehicles and
proper road planning to avoid congestion and unnecessary fuel wastage.
There's a lot that could be done there rather than clamping on more emissions targets.

A lot of countries in Asia have adopted Euro 4 this year including China,
I would rather see us tag our emission strategies to Asian countries and
follow their leads, after all we may be exporting to them....

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Its funny when Australia is compared to other nations in terms of CO2. The output is a smidge on a global scale. China and India are where the biggest CO2 threats are coming from. Yet the sky is falling because were not putting bigger strain on an Automotive industry to push a change that will make little difference.

Yeah I know this a little off topic but maybe a Tree Hugger will see it and realise that as vztrt mentioned, OZ is well down in the pollution race.

Enlarged versions of this pic are here..... http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=1438

[chevypower]

I don't know why people have a problem with increasing emissions standards? What harm is it doing? What would it be like if we were all driving 7 litre V8s with carburetors and running them on leaded fuel? Exhaust emissions does more than just cause this long-term, never happening global warming.
Plus there is the economic benefit of developing better cars that are cleaner, each generation. Keeping people employed, that is always important. I just don't know why people are having a cry about something that has so many benefits. We still have V8s, they are just cleaner.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by chevypower

I don't know why people have a problem with increasing emissions standards? What harm is it doing? What would it be like if we were all driving 7 litre V8s with carburetors and running them on leaded fuel? Exhaust emissions does more than just cause this long-term, never happening global warming.
Plus there is the economic benefit of developing better cars that are cleaner, each generation. Keeping people employed, that is always important. I just don't know why people are having a cry about something that has so many benefits. We still have V8s, they are just cleaner.

Emission standards are increasing in a proper timely fashion, this means car companies can plan and get their range right. If you read the article the gripe is that it should be reduced dramatically in quick time (obviously thought up by a person who has no idea about the engineering and testing process).

[mrbaxr6t]

this stuff really makes me wonder see way back when our farming methods were brutal on the environment here is a highly cutback version of the method : man finds densely forested area, man starts fire and moves upwind man lets fire burn till it stops man then uses highly fertile post fire ground to grow things, once land is no longer fertile man repeats this process.
Now I have read that this farming method was responsible for making sixfold more co2 per head of human population than the way we do things today, the ways of old before we understood (or thought we did) were major kickstarter to this whole planet changing course of events - Now I am not saying that the way we do things today is the best way or that there isn't room for improvement but we have come a heck of a long way just the same as fuel efficiency and emissions have come a long way since the invention of the internal combustion engine. Whining for something better without looking backward results in never enjoying anything because it is never good enough we need to look at how much better things are today than they were even 20 years ago.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by chevypower

I don't know why people have a problem with increasing emissions standards? What harm is it doing? What would it be like if we were all driving 7 litre V8s with carburetors and running them on leaded fuel? Exhaust emissions does more than just cause this long-term, never happening global warming.
Plus there is the economic benefit of developing better cars that are cleaner, each generation. Keeping people employed, that is always important. I just don't know why people are having a cry about something that has so many benefits. We still have V8s, they are just cleaner.

I don't think people have a problem with it. but they don't like listening to the hype or spin.
And there was nothing wrong with leaded fuel. more to the point unleaded was far worse for the environment. but that's now better because we have have E10.
Unleaded was poisoning under ground water and far worse for people's health then leaded.
No one could breath in the lead. and its only the cat converter did not like the lead.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by castellan

I don't think people have a problem with it. but they don't like listening to the hype or spin.

I just feel like sometimes there is just as much spin on the other side, I think (un)common sense is found somewhere in the middle of the two extremes, as with most things.

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by mrbaxr6t

this stuff really makes me wonder see way back when our farming methods were brutal on the environment here is a highly cutback version of the method : man finds densely forested area, man starts fire and moves upwind man lets fire burn till it stops man then uses highly fertile post fire ground to grow things, once land is no longer fertile man repeats this process.

Isn't this still happening to the Amazon?

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by chevypower

fuel consumption and exhaust emissions are two different things

But one usually relates to the other. Burn more petrol than another type of vehicle and its more than likely that the emissions will be higher.

If the greens had their way and Euro 5 was introduced asap then half the curent vehicles on sale would probably be removed from the market. Manufacturers need decent lead times to do the R&D needed to meet future emissions laws. Some people think it can be done ovenight.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

But one usually relates to the other.

Yeah I think carbon dioxide emissions is usually proportional to the fuel consumption, but nitrogen oxide isn't. More so with diesel engines, you could have a 2.0 old tech diesel getting 30mpg, puffing out black smoke (no DPF, EGR), or a new 7.0 diesel getting 18mpg with DPF, EGR, Urea, no black smoke Speaking of black smoke, I want to watch Lost all over again.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by chevypower

I don't know why people have a problem with increasing emissions standards? What harm is it doing? What would it be like if we were all driving 7 litre V8s with carburetors and running them on leaded fuel? Exhaust emissions does more than just cause this long-term, never happening global warming.
Plus there is the economic benefit of developing better cars that are cleaner, each generation. Keeping people employed, that is always important. I just don't know why people are having a cry about something that has so many benefits. We still have V8s, they are just cleaner.

American CAFE rules and Emission controls are a joke because average vehicle miles
have actually increased approximately 50% since CAFE started in 1976.
Drivers use the savings to travel further, not reduce total consumption.
Only a strong gas tax will kerb American driving habits.

[fg_nitro]

Originally Posted by castellan

The gov could tax rego on weight & emissions.

Yeah but no one seems to be able to tell me what they spend the "tax" on?