tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/fuel-efficiency-21448/articlesFuel efficiency – The Conversation2024-02-21T19:14:04Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2223982024-02-21T19:14:04Z2024-02-21T19:14:04ZAustralian passenger vehicle emission rates are 50% higher than the rest of the world – and it’s getting worse<p>Australian passenger vehicles are emitting 50% more carbon dioxide (CO₂) than the average of the world’s major markets. And the real-world situation is even worse than official figures show. That’s the finding of a <a href="https://theicct.org/publication/australian-ldv-co2-emissions-compare-to-the-rest-of-the-world-feb24/">new study</a> comparing the CO₂ emissions performance of cars, SUVs and light commercial vehicles in Australia and overseas. </p>
<p>The comparison suggests Australia will probably <a href="https://theconversation.com/too-big-too-heavy-and-too-slow-to-change-road-transport-is-way-off-track-for-net-zero-208655">fall well short</a> of the economy-wide 2050 <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction/net-zero">net-zero emission target</a> for road transport. To hit the target, policies to cut vehicle emissions have to be intensified and supported by a range of other policies. </p>
<p>This month, the Australian government <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/cleaner-cheaper-run-cars-australian-new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-consultation-impact-analysis">announced</a> options for a New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES) – not to be confused with the <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/energy/transport/national-electric-vehicle-strategy">National Electric Vehicle Strategy</a> (NEVS). Each option would set a national limit on grams of CO₂ that can be emitted for each kilometre driven, averaged across all new cars sold.</p>
<p>Mandatory CO₂ emission or fuel-efficiency standards are internationally recognised as a <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_89c9da85afb74c248ef7bbaf17d86297.pdf">fundamental building block</a> to cut transport emissions. To provide further context and input to the development of an Australian standard, Australia-based Transport Energy/Emission Research (<a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/">TER</a>) and the International Council on Clean Transportation (<a href="https://theicct.org/">ICCT</a>) collaborated on a newly published <a href="https://theicct.org/pr-cuts-in-average-rw-emissions-are-stalled-for-australias-ldv-fleet-while-other-major-markets-drive-towards-zero-feb24/">briefing paper</a>. </p>
<p>The independent analysis shows the urgent need for Australia to adopt a stringent, well-designed and mandatory fuel-efficiency standard. This standard and additional policies are essential to keep up with technological advances and decarbonisation in other developed countries.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1754380447688151191"}"></div></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-fuel-efficiency-standards-may-settle-the-ute-dispute-but-there-are-still-hazards-on-the-road-222875">Labor's fuel-efficiency standards may settle the ute dispute – but there are still hazards on the road</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How did we fall so far behind?</h2>
<p>Both fuel efficiency and emission standards aim for roughly the same thing: cutting fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. In doing so, they also cut fuel costs for consumers and improve energy security.</p>
<p><a href="https://theicct.org/pv-fuel-economy/">About 85%</a> of the global light vehicle market has adopted these standards over time, in some cases decades ago. The United States, European Union, Canada, United Kingdom, Japan, China, South Korea, Brazil, Mexico, New Zealand, Chile and India all have them. Australia and Russia are the two exceptions in the developed world.</p>
<p>Australia has a long history of debate about making such standards mandatory for passenger and light commercial vehicles. The federal government has released six public consultation documents since 2008, without achieving mandatory standards. This is <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/cleaner-cheaper-run-cars-australian-new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-consultation-impact-analysis">about to change</a>. </p>
<p>Australia has had voluntary standards since 1978. These targets have <a href="https://www.fcai.com.au/news/index/view/news/792">not always been met</a> due to lack of enforcement. They <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/sites/default/files/Lightvehiclesreport.pdf">have been criticised</a> for lacking both ambition and effectiveness in reducing real-world emissions. </p>
<p>It appears the government’s <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/cleaner-cheaper-run-cars-australian-new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-consultation-impact-analysis">current proposal</a> will be more ambitious. It potentially aims to converge with US targets in 2027 – though falling short of what is being done in Europe. The Australian standard’s effectiveness in achieving genuine emission reductions and net zero emissions in 2050 will still need to be examined once the design and details are clearer.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-electric-trucks-are-our-best-bet-to-cut-road-transport-emissions-219960">Why electric trucks are our best bet to cut road transport emissions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How does Australia compare using official figures?</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://theicct.org/pr-cuts-in-average-rw-emissions-are-stalled-for-australias-ldv-fleet-while-other-major-markets-drive-towards-zero-feb24/">new study</a> compared the officially reported CO₂ emissions performance of passenger and light commercial vehicles in Australia, China, the EU, Japan and the US. We found CO₂ emissions from the Australian passenger vehicles were 53% higher than the average of these major markets in 2021.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=530&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=530&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=530&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=666&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=666&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576602/original/file-20240219-16-ccfdd8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=666&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Officially reported fleet average emissions performance for new passenger vehicles, comparing Australia with four major markets.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://theicct.org/pr-cuts-in-average-rw-emissions-are-stalled-for-australias-ldv-fleet-while-other-major-markets-drive-towards-zero-feb24/">TER and ICCT, 2024</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Importantly, without effective action, this performance gap is expected to grow in future years. That’s because these other markets are moving to aggressively adopt standards that drive the transition to a low-or-zero-emissions vehicle fleet.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/too-big-too-heavy-and-too-slow-to-change-road-transport-is-way-off-track-for-net-zero-208655">Too big, too heavy and too slow to change: road transport is way off track for net zero</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How does Australia compare in reality?</h2>
<p>The official Australian figures are based on a test protocol called the New European Drive Cycle (<a href="https://coceurope.eu/blog/nedc-emission-test/">NEDC</a>). It was developed in the early 1970s. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-road-to-new-fuel-efficiency-rules-is-filled-with-potholes-heres-how-australia-can-avoid-them-188814">main problem</a> is that the difference between NEDC test results and actual on-road emissions has <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_3051fdd1a87948d3978cb2c2de0767be.pdf">steadily increased</a>. Actual on-road emissions were estimated to be about 10% higher in 2007, growing to over 45% in 2021. </p>
<p>Indeed, the EU no longer uses the outdated NEDC protocol. It has adopted a <a href="https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/On-the-way-to-real-world-WLTP_May2020.pdf">more realistic test procedure</a>, the Worldwide Harmonised Light-Vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP).</p>
<p>The briefing paper used previous research into Australian and international real-world emissions performance to create a more accurate comparison. Whereas the official figures suggest newly sold Australian passenger vehicles have relatively high emissions, at least they appear to have improved each year. The picture is very different when we look at on-road emissions. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=660&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=660&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576614/original/file-20240219-22-ivfdqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=660&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Estimated real-world fleet average emissions for new passenger vehicles, comparing Australia with four major markets.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://theicct.org/pr-cuts-in-average-rw-emissions-are-stalled-for-australias-ldv-fleet-while-other-major-markets-drive-towards-zero-feb24/">TER and ICCT 2024</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://theicct.org/pr-cuts-in-average-rw-emissions-are-stalled-for-australias-ldv-fleet-while-other-major-markets-drive-towards-zero-feb24/">Our estimates</a> suggest emissions from newly sold Australian passenger vehicles have actually been rising since 2015. This trend is a result of <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_3051fdd1a87948d3978cb2c2de0767be.pdf">increasing vehicle size and weight</a>, a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/jan/04/australia-2023-new-car-sales-record-list-top-utes-suvs-ford-ranger-toyota-hilux">shift towards more four-wheel-drive SUVs and large utes</a>, and a lack of mandatory standards or targets.</p>
<p>The Australian real-world emissions performance is also much worse than in the four major markets. Before 2016 the average difference was around 20% higher on average. By 2021, Australian emissions were almost 50% higher for passenger vehicles. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1744453560526364983"}"></div></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-road-to-new-fuel-efficiency-rules-is-filled-with-potholes-heres-how-australia-can-avoid-them-188814">The road to new fuel efficiency rules is filled with potholes. Here's how Australia can avoid them</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What does this mean for policy?</h2>
<p>Our analysis shows both officially reported and actual on-road CO₂ emissions from new Australian light-duty vehicles are much higher than in other developed nations. The available evidence suggests this poor performance will get worse without stringent mandatory standards in place. </p>
<p>The good news is that the government is acting on the lack of an effective standard. Mandatory standards will likely be adopted this year. The <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/cleaner-cheaper-run-cars-australian-new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-consultation-impact-analysis">New Vehicle Efficiency Standard</a> is due to take effect in 2025.</p>
<p>However, the standard must be carefully designed to achieve genuine emission reductions for new vehicles. </p>
<p>For instance, the official Australian test protocol (NEDC) is outdated and increasingly underestimates on-road emissions. It provides an unrealistic and skewed picture, undermining effective emission reduction. The government says it intends to adopt a more realistic test protocol.</p>
<p>The standards should also include on-board monitoring of fuel consumption – as the EU is now doing. It’s vital to measure real-world fuel efficiency and emissions of new vehicles and to make this information public to ensure standards are achieving their goals. But the <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/cleaner-cheaper-run-cars-australian-new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-consultation-impact-analysis">latest government report</a> didn’t mention it.</p>
<p>A mandatory fuel-efficiency standard is long overdue in Australia. It can help close the performance gap between Australia and the rest of the world. So we’d better make sure it works.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222398/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robin Smit is the Founder of and Director at Transport Energy/Emission Research (TER), which collaborated on the briefing paper discussed in this article.</span></em></p>Australian vehicle emissions are even worse than official figures show and are likely to fall even further behind the rest of the world unless much more ambitious policies are adopted.Robin Smit, Adjunct Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2228752024-02-06T19:08:34Z2024-02-06T19:08:34ZLabor’s fuel-efficiency standards may settle the ute dispute – but there are still hazards on the road<p>Australia looks set to adopt fuel-efficiency standards after the Albanese government on Sunday <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/cleaner-cheaper-run-cars-australian-new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-consultation-impact-analysis">revealed</a> options for the long-awaited policy. The government says the reform would lead to more cars that are cheaper to run, eventually saving Australians about A$1,000 per vehicle each year.</p>
<p>The announcement comes a decade after the Climate Change Authority <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/sites/default/files/Lightvehiclesreport.pdf">first proposed</a> such a standard for Australia. The United States has had such a policy since <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/reviews/light-vehicle-emissions-standards-australia/international-implementation-vehicle-emissions#:%7E:text=The%20US%20first%20introduced%20light,and%20reducing%20CO2%20emissions.">the 1970s</a> and the European Union implemented mandatory standards in 2009.</p>
<p>The Coalition has already sought to stoke fears among tradies and regional voters by claiming Labor’s policy threatens to take utes off the road. Labor’s policy is designed to address this concern – but the opposition looks likely to continue this scare campaign.</p>
<p>More generally, history tells us the road to fuel-efficiency reform in Australia is a bumpy one. The Albanese government has hazards to negotiate before its proposal becomes law.</p>
<h2>A carbon price, by another name</h2>
<p>Labor has outlined three options for a fuel-efficiency target, ranging from weak to aggressive. It describes its preferred middle-ground option as the sensible compromise.</p>
<p>The policy design for each of the options would set a national limit, averaged across all new cars sold, stipulating grams of CO₂ that can be emitted for each kilometre driven. This measure depends on fuel efficiency: that is, the amount of fuel burnt per kilometre. The designs differ in the stringency of the targets, the speed of the changes and the treatment of different vehicle classes.</p>
<p>The limit would not apply to individual cars. Instead, each supplier of new light vehicles to Australia would have to make sure the mix of vehicles does not exceed the limit. Low-efficiency vehicles could still be sold, but car dealers would have to balance this out by selling enough high-efficiency vehicles, such as electric vehicles.</p>
<p>Car suppliers that outperform the targets would earn credits that could be sold to those falling short. This system is similar to Australia’s renewable energy target for electricity and the safeguard mechanism for industry pollution. </p>
<p>All three are effectively a carbon price (though the political toxicity of that term means the government would never characterise them as such). Nonetheless, should the fuel-efficiency standards be implemented, Australia would end up with three carbon prices, one for each major energy use.</p>
<p>The government says the preferred option would lead to a saving of 369 million tonnes of CO₂ by 2050.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/whos-holding-back-electric-cars-in-australia-weve-long-known-the-answer-and-its-time-to-clear-the-road-188443">Who's holding back electric cars in Australia? We've long known the answer – and it's time to clear the road</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What about utes?</h2>
<p>One tricky path the policy must navigate is allowing for the supply of both small and large vehicles without further exacerbating <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/15/australia-may-increase-standard-car-parking-spaces-as-huge-vehicles-dominate-the-streets#:%7E:text=Australia%27s%20love%20affair%20with%20large,a%20category%20that%20includes%20utes.">the trend</a> towards oversized vehicles on our roads. </p>
<p>The government’s preferred option achieves this by allowing higher – but still limited – emissions for heavier vehicles such as utes, vans and SUVs, to account for their natural tendency to use more fuel.</p>
<p>Heavier vehicles are a sticking point in forming vehicle emissions policy in Australia. Who could forget then-prime minister Scott Morrison’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/07/shorten-wants-to-end-the-weekend-morrison-attacks-labors-electric-vehicle-policy">2019 claim</a> Labor’s electric vehicle policy would “end the weekend” by banning larger cars used to tow boats and the like.</p>
<p>Following Labor’s policy announcement on Sunday, Nationals leader David Littleproud picked up where Morrison left off, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/feb/04/fuel-efficiency-standards-labor-unveils-proposal-highlighting-petrol-savings-of-1000-a-year-for-motorists">saying</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If you take away particularly utes, they’re tools of trade, particularly for people, not just tradies in the cities, but also people in the bush. And if you put a tonne on the back of an electric ute at the moment, you don’t get far.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Anticipating the Coalition scare campaign, the Labor government’s preferred option has been designed with the aim of ensuring a wide range of conventional utes remain on the market. </p>
<p>In the medium term, we can also expect the trend towards larger vehicles to be weakened by measures in Labor’s last federal budget to <a href="https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/what-changes-with-the-updated-instant-asset-write-off-scheme">roll back</a> vehicle tax breaks for small and medium businesses. But that change doesn’t come into effect until mid-year, which means there may be a rush on larger vehicle purchases until then. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="hand on steering wheel with outback scene" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/573683/original/file-20240206-21-e6ei8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Coalition has previously claimed Labor’s vehicle policies would ‘end the weekend’.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-utes-can-now-power-the-weekend-and-the-work-week-199600">Electric utes can now power the weekend – and the work week</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Ghosts from the past</h2>
<p>Labor’s preferred policy option is broadly similar to that put forward by the Climate Change Authority in 2014. Then, the Coalition government appeared to consider the proposal for a time. But it eventually dropped the idea – in part, presumably, due to lobbying by interest groups including the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/push-for-carbon-car-standards-should-surprise-nobody-20170712-gx9uc9.html">car industry</a>.</p>
<p>There are signs those same groups are gearing up again. The Federated Chamber of Automotive Industries, for example, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-04/new-vehicle-efficiency-standard-for-new-cars/103425022">said on Sunday</a> the government’s targets will “be a challenge” to meet and may lead to more expensive vehicles, or gaps in the supply of utes and SUVs.</p>
<p>But the proposed policy has been welcomed by climate change advocates, the electric vehicle industry and motoring groups. The NRMA described them as “responsible and achievable”, saying “a business-as-usual approach meant that Australian families and businesses were not benefiting from the best technology designed to reduce fuel consumption”.</p>
<h2>Progress, at last</h2>
<p>The government intends to consult on its preferred model before introducing the legislation, with a view to enacting the policy in January 2025. </p>
<p>Assuming the policy is adopted, Australia would finally shed its unenviable status as the only developed country without such such standards. But we will still be at the back of pack, far behind the EU and only catching up to the US in 2028.</p>
<p>Despite the difficulties, it seems likely Australia will have fuel-efficiency standards in the near future. As with most measures to reduce emissions, the best time to introduce the policy was ten or more years ago. But the second-best time is now.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222875/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Quiggin was a Member of the Climate Change Authority at the time it proposed a fuel efficiency standard</span></em></p>The road to fuel-efficiency reform in Australia is a bumpy one – and the Albanese government has hazards to negotiate before its proposal becomes law.John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1906272022-09-23T12:34:32Z2022-09-23T12:34:32ZSurging sales of large gasoline pickups and SUVs are undermining carbon reductions from electric cars<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/486193/original/file-20220922-13134-x4skx7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=10%2C7%2C2393%2C1344&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Pickup trucks for sale at a Michigan dealership.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">John DeCicco</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Replacing petroleum fuels with electricity is crucial for curbing climate change because it cuts carbon dioxide emissions from transportation – the largest source of U.S. global warming emissions and a growing source worldwide. Even including the impacts of generating electricity to run them, electric vehicles <a href="http://dx.doi.org/%2010.1257/pol.20190390">provide clear environmental benefits</a>. </p>
<p>Plug-in vehicles are making great progress, with their <a href="https://www.anl.gov/esia/light-duty-electric-drive-vehicles-monthly-sales-updates">share of U.S. car and light truck sales </a> jumping from 2% to 4% in 2020-2021 and projected to exceed 6% by the end of 2022. But sales of gas-guzzling pickups and SUVs <a href="https://www.forbes.com/wheels/news/light-trucks-now-outselling-cars/">are also surging</a>. This other face of the market subverts electric cars’ carbon-cutting progress. </p>
<p>As a researcher who studies <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wQ5IYG4AAAAJ&hl=en">transportation and climate change</a>, it’s clear to me that EVs provide large carbon reductions that will grow as the electric grid shifts to carbon-free energy. But fleetwide emissions, including vehicles of all types and ages, are what ultimately matters for the climate. </p>
<p>While the latest policy advances will speed the transition to EVs, actual <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00921-7">emission reductions could be hastened</a> by tightening greenhouse gas emissions standards, especially for the larger gasoline-powered personal trucks that dominate transportation’s carbon footprint. Because <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf4d2">it takes 20 years to largely replace the on-road automobile fleet</a>, gas vehicles bought today will still be driving and emitting carbon dioxide in 2040 and beyond. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EGdyoiw9NwE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">California has adopted regulations that will phase out sales of new cars powered only by gasoline in the state by 2035, a shift that is expected to drive similar policies in other states.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Public policy progress</h2>
<p>Plugging in rather than pumping gas <a href="https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/reducing-pollution-electric-vehicles">reduces both global warming and smog-forming pollution</a>. It avoids the ecological harm of petroleum production and reduces the economic and security risks of a world oil market coupled to totalitarian regimes such as those of Russia and in the Middle East. </p>
<p>On the good news front, automakers are offering ever more EV choices and promising all-electric fleets within 15 years or so. Two recent policy developments will help turn such promises into reality. </p>
<p>One is California’s recent <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission-vehicle-sales-2035">update to its zero-emission vehicle program</a>. The new regulations will require that by 2035, 100% of new light vehicles sold in California must be qualifying zero-emission vehicles, allowing for a limited number of plug-in hybrid vehicles. Other states that historically have adopted California’s emission standards may follow its lead, so cars running only on gasoline could ultimately be banned across 40% of the U.S. new car market. </p>
<p>In addition, the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2022/08/12/inflation-reduction-act-house-vote/">Inflation Reduction Act</a> recently signed by President Biden includes new incentives for EVs and subsidies for domestic production of EVs, batteries and critical minerals. The new policy <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/electric-vehicle-tax-credits-6500157">targets incentives in several ways</a>, disqualifying high-income consumers, capping the price of qualifying vehicles, providing incentives for used EVs, and restricting the tax credits to EVs built in the U.S. and Canada. It complements the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/09/14/fact-sheet-president-bidens-economic-plan-drives-americas-electric-vehicle-manufacturing-boom/">US$7.5 billion for building a national EV charging network</a> authorized by the infrastructure bill that the Biden administration brokered in 2021. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1570163438143569920"}"></div></p>
<h2>The consumption conundrum</h2>
<p>In spite of rapidly growing sales, however, EVs have not yet measurably cut carbon. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data indicates that the rate of carbon dioxide reduction from new vehicles has <a href="https://www.epa.gov/automotive-trends">all but stalled, while vehicle mass and power have reached all-time highs</a>. </p>
<p>Why? The surging popularity of low-fuel-economy pickups and SUVs. My analysis of the EPA data shows that through 2021, the higher emissions from market shifts to larger, more powerful vehicles swamp the potential carbon dioxide reductions from EVs <a href="https://www.carsclimate.com/2022/09/truck-vs-EV-CO2-gap-thru-2021.html">by more than a factor of three</a>. </p>
<p>Including the largest personal pickup trucks, which are omitted from the EPA’s public data, would further increase the gasoline vehicle emissions that overwhelm EV carbon reductions. Because vehicles <a href="https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/809952">remain on the road for so long</a>, excessive emissions from popular but under-regulated pickups and SUVs will harm the climate for many years. </p>
<h2>Complications of clean-car rules</h2>
<p>A reason for this conundrum is that <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-greenhouse-gas-emissions-passenger-cars-and">clean-car standards</a> are averaged across the overall fleets of cars and light trucks that automakers sell. When a manufacturer increases its sales of EVs and other high-efficiency vehicles, it can sell a greater number of less fuel-efficient vehicles while still meeting regulatory requirements. </p>
<p>The standards are structured in several ways that further weaken their effectiveness. The targets an automaker has to meet <a href="https://www.autonews.com/article/20160814/OEM11/308159946/is-cafe-making-cars-bigger">get weaker if it makes its vehicles larger</a>. Vehicles classified as light trucks – including four-wheel-drive and large SUVs, as well as vans and pickups – are held to weaker standards than those classified as cars. </p>
<p>What’s worse, a regulatory loophole allows the largest pickups to effectively evade meaningful carbon constraints. Such vehicles are classified as “work trucks” even though they are sold and priced as luxury personal vehicles. An ongoing horsepower war gives these massive “<a href="https://twitter.com/uhalevi/status/1333077860119171072">suburban cowboy</a>” trucks capabilities far beyond those of the relatively spartan pickups once used by cost-conscious businesses. </p>
<h2>Toward faster emission reductions</h2>
<p>In spite of falling prices and rising sales, electric cars <a href="https://www.freep.com/story/opinion/contributors/2019/01/11/electric-cars-evs/2535200002/">still face hurdles</a> before they can fully sweep the market. <a href="https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/a32600212/ev-charging-time/">The time it takes to charge an electric car</a> may remain an inconvenience for many consumers. For example, commonly available Level 2 chargers take <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev-basics/charging-speeds">four to 10 hours</a> to fully recharge an EV battery.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ft-aMNRDXD8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Buying an EV requires consumers to consider where and how quickly they want to charge their car.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Such obstacles make it <a href="https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a35118090/are-we-ready-for-the-zero-emission-future/">unclear whether the car market can move as quickly</a> to an all-electric future as some hope. </p>
<p>Emissions could be cut more quickly if regulators reform clean car standards to close the loopholes that allow excess emissions. California is taking a step in this direction by revising its methods for determining new fleet emission limits for gasoline vehicles. Also hopeful is the recent <a href="https://www.edf.org/media/gm-and-edf-announce-recommended-principles-epa-emissions-standards-model-year-2027-and-beyond">joint announcement by General Motors and the Environmental Defense Fund</a>, which notes the need to address the large light trucks as part of new standards targeting a 60% reduction in fleetwide greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. </p>
<p>As the world transitions to EVs, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/electric-vehicles/">their size and energy use will matter</a>, too. Massive EVs will require large batteries, and hence more <a href="https://theconversation.com/making-evs-without-chinas-supply-chain-is-hard-but-not-impossible-3-supply-chain-experts-outline-a-strategy-189453">critical minerals whose supplies are limited</a>. They will demand more electricity that, even if renewable, is <a href="https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/impacts-renewable-energy-facilities">not fully free of environmental impacts</a>. Sustainability will suffer if the roads are ruled more by the likes of <a href="https://www.gmc.com/electric/hummer-ev">Hummer EVs</a> rather than <a href="https://www.tesla.com/model3">Tesla Model 3s</a>. </p>
<p>Policymakers and environmental organizations have mounted major promotional campaigns in support of EVs. But there are no similar efforts to encourage consumers to <a href="http://www.autonews.com/article/20180521/MOBILITY/180529995/1137">choose the most efficient vehicle</a> that meets their needs. Significant numbers of Americans <a href="https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/climate-change-in-the-american-mind-november-2019/toc/2/">now believe that global warming is for real and of concern</a>. Connecting such beliefs to everyday vehicle purchases is a missing link in clean-car strategy. </p>
<p>These sobering car market trends highlight the risk of letting visions of an all-electric future mask the need for better decisions today – by policymakers, consumers and automakers – to more quickly reduce emissions across the entire vehicle fleet. </p>
<p><em>This piece updates an <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-make-the-us-auto-fleet-greener-increasing-fuel-efficiency-matters-more-than-selling-electric-vehicles-153085">article</a> originally published on January 28, 2021.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/190627/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John M. DeCicco, Ph.D., is a Research Professor Emeritus retired from the University of Michigan. He remains professionally active in energy research and teaches the "Mobility and the Environment" module as part of the University of Michigan's online Foundations of Mobility credential. He currently receives no funding, but his past work on vehicle efficiency was supported by environmental organizations, foundations and federal agencies. </span></em></p>Electric cars are getting a lot of PR buzz, but automakers are still promoting – and many consumers are buying – vehicles that are major gas guzzlers.John DeCicco, Research Professor Emeritus, University of MichiganLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1888142022-08-23T05:20:21Z2022-08-23T05:20:21ZThe road to new fuel efficiency rules is filled with potholes. Here’s how Australia can avoid them<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480268/original/file-20220822-53932-9ghveh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C5%2C3547%2C2350&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last week, federal Climate and Energy Minister Chris Bowen officially put fuel efficiency standards on the national agenda, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/19/electric-vehicles-four-things-that-will-help-australia-shift-gears-after-a-decade-of-denial">saying</a> the measure would reduce transport emissions and encourage electric vehicle uptake. </p>
<p>Fuel efficiency standards are applied to car manufacturers and indirectly set limits on how much CO₂ can on average be emitted from a new vehicle. Such standards lead to lower fuel costs for motorists and could help Australia meet its targets under the Paris climate agreement.</p>
<p>Importantly, Bowen <a href="https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1560411828118646784">noted</a> any new rules must be ambitious and designed specifically for Australia. But implementing effective standards is easier said than done – and there are many potholes to avoid. </p>
<p>Without a robust set of mandatory transport emissions standards, Australia’s dependence on fossil fuels will deepen, and reaching our emissions reduction goals will become harder.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="man in black suit gestures with hands" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480259/original/file-20220822-2925-x8x3n4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Climate and Energy Minister Chris Bowen says fuel efficiency standards must be ambitious.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Standards must be mandatory</h2>
<p>Road vehicles vary in the efficiency with which they use fossil fuels such as petrol and diesel. For example, large SUVs are usually less fuel efficient than smaller, lighter cars. And of course, electric vehicles operate without any fossil fuels at all (although the energy source used to charge their batteries determines how “green” they are). </p>
<p>Stringent fuel efficiency standards will encourage the auto industry to bring more electric vehicles to Australia, and reduce how many polluting vehicles it imports.</p>
<p>Australia is the only country in the OECD <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/19/australia-plans-fuel-efficiency-standards-to-boost-electric-car-supply.html">without</a> mandatory fuel efficiency standards for road transport vehicles. Voluntary fuel economy targets were <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_eec0d63b5f384c90aa308fb8067ec261.pdf">adopted</a> for new petrol cars in 1978, but <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_eec0d63b5f384c90aa308fb8067ec261.pdf">were not</a> achieved in 2010. In 2020, Australia’s automotive industry <a href="https://www.fcai.com.au/news/index/view/news/652">announced</a> a new voluntary reporting system for CO₂ emissions reduction of 3-4% per year this decade.</p>
<p>These rules are not mandatory, and the target probably falls short of what’s needed. Yet, the industry is <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/revealed-car-industry-s-secret-emissions-plan-would-slow-electric-vehicle-uptake-20220805-p5b7pe.html">promoting</a> these standards as a template for Australia’s new fuel efficiency rules. </p>
<p>Mandatory fuel efficiency standards are at the core of energy and transport policies around the world. So this should be the first guiding principle of any new system pursued by the federal government. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-the-world-surges-ahead-on-electric-vehicle-policy-the-morrison-governments-new-strategy-leaves-australia-idling-in-the-garage-169824">As the world surges ahead on electric vehicle policy, the Morrison government's new strategy leaves Australia idling in the garage</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="red car drives on city street" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480267/original/file-20220822-66666-qjuiuo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Small cars are usually more fuel-efficient than bigger cars.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tracey Nearmy/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Real-world driving patterns</h2>
<p>Second, the standards must be based on real-world fuel consumption.</p>
<p>Setting fuel efficiency standards first requires selecting a specific “driving pattern” that includes vehicle speed, acceleration, deceleration and power usage, and are used to determine a vehicle’s fuel use and emissions. </p>
<p>The patterns also take into account local road type (such as residential, arterial or motorway) and driving conditions (such as free-flow or morning peak).</p>
<p>The voluntary industry standards now in place in Australia are based on a driving pattern called the “New European Drive Cycle” or NEDC. Among its <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_ba13c6aab78d4cf5bd81aa03a5c17571.pdf">shortcomings</a>, the cycle assumes mild accelerations and constant speeds that don’t reflect modern-day driving. </p>
<p>This has <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334812923_Real_World_Fuel_Consumption_and_Emissions_From_LDVs_and_HDVs">led to</a> substantial deviations between the NEDC assumptions about fuel use and real-world consumption. </p>
<p>Our recent research <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_5ccb87ff39e545809bd1f92872e3069a.pdf">measured emissions</a> from five SUVs driving around Sydney. After comparing our measurements with the <a href="https://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au/">Green Vehicle Guide</a>, we found fuel use was 16% to 65% higher than NEDC values, depending on the vehicle and driving conditions.</p>
<p>And <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_00dcaa41d8d046d3a7b84a65a2135bb7.pdf">research</a> in 2019 suggested that, contrary to <a href="https://www.ntc.gov.au/sites/default/files/assets/files/Carbon-dioxide-emissions-intensity-for-new-Australian-light-vehicles-2019.pdf">official figures</a> using the NEDC, the rate of CO₂ emissions for new Australian passenger vehicles was not falling – and may actually have increased since 2015.</p>
<p>Why? It’s likely due to an <a href="https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/design/australias-big-car-obsession-utes-suv-sales-on-the-rise/news-story/63b01a52b087e2ab094a9492ef83c480">increase</a> in sales of bigger, heavier vehicles in Australia, such as SUVs, as well as a shift towards more 4WD and diesel cars. </p>
<p>So it’s crucial that we drop the NEDC – and base the new Australian standards on a drive pattern that represents real-world conditions. This could be similar to <a href="https://www.wltpfacts.eu/what-is-wltp-how-will-it-work/">the pattern</a> adopted by the European Union, or a real-world <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/_files/ugd/d0bd25_ba13c6aab78d4cf5bd81aa03a5c17571.pdf">Australian drive cycle</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-thought-australian-cars-were-using-less-fuel-new-research-shows-we-were-wrong-122378">We thought Australian cars were using less fuel. New research shows we were wrong</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="vehicles queue in tunnel" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480264/original/file-20220822-53919-48a0ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fuel efficiency standards must be based on real Australian driving patterns.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Other things to consider</h2>
<p>The federal government should implement a single standard for all passenger vehicles – including all SUVs, without exception.</p>
<p>Australia’s voluntary system allows large road-based SUVs to <a href="https://www.fcai.com.au/library/publication/fcai_rules_for_calculating_co2_compliance.pdf">fall into the same category</a> as light commercial vehicles. This means they’re subject to less stringent fuel efficiency standards than cars. </p>
<p>This may inadvertently promote sales of heavy SUVs and, as a result, significantly increase real-world fuel consumption and associated emissions. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="SUV parked at side of road" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/480261/original/file-20220822-2925-3r6wep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">SUVs should comply with the same standards as other vehicles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And Australia’s standards must also eliminate loopholes that could allow companies to comply with regulations but not actually improve fuel efficiency to the extent intended. </p>
<p>The considerations listed above are by no means exhaustive. And new fuel efficiency standards must be supported by other policy measures, such as reducing our reliance on private cars, and promoting public transport, walking and cycling.</p>
<p>Transport is Australia’s third-biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions, and federal government moves to tackle this problem are welcome. But if fuel efficiency standards are not carefully designed, the sector will continue to <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-thought-australian-cars-were-using-less-fuel-new-research-shows-we-were-wrong-122378">let down</a> motorists, and the planet.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188814/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robin Smit is the founder and director at Transport Energy/Emission Research Pty Ltd (TER) and an Adjunct Associate Professor at University of Technology Sydney.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hussein Dia receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre, Level Crossing Removal Authority, City of Boroondara, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Transport for New South Wales, EmissionsIQ Pty Ltd, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications, and Beam Mobility Holdings</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nic Surawski has worked on projects funded by city councils, alternative engine design companies, the Australian Coal Association Research Program, the federal Department of Environment and the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. Nic is a member of the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand.</span></em></p>Labor has put fuel efficiency rules on the agenda. But the standards must be stringent and purpose-built for Australia.Robin Smit, Adjunct Associate Professor, University of Technology SydneyHussein Dia, Professor of Future Urban Mobility, Swinburne University of TechnologyNic Surawski, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Engineering, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1884432022-08-10T05:47:12Z2022-08-10T05:47:12ZWho’s holding back electric cars in Australia? We’ve long known the answer – and it’s time to clear the road<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478457/original/file-20220810-17-uigq99.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=6%2C6%2C4602%2C3061&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paul Miller/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>New analysis this week found strong fuel efficiency standards would have saved Australia A$5.9 billion in fuel costs and emissions equal to a year’s worth of domestic flights if the policy was adopted in 2015.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-analysis-5-9b-fuel-cost-saving-to-commuters-if-fuel-efficiency-standards-introduced/">finding</a>, by think-tank the Australia Institute, puts further pressure on the new federal government to bring our fuel efficiency standards in line with Europe and other developed nations. </p>
<p>Unlike other comparable countries, Australia does not have fuel efficiency standards for motor vehicles. On the face of it this is puzzling; aside from lower costs for motorists and fewer emissions, the policy would also decrease our reliance on imported oil. </p>
<p>But opposition from vested interests – including oil refineries and the car dealership industry – has held Australia back. The onus is now on the Albanese government to enact this obvious and long overdue policy which is crucial to the electric vehicle transition.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="smoke blows from tailpipe" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C3%2C1249%2C885&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478455/original/file-20220810-4757-oao8ef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Unlike other comparable countries, Australia does not have fuel efficiency standards for motor vehicles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ALEXANDER RUESCHE/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Long road, little progress</h2>
<p>So how would a fuel efficiency standard work? </p>
<p>Under a likely model, the government would set a national limit, averaged across all new cars sold, stipulating grams of CO₂ that can be emitted for each kilometre driven. This measure depends on fuel-efficiency: that is, the amount of fuel burnt per kilometre.</p>
<p>The limit would not apply to individual cars. Instead, each supplier of new light vehicles to Australia would have to make sure the mix of vehicles does not exceed the limit. Low-efficiency vehicles could still be sold, but car dealers would have to balance this out by selling enough high-efficiency vehicles. </p>
<p>Because electric vehicles don’t use fuel (or use less, in the case of hybrids), a fuel efficiency standard would give suppliers an incentive to include electric vehicles in the mix of vehicles they supply.</p>
<p>The prospect of fuel efficiency standards on light vehicles has regularly hit the national agenda in recent years. </p>
<p>In 2014, the Climate Change Authority prepared <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/publications/light-vehicle-emissions-standards-australia">a detailed plan</a> for a standard and estimated the likely economic savings. The plan seemed well timed. Australia has traditionally produced large, fuel-guzzling cars like the Holden Commodore and Ford Falcon. At the time of the plan’s release, however, the last remaining domestic car manufacturers had just announced plans to close, removing the most likely source of political resistance. </p>
<p>But the Coalition government sat on the idea. It ran a string of <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/infrastructure-transport-vehicles/vehicles/vehicle-safety-environment/ministerial-forum-emissions">reviews</a> before ultimately letting the issue drop. </p>
<p>In 2019, then-Opposition Leader Bill Shorten <a href="https://billshorten.com.au/news/bill-s-transcripts/doorstop-canberra-monday-1-april-2019/">pledged</a> fuel efficiency standards, as well as a target for electric vehicles to comprise half of new car sales by 2030. But he soon ran into Scott Morrison’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/07/shorten-wants-to-end-the-weekend-morrison-attacks-labors-electric-vehicle-policy">jibe</a> that Labor wanted to “end the weekend” and take away people’s utes. </p>
<p>Labor, of course, lost that election and Anthony Albanese dumped the fuel standards idea on becoming party leader.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/transport-is-letting-australia-down-in-the-race-to-cut-emissions-131905">Transport is letting Australia down in the race to cut emissions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="two smiling men sit in car" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478462/original/file-20220810-22-j4gj5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Coalition government failed to progress fuel efficiency standards.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">William West/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>But what about the benefits?</h2>
<p>A fuel efficiency standard would deliver significant benefits to Australia.</p>
<p>The first is economic. The report released this week is just the latest of many <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-could-have-saved-over-1-billion-in-fuel-if-car-emissions-standards-were-introduced-3-years-ago-117190">studies</a> showing motorists would have been slugged far less at the bowser if our cars used fuel more efficiently.</p>
<p>The second benefit is tackling climate change. Transport accounts for <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/national-greenhouse-gas-inventory-quarterly-update-december-2021">nearly 20%</a> of Australia’s emissions and this share is increasing. </p>
<p>And while lab tests suggest cars sold in Australia are becoming somewhat more efficient, real world testing <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-thought-australian-cars-were-using-less-fuel-new-research-shows-we-were-wrong-122378">shows the opposite</a>. If we are to achieve emissions cuts consistent with the goals of the Paris agreement, cutting emissions from transport is essential.</p>
<p>Third, Australia is almost entirely dependent on foreign fuel. So new efficiency standards would decrease overall liquid fuel consumption, leaving us less reliant on imports.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-thought-australian-cars-were-using-less-fuel-new-research-shows-we-were-wrong-122378">We thought Australian cars were using less fuel. New research shows we were wrong</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="woman fills white car with petrol" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478464/original/file-20220810-602-e6ok2b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fuel efficiency standards could have saved Australian motorists billions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">James Gourley/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What’s holding us back</h2>
<p>So why hasn’t Australia introduced this clearly beneficial policy? In short, because fuel inefficiency is deeply embedded in Australia’s automotive sector. </p>
<p>The strongest <a href="https://acapmag.com.au/2019/04/shortens-choice-fuel-standards-or-refineries/">initial resistance</a> to fuel efficiency standards came from the operators of refineries. Fuel-efficient cars require high-quality fuel. But Australia has long had among the <a href="https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/australias-dirty-fuel-and-when-itll-get-cleaner">dirtiest petrol</a> in the developed world in terms of sulphur content.</p>
<p>Australian refiners resisted fuel efficiency standards because they said the cost of upgrading their plants would put them out of business. But the Morrison government last year <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/australia-prop-up-its-last-two-refineries-with-up-179-bln-2021-05-16/">funded</a> upgrades at Australia’s last two oil refineries, removing one obstacle. </p>
<p>Further resistance has come from <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/push-for-carbon-car-standards-should-surprise-nobody-20170712-gx9uc9.html">car dealers</a>. From a dealership perspective, it’s easier to sell a car with a low sticker price even if lifetime running costs are higher. </p>
<p>Fuel efficiency standards, and the subsequent large-scale shift to electric vehicles, would fundamentally undermine the business model of the Australian car dealership industry. Much of its <a href="https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/dealer-profit-margins-explained-32397">profitability</a> comes from after-sales services required to maintain warranty protection, such as oil changes, transmission fluid and tune-ups. </p>
<p>None of these are needed in electric vehicles. The lifetime costs of maintaining an electric vehicle engine are <a href="https://motorandwheels.com/electric-cars-need-less-maintenance/">about half</a> those for a comparable internal combustion engine. At some point in their lives, an electric vehicle will require a new battery. But this will occur long after the initial sale.</p>
<p>Given all this, it’s not surprising the car industry is <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/revealed-car-industry-s-secret-emissions-plan-would-slow-electric-vehicle-uptake-20220805-p5b7pe.html">reportedly campaigning</a> to limit any new fuel efficiency standards and delay the shift to electric vehicles. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="cars and a van pause in from of sign saying 'prepare to stop'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478463/original/file-20220810-667-gwinsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The car industry is reportedly campaigning to limit any new fuel efficiency standards.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What now?</h2>
<p>The Albanese government has proposed some incentives to encourage a shift towards electric vehicles. But these limited measures won’t drive the dramatic transition that is needed. </p>
<p>Strong fuel efficiency standards would save motorists money, cut emissions and reduce Australia’s dependence on imported fuel. Anyway you look at it, the policy makes sense.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/government-assumes-90-of-australias-new-car-sales-will-be-electric-by-2050-but-its-a-destination-without-a-route-171741">Government assumes 90% of Australia’s new car sales will be electric by 2050. But it's a destination without a route</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188443/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Quiggin was a Member of the Climate Change Authority from 2012 to 2017</span></em></p>Opposition from vested interests – including oil refineries and the car dealership industry – has held Australia back on fuel efficiency. The onus is now on the Albanese government to intervene.John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1530852021-01-28T13:30:07Z2021-01-28T13:30:07ZTo make the US auto fleet greener, increasing fuel efficiency matters more than selling electric vehicles<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/380927/original/file-20210127-19-1focpcx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=49%2C0%2C5472%2C3620&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A used car superstore in Colma, California.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/view-of-a-carmax-superstore-on-september-24-2020-in-colma-news-photo/1276492605?adppopup=true">Justin Sullivan/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Biden has proposed ambitious goals for <a href="https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/">curbing climate change and investing in a cleaner U.S. economy</a>. One critical sector is transportation, which <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks">generates 28% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions</a> – more than either electric power production or industry. </p>
<p>Shifting from cars that run on gasoline and diesel to electric vehicles, or EVs, is a key strategy to address transportation’s contribution to global warming. Industry watchers expect big federal investments in <a href="https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/joe-biden-administration-ev-autos-transportation-infrastructure/">charging stations and tax credits</a> for electric cars. But as Biden’s Day One <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-protecting-public-health-and-environment-and-restoring-science-to-tackle-climate-crisis/">executive order on climate and the environment</a> recognized, an even greater priority is making gasoline vehicles more fuel-efficient. </p>
<p>My research focuses on energy problems, including <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wQ5IYG4AAAAJ&hl=en">transportation and climate change</a>. I believe though EVs are important, it’s emissions from the entire automobile fleet – meaning vehicles of all types and sizes – that ultimately matter for climate. Motorcars <a href="https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/809952">stay on the road for a long time</a>, so failing to adequately reduce gasoline vehicle emissions this year burdens the atmosphere with excess carbon dioxide (CO2) for many years ahead. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Pmt4khA-3ks?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">California will end sales of gas-powered cars by 2035, but used gas-powered cars will remain on the market for years longer.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Electric cars in context</h2>
<p>The media spotlight on EVs can lend them outsize importance in discussions of the car-climate challenge. Tesla’s leadership on electrification has boosted its stock to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-stocks/tesla-hits-record-high-in-first-trading-session-of-2021-idUSKBN2990ZR">record levels</a>. GM has made the news with its <a href="https://www.motortrend.com/news/2021-ces-gm-chevy-cadillac-buick-hummer-evs-details/">announcements of new EVs</a> in the making, and all major automakers worldwide now have ambitious EV plans.</p>
<p>Even after accounting for emissions caused by generating electricity to power them, research shows that EVs clearly <a href="http://dx.doi.org/%2010.1257/pol.20190390">provide environmental benefits</a>. They <a href="https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/reducing-pollution-electric-vehicles">emit fewer pollutants</a> that contribute to climate change and smog than gasoline-powered vehicles. And they avoid the environmental damage associated with drilling for oil, refining it into gasoline and transporting it to filling stations. </p>
<p>For these reasons, but especially because of EVs’ crucial role in cutting carbon, California aims to require new cars and light trucks sold in the state <a href="https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/23/governor-newsom-announces-california-will-phase-out-gasoline-powered-cars-drastically-reduce-demand-for-fossil-fuel-in-californias-fight-against-climate-change/">to be all-electric by 2035</a>. More than a dozen other states are adopting California’s clean-car strategies. Massachusetts recently <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gasoline-car-sales-to-end-by-2035-in-massachusetts/">announced its own plan</a> to effectively ban sales of new gasoline-powered personal vehicles by 2035. </p>
<p>However, EVs are not yet close to having a measurable net impact on CO2 reduction. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s <a href="https://www.epa.gov/automotive-trends">automotive trends report</a>, even as EVs have gained market share, <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2021/01/07/us-gas-mileage-new-vehicles-down-first-time-5-years/6578610002/">carbon-cutting progress has ground to a halt</a>.</p>
<p>Why? The surging popularity of highly fuel-consumptive pickups and SUVs. Indeed, EPA data show that to date, higher emissions from the market shift to larger, more powerful vehicles have <a href="https://www.carsclimate.com/2021/01/personal-trucks-widen-emissions-gap.html">swamped potential CO2 reductions from electric vehicles</a> by a factor of five. </p>
<p><iframe id="clCGm" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/clCGm/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>The role of clean-car standards</h2>
<p>To appreciate this conundrum, it helps to understand how federal clean-car standards work. These regulations combine <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy">Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards</a> with <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-greenhouse-gas-emissions-passenger-cars-and">greenhouse gas emission standards</a>. The two sets of rules are coordinated, because cars that get more miles per gallon have lower CO2 emission rates. </p>
<p>Both types of standards apply to automakers on a fleetwide basis. Therefore, when automakers increase their sales of EVs and other high-efficiency vehicles, they can sell a greater number of less fuel-efficient SUVs and pickup trucks while still meeting their fleet average greenhouse gas emission limits. </p>
<p>As a result, each additional EV sold does not yield a net CO2 reduction overall. In fact, because EVs get extra credit under the standards, electric car sales are now <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.04.003">increasing fleet-average emissions</a> to a level slightly higher than they would be without EVs in the mix. </p>
<p>Automakers also exploit flexibility provisions built into the regulations. For example, a firm’s standard <a href="https://www.autonews.com/article/20160814/OEM11/308159946/is-cafe-making-cars-bigger">gets weaker when it makes its vehicles larger</a>. On top of that, vehicles classified as light trucks – including four-wheel-drive and large SUVs as well as vans and pickups – are held to weaker standards than those classified as cars. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1354531534821183489"}"></div></p>
<p>In spite of this regulatory flexibility, automakers lobbied the Trump administration to <a href="https://e360.yale.edu/features/after-years-of-green-promises-us-automakers-renege-on-emissions-standards">weaken clean-car standards</a> that had been developed under the Obama administration. In response, the Trump administration <a href="https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2020/03/31/trump-rolls-back-obama-mpg-rules/5093643002/">gutted the regulations</a> in 2020. President Biden has directed federal agencies to <a href="https://www.autoblog.com/2021/01/20/biden-vehicle-emissions-standards/">revisit this issue</a>, but for now, the weak existing standards mean that little carbon-cutting progress is on the horizon. </p>
<h2>Real promises require legal obligation</h2>
<p>Automakers recognize the future importance of electrification. Most major car manufacturers have pledged to <a href="https://www.barrons.com/articles/traditional-auto-makers-are-getting-into-evs-here-are-their-plans-to-battle-tesla-51606734002">bring a growing number of EVs to market</a>. Nevertheless, EVs <a href="https://www.freep.com/story/opinion/contributors/2019/01/11/electric-cars-evs/2535200002/">still face many obstacles</a> to widespread use, including <a href="https://morningconsult.com/2019/05/22/for-widespread-adoption-of-electric-vehicles-many-roadblocks-ahead/">higher price tags and lower convenience for many consumers</a>. </p>
<p>Even as EVs’ prices fall, driving ranges rise and charging stations proliferate, the <a href="https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/a32600212/ev-charging-time/">time required to charge EVs</a> will remain a barrier. It’s therefore <a href="https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a35118090/are-we-ready-for-the-zero-emission-future/">unclear whether the pieces are in place</a> for a rapid transition to an all-electric automotive future. </p>
<p><iframe id="HFSYB" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HFSYB/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Adopting clean-car standards that grow progressively more stringent each year and require automakers to cut CO2 emissions from all the vehicles they sell would ensure that technological promises translate to actual emission reductions. This approach underpinned the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/autos-must-average-545-mpg-by-2025-new-epa-standards-are-expected-to-say/2012/08/28/2c47924a-f117-11e1-892d-bc92fee603a7_story.html">Obama administration’s 2012 standards</a>, which originally were designed to achieve a nearly 5% yearly average reduction in new-fleet CO2 emission rates. </p>
<p>Some automakers seem to want to sidestep any serious obligation to meaningfully reduce emissions. General Motors has been on a <a href="https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2021/01/11/gm-goes-big-consumer-electronics-show-bolster-ev-cred/6625599002/">publicity blitz</a> about its EV plans, but the company has been notably silent on restoring strong clean-car standards. </p>
<p>In contrast, Ford, Honda, BMW and Volkswagen have cooperated with California to develop a plan <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27S3AM">more in line with climate protection needs</a>. I would argue that even more stringent standards are needed to make up for lost time and put the fleet on track to a zero-carbon goal. </p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>Although it’s not a good reason for weak standards, automakers raise a valid concern when they point to weak marketwide interest in cleaner cars. Consumer demand for more efficient vehicles waxes and wanes with gasoline prices, but there’s an ongoing need to continually reduce CO2 emissions. </p>
<p>Although green groups and green-leaning policymakers have mounted extensive efforts to promote EVs, there is no comparable level of effort to <a href="http://www.autonews.com/article/20180521/MOBILITY/180529995/1137">encourage consumers to choose greener gasoline vehicles</a>. That’s a missing link in clean-car strategy.</p>
<p>In short, to cut carbon from cars sooner rather than later, it is crucial to greatly improve the fuel economy of the gasoline vehicles that will still be sold in the years ahead. This is especially true for the pickups and SUVs that comprise the highest-emitting part of the fleet. At the end of the day, total emissions from the entire vehicle market matter much more for the planet than green niches glowing in the spotlight.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/153085/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John M. DeCicco, Ph.D., is a Research Professor Emeritus retired from the University of Michigan. He remains professionally active in energy research and teaches the "Mobility and the Environment" module as part of the University of Michigan's online Foundations of Mobility credential. He currently receives no funding, but his past work on vehicle efficiency was supported by environmental foundations and organizations. </span></em></p>Electric cars get a lot of hype, but what really matters for the climate are excess emissions from the many millions of gasoline vehicles still sold each year.John DeCicco, Research Professor Emeritus, University of MichiganLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1402462020-06-09T19:54:05Z2020-06-09T19:54:05ZClimate explained: does your driving speed make any difference to your car’s emissions?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/340440/original/file-20200608-176538-15lwe35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=49%2C149%2C4695%2C3009&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">SP Photo/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287622/original/file-20190811-144878-bvgm9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><strong><a href="https://theconversation.com/nz/topics/climate-explained-74664">Climate Explained</a></strong> is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.</em> </p>
<p><em>If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Does reducing speed reduce emissions from the average car?</strong> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Every car has an optimal speed range that results in minimum fuel consumption, but this range differs between vehicle types, design and age.</p>
<p>Typically it looks like this graph below: fuel consumption rises from about 80km/h, partly because air resistance increases.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/340495/original/file-20200609-165349-1dwyw4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But speed is only one factor. No matter what car you are driving, you can reduce fuel consumption (and therefore emissions) by driving more smoothly. </p>
<p>This includes anticipating corners and avoiding sudden braking, taking the foot off the accelerator just before reaching the peak of a hill and cruising over it, and removing roof racks or bull bars and heavier items from inside when they are not needed to make the car lighter and more streamlined. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-the-environmental-footprint-of-electric-versus-fossil-cars-124762">Climate explained: the environmental footprint of electric versus fossil cars</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Driving wisely</h2>
<p>In New Zealand, <a href="https://www.aa.co.nz/about/newsroom/media-releases/events/aa-energywise-rally-starts-with-a-rush/">EnergyWise rallies</a> used to be run over a 1200km course around the North Island. They were designed to demonstrate how much fuel could be saved through good driving habits. </p>
<p>The competing drivers had to reach each destination within a certain time period. Cruising too slowly at 60-70km/h on straight roads in a 100km/h zone just to save fuel was not an option (also because driving too slowly on open roads can contribute to accidents). </p>
<p>The optimum average speed (for both professional and average drivers) was typically around 80km/h. The key to saving fuel was driving smoothly. </p>
<p>In the first rally in 2002, the Massey University entry was a brand new diesel-fuelled Volkswagen Golf (kindly loaned by VW NZ), running on 100% biodiesel made from waste animal fat (as Z Energy has been <a href="https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2018/05/02/106691/biofuels-z-energys-tortuous-carbon-solution">producing</a>). </p>
<p>A car running on fossil diesel emits about 2.7kg of carbon dioxide per litre and a petrol car produces 2.3kg per litre. Using biofuels to displace diesel or petrol can reduce emissions by up to 90% per kilometre if the biofuel is made from animal fat from a meat works. The amount varies depending on the source of the biofuel (sugarcane, wheat, oilseed rape). And of course it would be unacceptable if biofuel crops were replacing food crops or forests.</p>
<p>Regardless of the car, drivers can reduce fuel consumption by 15-20% by improving driving habits alone – reducing emissions and saving money at the same time. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-what-each-of-us-can-do-to-reduce-our-carbon-footprint-123851">Climate explained: what each of us can do to reduce our carbon footprint</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Fuel efficiency</h2>
<p>When you are thinking of replacing your car, taking into account fuel efficiency is another important way to save on fuel costs and reduce emissions.</p>
<p>Many countries, including the US, Japan, China and nations within the European Union, have had fuel efficiency standards for more than a decade. This has driven car manufacturers to design ever <a href="http://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/files/files/Light%20Vehicle%20Report/CCA_TransportReport_Appendices.WEB.pdf">more fuel-efficient vehicles</a>.</p>
<p>Most light-duty vehicles sold globally are subject to these standards. But Australia and New Zealand have both dragged the chain in this regard, partly because most vehicles are imported. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-could-have-saved-over-1-billion-in-fuel-if-car-emissions-standards-were-introduced-3-years-ago-117190">Australians could have saved over $1 billion in fuel if car emissions standards were introduced 3 years ago</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>New Zealand also remains hesitant about introducing a “<a href="https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/government-announces-consultation-light-vehicle-fleet-feebate">feebate</a>” scheme, which proposes a fee on imported high-emission cars to make imported hybrids, electric cars and other efficient vehicles cheaper with a subsidy.</p>
<p>In New Zealand, driving an <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-switching-to-electric-transport-makes-sense-even-if-electricity-is-not-fully-renewable-136502">electric car results in low emissions</a> because electricity generation is 85% renewable. In Australia, which still relies on coal-fired power, electric cars are responsible for higher emissions unless they are recharged through a local renewable electricity supply.</p>
<p>Fuel and electricity prices will inevitably rise. But whether we drive a petrol or electric car, we can all shield ourselves from some of those future price rises by driving more efficiently and less speedily. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-switching-to-electric-transport-makes-sense-even-if-electricity-is-not-fully-renewable-136502">Climate explained: why switching to electric transport makes sense even if electricity is not fully renewable</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/140246/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ralph Sims does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>You can reduce your fuel consumption by 15-20% with improved driving habits alone – reducing emissions and saving money at the same time.Ralph Sims, Professor, School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1319052020-03-01T19:03:38Z2020-03-01T19:03:38ZTransport is letting Australia down in the race to cut emissions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317523/original/file-20200227-24664-mmpjep.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=92%2C134%2C5515%2C3362&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/cars-stuck-traffic-intersection-120564112">e2dan/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At a time Australia is meant to be reducing its greenhouse emissions, the upward trend in transport sector emissions continues. The <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/national-greenhouse-gas-inventory-september-2019">latest National Greenhouse Gas Inventory</a> report released last week shows the transport sector emitted 102 million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂-e) in the 12 months to September 2019. This was 18.9% of Australia’s emissions. </p>
<p>Overall, the trend in emissions from all sectors have been essentially flat since 2013. If Australia is to reduce emissions, all sectors including transport must pull their weight. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/four-ways-our-cities-can-cut-transport-emissions-in-a-hurry-avoid-shift-share-and-improve-106076">Four ways our cities can cut transport emissions in a hurry: avoid, shift, share and improve</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317522/original/file-20200227-24690-1g2lk7m.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Overall trend emissions, by quarter, September 2009 to September 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-02/nggi-quarterly-update-sep-2019.pdf">National Greenhouse Gas Inventory</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Transport emissions have <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-02/nggi-quarterly-update-sep-2019.pdf">gone up 64% since 1990</a>. That’s the largest percentage increase of any sector. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=354&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=354&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=354&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317508/original/file-20200227-24655-2gz9ko.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Transport emissions, actual and trend, by quarter, September 2009 to September 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-02/nggi-quarterly-update-sep-2019.pdf">Source: National Greenhouse Gas Inventory</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Transport sector emissions include the direct burning of fuels for road, rail, domestic aviation and domestic shipping, but exclude electricity for electric trains.</p>
<p>Transport emissions are now equal second with stationary energy (fuels consumed in the manufacturing, construction and commercial sectors and heating) at 18.9%. The electricity sector produces 33.6% of all emissions. The main reasons for transport emissions trending upwards are an over-dependence on cars with high average fuel use and an over-reliance on energy-intensive road freight.</p>
<h2>Inevitable results of policy failure</h2>
<p>Increasing transport emissions are a result of long-standing government policies on both sides of politics. In 2018, the Climate Council <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/transport-climate-change/">noted</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia’s cars are more polluting; our relative investment in and use of public and active transport options is lower than comparable countries; and we lack credible targets, policies, or plans to reduce greenhouse gas pollution from transport.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>John Quiggin and Robin Smit recently <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-thought-australian-cars-were-using-less-fuel-new-research-shows-we-were-wrong-122378">wrote about vehicle fuel efficiency</a> for The Conversation. They cited <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_9527cdcb01a84440a53308b3b5624320.pdf">new research</a> that indicates emissions from road transport will accelerate. This is largely due to increased sales of heavier vehicles, such as four-wheel drives, and diesel cars. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-thought-australian-cars-were-using-less-fuel-new-research-shows-we-were-wrong-122378">We thought Australian cars were using less fuel. New research shows we were wrong</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government has ignored recommendations to adopt mandatory fuel-efficiency standards for road passenger vehicles. Australia is the <a href="http://theconversation.com/labors-plan-for-transport-emissions-is-long-on-ambition-but-short-on-details-114592">only OECD country without such standards</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.tai.org.au/sites/default/files/NEEA%20October%202019%20%5BWeb%5D_2.pdf">Research by Hugh Saddler</a> found a marked increase in CO₂ emissions from burning diesel (up 21.7Mt between 2011 and 2018). A 2015 Turnbull government initiative to phase in from 2020 to 2025 a standard of 105g of CO₂ per kilometre for light vehicles was “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/02/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-diesel-vehicles-cancelled-out-cuts-from-renewable-energy">shelved after internal opposition</a> and criticism from the automotive lobby”. </p>
<p>At the same time, the uptake of electric vehicles is slow. Economist Ross Garnaut, in his 2019 book <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Superpower.html?id=KPiPDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false">Superpower: Australia’s Low-Carbon Opportunity</a>, sums it up:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia is late in preparation for and investment in electric road transport.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/clean-green-machines-the-truth-about-electric-vehicle-emissions-122619">Clean, green machines: the truth about electric vehicle emissions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Australia’s low transport energy efficiency (and so high CO₂ emissions) has also attracted overseas attention. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy <a href="https://www.aceee.org/portal/national-policy/international-scorecard">rates the world’s 25 largest energy users</a> for sectors including transportation. In 2018, Australia slipped two places to 18th overall. It was <a href="http://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/i1801.pdf">20th for transportation with just 6.5 points</a> out of a possible 25 on nine criteria.</p>
<p>On four of these criteria, Australia scored zero: fuel economy of passenger vehicles, having no fuel-efficiency standards for passenger vehicles and heavy trucks, and having no smart freight programs.</p>
<p>For vehicle travel per capita, the score was half a point. For three metrics – freight task per GDP, use of public transport, and investment in rail transit versus roads – Australia scored just one point each. </p>
<p>Only in one metric, energy intensity of freight transport, did Australia get full marks. This was a result of the very high energy efficiency of the iron ore railways in Western Australia’s Pilbara region.</p>
<p>The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has also <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/infrastructure/imf-says-australia-has-overspent-on-roads-20180221-h0wfin">questioned</a> the Australian government’s preference for funding roads rather than more energy-efficient rail transport. The IMF <a href="https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2019/02/13/Australia-2018-Article-IV-Consultation-Press-Release-Staff-Report-and-Statement-by-the-46612">says</a> Australia should be spending more on infrastructure, but this should be on rail, airports and seaports, rather than roads. </p>
<h2>What can be done</h2>
<p>The first thing is to acknowledge that our preferred passenger transport modes of cars and planes cause more emissions than trains, buses, cycling and walking. For example, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49349566">CO₂ emissions per passenger km</a> can be 171 grams for a passenger car as against 41g for domestic rail. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=205&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=205&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=205&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=258&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=258&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317520/original/file-20200227-24701-1gktt92.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=258&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2019">Data source: Greenhouse gas reporting: conversion factors 2019</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For freight, our high dependence on trucks rather than rail or sea freight increases emissions by a factor of three.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-plan-for-transport-emissions-is-long-on-ambition-but-short-on-details-114592">Labor's plan for transport emissions is long on ambition but short on details</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A 1996 report, <a href="https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/1996/report_094">Transport and Greenhouse</a>, from what is now the federal Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE), reviewed no fewer than 16 measures (including five “no regrets” measures) to cut transport emissions. In a 2002 report, <a href="https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2002/report_105">Greenhouse Policy Options for Transport</a>, BITRE offered 11 measures to reduce vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT), nine measures to reduce emissions per VKT, and four road-pricing measures (mass-distance charges for heavy trucks, tolls, internalising transport externalities and emission charging). </p>
<p>BITRE last appeared to revisit this important issue in a <a href="https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2009/wp_073">2009 report</a> on transport emission projections to 2020. This report projected a total of 103.87Mt CO₂-e for 2019. Actual 2019 transport emissions will be about 102Mt. </p>
<p>It’s important to note that BITRE’s 2009 projection was on a business-as-usual basis. The current level of about 4 tonnes a year per person is <a href="https://www.australasiantransportresearchforum.org.au/sites/default/files/2003_Laird.pdf">where Australia was in 2000</a>.</p>
<p>Clearly, Australia needs to do better. As well as the BITRE remedies, another remedy would be to <a href="https://www.australasiantransportresearchforum.org.au/sites/default/files/2003_Laird.pdf">adopt a 2002 National Action Plan</a> approved by the Australian Transport Council in collaboration with the Commonwealth, state and territory governments. The plan included, within ten years, “programs that encourage people to take fewer trips by car” and a shift “from predominantly fixed to predominantly variable costs” to “ensure that transport users experience more of the true cost of their travel choices”. This did not proceed. </p>
<p>However, New Zealand has effectively adopted this approach for many years. Petrol excise is now <a href="https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/energy-generation-and-markets/liquid-fuel-market/duties-taxes-and-direct-levies-on-motor-fuels-in-new-zealand/">66.524 cents per litre</a> (just <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/business/excise-and-excise-equivalent-goods/fuel-excise/excise-rates-for-fuel/">42.3c/l in Australia</a>) and the revenue goes to the National Land Transport Fund for roads and alternatives to roads, resulting also in lower registration fees for cars. New Zealand has had mass distance pricing for heavy trucks for 40 years. These measures have not stopped its economy performing well. </p>
<p>Why do measures that would reduce transport emissions continue to be so elusive in Australia?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131905/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Philip Laird owns shares in some transport companies and has received funding from the two rail-related CRCs as well as the ARC and the former Energy R&D Corporation. He is affiliated, inter alia, with the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, the Rail Futures Institute and Engineers Australia. The opinions expressed are those of the author.</span></em></p>The continued upward trend in our second-biggest source of emissions is a result of government inaction on a transport mix dominated by trucks and cars and a lack of fuel-efficiency standards.Philip Laird, Honorary Principal Fellow, University of WollongongLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1223782019-10-11T02:45:33Z2019-10-11T02:45:33ZWe thought Australian cars were using less fuel. New research shows we were wrong<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/296398/original/file-20191010-188823-16j0ksr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=31%2C25%2C4217%2C2746&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Traffic congestion on the M5 motorway in Sydney. Government assumptions that Australian cars are becoming more fuel efficient are incorrect, research shows.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In several speeches of late, Prime Minister Scott Morrison insisted with a straight face that Australia is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/26/scott-morrison-says-australias-record-on-climate-change-misrepresented-by-media">doing its bit on climate change</a>. The claim was <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-30/morrison-un-speech/11553594">swiftly</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2019/sep/26/fact-check-scott-morrisons-un-speech-about-australias-environmental-achievements-video">thoroughly</a> debunked. The truth is that the Morrison government is piggybacking on the efforts of others, to varying degrees of success.</p>
<p>We saw it in electricity generation, where the federal government has rejected a string of schemes to reduce emissions. Nonetheless the electricity sector is getting cleaner as ageing coal-fired power stations are replaced by renewables. This outcome owes nothing to federal government action. It reflects state government policies and the residual effects of the previous Labor government’s Renewable Energy Target, and public pressure that forced banks and insurance companies to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/26/insurance-giant-suncorp-says-it-will-no-longer-cover-new-thermal-coal-projects">stop supporting fossil fuels</a>. </p>
<p>In the transport sector, after <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_0e5b82c440c7482a8e0d645f2d931f57.pdf">decades of inaction</a>, the government rejected recommendations from the Climate Change Authority to impose fuel efficiency standards on passenger vehicles, leaving Australia as the <a href="http://theconversation.com/labors-plan-for-transport-emissions-is-long-on-ambition-but-short-on-details-114592">only OECD country without such standards</a>. It has similarly derided action to <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/butler-says-hard-right-makes-it-long-road-back-for-electric-vehicle-policy-67786/">promote the use of electric vehicles.</a></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-could-have-saved-over-1-billion-in-fuel-if-car-emissions-standards-were-introduced-3-years-ago-117190">Australians could have saved over $1 billion in fuel if car emissions standards were introduced 3 years ago</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Instead, the Coalition is relying on the hope that carbon dioxide emission rates of Australia’s new passenger vehicle fleet will reduce over time without any effort by governments, because <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_0e5b82c440c7482a8e0d645f2d931f57.pdf">vehicle emissions legislation</a> overseas, where Australia’s cars are made, is delivering technological improvements. <a href="https://ris.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2017/02/efficiency_standards_for_new_light_vehicles_ris_for_consultation.pdf">Official projections</a> state that some, but not all, of this improvement will flow through to Australia.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this assumption is not reliable. New research shows that for the first time, fuel efficiency in Australia is getting worse, not better. In the absence of positive action from governments, transport emissions will continue to grow, and even accelerate.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=635&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=635&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/292388/original/file-20190913-2140-zaju43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=635&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/128ae060-ac07-4874-857e-dced2ca22347/files/australias-emissions-projections-2018.pdf">Department of Environment and Energy</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A nation of car lovers, and carbon belchers</h2>
<p>Total road travel in Australia rose from 181 billion km in 2000 to <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/9208.0">255 billion km</a> in 2018 - a 41% increase.</p>
<p>Total CO₂ emissions from road transport increased by <a href="http://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/">31%</a> between 2000 and 2017, rising from 16% of total emissions in 2000 to 22% in 2017. With no action, transport emissions are <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/transport-emissions-and-climate-solutions/">projected to reach 111 million tonnes of CO₂ by 2030</a>.</p>
<p>Emissions have grown more slowly than kilometres travelled, which suggests that improvements in fuel efficiency have partially mitigated the effect of increased travel. Reducing emissions from transport will require a stronger decline in emissions intensity (CO₂ emissions per kilometre travelled) from our vehicles. Under current policies, this will not happen.</p>
<h2>Our assumptions are all wrong</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_9527cdcb01a84440a53308b3b5624320.pdf">recent analysis</a>
by <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com">Transport Energy/Emission Research</a> (TER) found the actual emissions intensity of new Australian passenger vehicles has stabilised and likely increased in recent years.</p>
<p>This finding directly contradicts projections that emissions intensity will fall without government intervention.</p>
<p>The chart below shows the average fleet emission rates officially reported in Europe, the US and Japan, and based on laboratory tests. When compared to these jurisdictions, Australia’s new passenger vehicles have significantly higher average CO₂ emission rates, and thus fuel consumption, than other countries, but all show a decline.</p>
<p><strong>Official new private vehicle fleet average CO₂ emission rates 2000-17</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=304&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=304&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=304&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290595/original/file-20190902-175696-1xkqvbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_e27faf5fcaaa4d8ba11c6aefc2d61774.pdf">Real-World CO2 Emissions Performance of the Australian New Passenger Vehicle Fleet 2008-2018, TER</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Unfortunately, real-world emissions and fuel consumption deviate substantially – and increasingly – from laboratory tests that are used to produce the officially reported CO₂ figures. This discrepancy is often referred to as “the gap”. So in reality, the reduction in CO₂ emission rates is not as large as official laboratory results suggest.</p>
<p>There are multiple reasons for this gap, such as the laboratory test protocol itself, and strategies used by car manufacturers -and allowed by the test - to achieve <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_9527cdcb01a84440a53308b3b5624320.pdf">lower emissions in laboratory conditions</a>. </p>
<p>TER corrected the official Australian figures to reflect real world emissions. It found that carbon emission intensity stopped declining around 2014 and is now increasing. This suggests that, for the first time, fuel efficiency is no longer improving and is actually getting worse.</p>
<p><strong>Official vs real-world CO₂ emission rates for Australia’s new private vehicle fleet</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/290596/original/file-20190903-175678-1ucb8ji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_e27faf5fcaaa4d8ba11c6aefc2d61774.pdf">Real-World CO2 Emissions Performance of the Australian New Passenger Vehicle Fleet 2008-2018, TER</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The upshot is that total CO₂ emissions from road transport are increasing, and will accelerate in the future.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_9527cdcb01a84440a53308b3b5624320.pdf">TER study</a>
identified the likely reasons for this: increased sales of heavy vehicles, such as four-wheel drives, and diesel cars. The latter may have a reputation for fuel efficiency, but they still emit, on average, about 10% more CO₂ than petrol cars. Australian diesel cars are, on average, about 40% heavier than petrol cars, and have 15% higher engine capacity.</p>
<h2>The road ahead</h2>
<p>The worsening picture in road transport emissions will increasingly drag down Australia’s efforts to meet its modest climate goals set in Paris - even with the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-institute-analysis-adds-to-pacific-pile-on-over-morrisons-climate-policy-121817">accounting tricks</a> the government plans to deploy to reduce the task. Of course it also means Australia is far less likely to make the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/publications/emissions-projections-2018">much sharper emissions reductions</a> needed by all nations to stabilise the global climate. </p>
<p>What can be done about this? The most obvious first step is to implement mandatory fuel efficiency or vehicle emission standards. This policy, fundamental in other countries, would significantly <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-could-have-saved-over-1-billion-in-fuel-if-car-emissions-standards-were-introduced-3-years-ago-117190">lower weekly fuel costs</a> for vehicle owners.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=554&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=554&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/296605/original/file-20191011-188797-103p1vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=554&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The federal government must adjust policy settings to encourage the uptake of electric vehicles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/clean-green-machines-the-truth-about-electric-vehicle-emissions-122619">Clean, green machines: the truth about electric vehicle emissions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Second, a rapid shift to electric cars will help, and increasingly so as the electricity supply <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-battery-powered-vehicles-stack-up-better-than-hydrogen-106844">transitions to renewables</a>. Deep emission cuts are then <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_6959d3a0b5d647bb9715126de67fa197.pdf">possible</a>.</p>
<p>The third is to provide better information about actual emissions. This could be achieved by restoring the large testing programs conducted in Australia up to 2008, involving hundreds of Australian vehicles over different real-world Australian test cycles which generated <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_e27faf5fcaaa4d8ba11c6aefc2d61774.pdf">large databases</a> of raw measurements.</p>
<p>For the moment, Australia’s national greenhouse gas emissions strategy seems to be: do nothing, rely on the work of industry, state governments and other nations, and hope that nobody notices. But climate change is not going away. Dodging it now will only increase the costs we accumulate in the long run.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/122378/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Quiggin is a former Member of the Climate Change Authority, and has campaigned for action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robin Smit is the founder of Transport Energy/Emission Research.</span></em></p>Surprise findings have revealed that Australia’s cars are getting less fuel efficient. This is bad news for the hip-pockets of motorists - and for the climate.John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandRobin Smit, Adjunct professor, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1171902019-05-29T19:46:17Z2019-05-29T19:46:17ZAustralians could have saved over $1 billion in fuel if car emissions standards were introduced 3 years ago<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274797/original/file-20190516-69204-135e2br.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=4%2C0%2C2941%2C2088&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Legislative action regarding vehicle emissions is overdue, and needs urgent attention by the federal government.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When it comes to road transport, Australia is at risk of becoming a climate villain as we lag behind international best practice on fuel efficiency.</p>
<p>Road transport is one of the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions and <a href="http://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/">represented</a> 16% of Australia’s total carbon dioxide emissions in 2000, growing to 21% in 2016. Total CO₂ emissions from road transport increased by almost 30% in the period 2000-16.</p>
<p>Fuel efficiency (CO₂ emission) standards have been adopted in around <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/vehicles/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">80% of the global light vehicle market</a> to cap the growth of transport emissions. This includes the United States, the European Union, Canada, Japan, China, South Korea and India – but not Australia. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/emissions-standards-on-cars-will-save-australians-billions-of-dollars-and-help-meet-our-climate-targets-74623">Emissions standards on cars will save Australians billions of dollars, and help meet our climate targets</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>If Australia had introduced internationally harmonised emissions legislation three years ago, households could have made savings on fuel costs to the tune of A$1 billion.</p>
<p>This shocking figure comes from our preliminary calculations looking at the effect of requiring more efficient vehicles to be sold in Australia.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/publications">report</a>, published yesterday by Transport Energy/Emission Research, looked at what Australia has achieved in vehicle fuel efficiency and CO₂ standards over the past 20 years. While Australia has considered and tried to impose standards a number of times, sadly these attempts were unsuccessful.</p>
<p>Legislative action on vehicle CO₂ emissions is long overdue and demands urgent attention by the Australian government.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274854/original/file-20190516-69189-gqprq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australian consumers are increasingly buying heavier vehicles with bigger emissions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shuterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How did Australia get here?</h2>
<p>The most efficient versions of vehicle models offered in Australia are <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/vehicles/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">considerably less efficient</a> than similar vehicles in other markets. </p>
<p>Australia could increasingly become a dumping ground for the world’s least efficient vehicles with sub-par emissions performance, given our lack of fuel efficiency standards. This leaves us on a dangerous path towards not only higher vehicle emissions, but also higher fuel costs for passenger travel and freight.</p>
<p>Australia has attempted to impose CO₂ or fuel efficiency standards on light vehicles several times over the past 20 years, but without success. While the federal government was committed to addressing this issue in <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/vehicles/environment/forum/index.aspx">2015</a>, four years later we are still yet to hear when – or even if – mandatory fuel efficiency standards will ever be introduced. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://ris.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2017/02/efficiency_standards_for_new_light_vehicles_ris_for_consultation.pdf">general expectation</a> appears to be that average CO₂ emission rates of new cars in Australia will reduce over time as technology advances overseas. In the absence of CO₂ standards locally, it is more likely that consumers will continue to not be offered more efficient cars, and pay higher fuel costs as a consequence.</p>
<h2>Estimating the fuel savings</h2>
<p>Available evidence suggests Australian motorists are paying on average almost <a href="http://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/files/files/Light%20Vehicle%20Report/Lightvehiclesreport.pdf">30% more for fuel than they should</a> because of the lack of fuel efficiency standards. </p>
<p>The Australian vehicle fleet uses about <a href="http://www.npi.gov.au/resource/australian-motor-vehicle-emission-inventory-national-pollutant-inventory-npi">32 billion litres</a> of fuel per year. </p>
<p>Using an Australian <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/publications">fleet model</a> described in the TER report, we can make a conservative estimate that the passenger vehicle fleet uses about half of this fuel: 16 billion litres per year. New cars entering the fleet each year would represent about 5% of this: 800 million litres per year.</p>
<p>So <a href="https://www.transport-e-research.com/">assuming</a> that mandatory CO₂ standards improve fuel efficiency <a href="http://ris.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2017/02/efficiency_standards_for_new_light_vehicles_ris_for_consultation.pdf">by 27%</a>, fuel savings would be 216 million litres per year. </p>
<p>In the last three years, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/petrol-prices-hit-10-year-high-putting-squeeze-on-families-20181022-p50b6z.html">the average fuel price</a> across Australia’s five major cities is A$1.33 per litre. This equates to a total savings of A$287 million per year, although this would be about half the first year as new cars are purchased throughout the year and travel less, and would reduce as vehicles travel less when they age.</p>
<p>The savings are accumulative because a car purchased in a particular year continues to save fuel over the following years. </p>
<p>The table below shows a rough calculation of savings over the three year period (2016-2018), for new cars sold in the same period (Model Years 2016, 2017 and 2018).</p>
<p>As a result, over a period of three years, A$1.3 billion in potential savings for car owners would have accumulated. </p>
<h2>Policy has come close, but what are we waiting for?</h2>
<p>The Australian government is not progressing any measures to introduce a fuel efficiency target. In fact, it recently labelled Labor’s proposed fuel efficiency standard as a “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-s-vehicle-carbon-target-would-save-motorists-27-5-billion-20190410-p51coz.html">car tax</a>”.</p>
<p>But Australia has come close to adopting mandatory vehicle CO₂ emission standards in the past. </p>
<p>In late 2007, the Labor government committed to cutting emissions to achieve Australia’s obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. The then prime minister, Kevin Rudd, <a href="https://thepep.unece.org/sites/default/files/2017-06/Vehicle.Fuel_.Efficiency.pdf">instructed</a> the Vehicle Efficiency Working Group to: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>… develop jointly a package of vehicle fuel efficiency measures designed to move Australia towards international best practice.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then, in 2010, the Labor government decided mandatory CO₂ emissions standards would apply to new light vehicles from 2015. But a change in government in 2013 meant these standards did not see the light of day.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/274827/original/file-20190516-69182-adqcks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The amount of fuel that could have been saved is A$287 million per year.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Things looked promising again when the Coalition government released a <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/fuel-quality/better-fuel-cleaner-air-discussion-paper-2016.">Vehicle Emissions Discussion Paper</a> in 2016, followed by a draft <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/vehicles/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">Regulation Impact Statement</a> in the same year.</p>
<p>The targets for adopting this policy in 2025, considered in the draft statement, were marked as “strong” (105g of CO₂ per km), “medium” (119g/km) and “mild” (135g/km) standards. </p>
<p>Under all three targets, there would be significant net cost savings. But since 2016, the federal government has taken no further action. </p>
<p>It begs the question: what exactly are we waiting for?</p>
<h2>The technical state of play</h2>
<p>Transport Energy/Emission Research conducted <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_0e5b82c440c7482a8e0d645f2d931f57.pdf">preliminary modelling</a> of Australian real-world CO₂ emissions. </p>
<p>This research suggests average CO₂ emission rates of the on-road car fleet in Australia are actually increasing over time and are, in reality, higher than what is officially reported in laboratory emissions tests.</p>
<p>In fact, the gap between mean real-world emissions and the official laboratory tests is expected to grow from 20% in 2010 to 65% in 2025. </p>
<p>This gap is particularly concerning when we look at the lack of support for low-emissions vehicles like electric cars.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-battery-powered-vehicles-stack-up-better-than-hydrogen-106844">Why battery-powered vehicles stack up better than hydrogen</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Given that fleet turnover is slow, the benefits of fuel efficiency standards would only begin to have a significant effect several years into the future.</p>
<p>With continuing population growth, road travel will only increase further. This will put even more pressure on the need to reduce average real-world CO₂ emission rates, given the increasing <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/transport-fact-sheet/">environmental</a> and <a href="https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2005/files/wp_063.pdf">health</a> impacts of the vehicle fleet.</p>
<p>Even if the need to reduce emissions doesn’t convince you, the cost benefits of emissions standards should. The sale of less efficient vehicles in Australia means higher weekly fuel costs for car owners, which could be avoided with the introduction of internationally harmonised emissions legislation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/117190/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robin Smit is an Adjunct Professor at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) and a Senior Honorary Fellow at the University of Queensland (UQ) and this article was prepared under these university affiliations. Robin is also Chair of the Transport Special Interest Group at the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand (CASANZ), Science Leader at the Queensland Department of Environment and Science and the Founder of TER.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Jake Whitehead is a Research Fellow at The University of Queensland and Director of Transmobility Consulting.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nic Surawski has worked on projects funded by city councils, alternative engine design companies, the Australian Coal Association Research Program, the federal Department of Environment and the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. Nic is a member of the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand.</span></em></p>This shocking figure comes from our back-of-the-envelope calculations looking at the effect of forcing more efficient engines on the Australian market.Robin Smit, Adjunct professor, The University of QueenslandJake Whitehead, Research Fellow, The University of QueenslandNic Surawski, Lecturer in Environmental Engineering, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1079522019-03-08T11:44:24Z2019-03-08T11:44:24ZMass-market electric pickup trucks and SUVs are on the way<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259987/original/file-20190220-148545-1tjfzvw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C453%2C5070%2C3142&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A new plug-in electric truck is in development, along with an electric SUV.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Debut_of_the_Rivian_R1T_pickup_at_the_2018_Los_Angeles_Auto_Show,_November_27,_2018.jpg">Richard Truesdell/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Electric vehicles – specifically, the Tesla Model 3 – are <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/08/teslas-model-3-was-2018s-best-selling-luxury-car-in-us.html">dominating the U.S. market</a> for premium sedans, but are barely even on the radar in the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-has-fallen-out-of-love-with-the-sedan-1535169698">busiest automotive category</a>, which includes <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-30/gm-bets-on-bigger-greener-cars-and-it-isn-t-alone">SUVs</a> and <a href="https://cleantechnica.com/2019/01/17/ford-says-an-electric-f-150-is-coming/">pickup trucks</a>.</p>
<p>The immediate reason is economics, but it has a lot to do with physics as well: Larger, heavier, less aerodynamic electric vehicles need larger, heavier, more expensive batteries to power them. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=4g7P1w4AAAAJ&hl=en">Our research</a> has looked at the <a href="https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=R34nvJoAAAAJ&hl=en">energy needed</a> to move cars and trucks along the road, and has identified the important factors that affect power usage.</p>
<p>We have developed an <a href="https://jscalc.io/embed/I78Wqhhw7mUzPwIq">applet</a> that can provide estimates of how much energy an electric vehicle would need to carry on board for a given driving range. This lets consumers determine how big a battery pack their car will need. The applet can provide a comparison of difference in energy consumption among sedans, pickup trucks and SUVs. Tesla’s Model 3 and the <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1102338251497431040">Model Y crossover SUV will use the same battery pack</a>, so our applet lets consumers compare the difference in driving range between a sedan and SUV.</p>
<h2>How do electric vehicles work?</h2>
<p>There are three forces resisting any effort to move a car on a flat road: wind resistance, friction from the road and inertia. Using the specifications of a vehicle’s design, including its weight, dimensions and shape, we can calculate the energy needed to get the vehicle to start and stay moving. From there, we can determine how long the car can travel at a certain speed, and estimate how far it can go before needing to recharge its batteries.</p>
<p>The actual range of the vehicle can vary widely, depending on the exact driving scenario, such as moving on a highway or driving in a city. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency provides a set of standardized drive profiles for different conditions (<a href="https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-fuel-emissions-testing/dynamometer-drive-schedules">such as urban, highway or a combination</a>), each of which specifies the speed of the car as it travels. The EPA also publishes a <a href="https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/overview-certification-and-compliance-vehicles-and-engines">certification report</a> that provides many characteristics, including the battery pack size and range of a given vehicle. This provides a consistent set of data with which we compare different cars, SUVs and trucks. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8CV6mKkwhec?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A prototype of Rivian’s SUV, still under development.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Those sorts of calculations are common for gas-powered vehicles. Electric cars also have an additional element to factor in: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhOEoXfxHMc">regenerative braking</a>, which lets cars recharge their batteries when slowing down.</p>
<p>An early test of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1149/2.0671711jes">our approach</a> involved the <a href="https://www.axios.com/researchers-try-to-crack-teslas-wall-of-silence-on-model-3-battery-1513304688-a31c1006-85f0-41f3-b7fa-b57393867fc1.html">Tesla Model 3</a>. We calculated how much energy it would need, how much it could regenerate along a trip and how much battery storage would need to be on board. We predicted that for the car to fulfill its promised 310-mile range before needing to recharge, it would have to store about <a href="https://www.axios.com/researchers-try-to-crack-teslas-wall-of-silence-on-model-3-battery-1513304688-a31c1006-85f0-41f3-b7fa-b57393867fc1.html">80 kilowatt-hours in its battery bank</a>. That calculation was later borne out by <a href="https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=42148&flag=1">the EPA certification report</a>.</p>
<p>Since that first success, we have analyzed a wide range of electric vehicles, allowing us – and consumers – to compare their energy efficiency and power consumption, and earning us the title “<a href="https://qz.com/1446315/">Battery Police</a>.”</p>
<iframe src="https://jscalc.io/embed/I78Wqhhw7mUzPwIq?autofocus=1" width="100%" height="500" frameborder="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="-1" style="border: 1px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.5)"></iframe>
<p><em>(Select an available electric vehicle or make your own using the “Custom Vehicle” option.)</em></p>
<h2>On to electric pickup trucks</h2>
<p>Our method isn’t just limited to cars. We have used it to analyze tractor-trailers <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.7b00432">that haul freight long distances</a>. And we are beginning to examine <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/15/rivian-announces-700-million-investment-round-led-by-amazon.html">pickups and SUVs as they come onto the market</a>. </p>
<p>Trucks are bigger and, often, less aerodynamically designed than cars, meaning they typically encounter more wind resistance. Friction and inertia increase for heavier vehicles. All of those mean a truck needs more energy to get, and stay, moving.</p>
<p>Once we know the amount of energy, we can calculate the battery pack size or driving range. The price of battery packs has <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2018-12-21/bnef-brief-lithium-battery-prices-fall-18-percent-video">dropped significantly</a> over the past decade.</p>
<p>By studying vehicle characteristics, we can help compare different electric vehicles’ battery needs and costs, which can help consumers evaluate options when they’re considering buying an electric car, a future SUV or an electric pickup truck. Within the applet, different vehicles currently can be selected. The change in driving range for different average driving speeds can be computed. </p>
<p>In addition, a custom electric vehicle with any battery pack size can be designed and the applet will answer questions about energy consumption, range and the total weight of the vehicle with the battery pack. This can be used to compare and understand the differences among vehicles.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107952/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Venkat Viswanathan is a consultant for Pratt & Whitney. He is a technical consultant, owns stock options and a member of Advisory Board at Zunum Aero. He is a technical consultant for Quantumscape. His research group receives funding from Airbus A^3, Quantumscape, Zunum Aero, Volkswagen, Toyota Research Institute.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Shashank Sripad receives funding from Zunum Aero and Airbus A^3 to undertake research as a Ph.D. Student at Carnegie Mellon University.
</span></em></p>Researchers have found a way to evaluate how energy-efficient electric vehicles are, and compare the sizes and costs of batteries for different models.Venkat Viswanathan, Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon UniversityShashank Sripad, Ph.D. Candidate in Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/944672018-08-09T10:41:33Z2018-08-09T10:41:33ZHow the federal government came to control your car’s fuel economy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231140/original/file-20180808-191038-1tfaef.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The bad old days of gas lines in the 1970s and shortages led to the creation of fuel economy rules.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Associated-Press-Domestic-News-New-York-United-/80242c041ce5da11af9f0014c2589dfb/19/0">AP Photo</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Environmental Protection Agency in August <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/safer-and-affordable-fuel-efficient-vehicles-proposed">announced a plan</a> to freeze fuel economy standards and revoke the ability of California to set more stringent rules than the national ones, prompting a <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-administration-and-california-are-on-collision-course-over-vehicle-emissions-rules-100574">legal showdown</a> between the state and the federal government.</p>
<p>The proposal, which would keep fuel economy at planned 2020 levels, is the most significant step to halt the rise on the mileage standards of the U.S. passenger vehicle fleet in decades. </p>
<p>But how did fuel efficiency even become mandated? After all, manufacturers go to great lengths to analyze the consumer marketplace and build in the most tantalizing features to create top sellers, whether it’s great acceleration or a deep bass sound system. One feature is different, though: Carmakers are legally bound to innovate more efficiency into their vehicles.</p>
<p>The regulations requiring higher efficiency – known as the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards – are one of the clearest vestiges of lessons the U.S. learned during the 1970s energy crisis. And most experts agree that by every measure, they show that <a href="https://theconversation.com/stronger-fuel-standards-make-sense-even-when-gas-prices-are-low-94274">thoughtful regulation can drive industry</a> to improve basic aspects of the consumer market, in this case automobiles, through innovation and designs that prioritize efficiency. </p>
<p>But today, the Trump administration argues that such regulations may be “<a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/01/607447344/states-sue-the-epa-to-protect-obama-era-fuel-efficiency-standards">too stringent</a>.” From my perspective as a historian, I see this move to put the brakes on rising fuel efficiency rules as a sea change in the country’s priorities on energy and oil consumption.</p>
<h2>‘Energy crisis’ and OPEC</h2>
<p>It was a panicked moment in 1977 when President Jimmy Carter <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4161905/jimmy-carter-sweater">stood in the Oval Office</a> to “have an <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=7369">unpleasant talk</a> with Americans about a problem unprecedented in our history.” </p>
<p>The Arab members of OPEC had embargoed oil shipments to many Western nations, resulting in temporary shortages in supply. But the U.S. after World War II had come to assume an <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-world-war-i-ushered-in-the-century-of-oil-74585">infinite oil supplies</a>. Though temporary, lines at gas stations and market shortages caused what was called an “energy crisis.” </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-tPePpMxJaA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Jimmy Carter called energy, apart from war, the greatest challenge Americans “will face in our lifetime.”</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Carter identified the essential problem as energy gluttony on which he <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1977/04/19/archives/carter-asks-strict-fuel-saving-urges-moral-equivalent-of-war-to-bar.html">declared</a> the “moral equivalent of war.” And CAFE standards marked a significant part of the federal response to the new reality of energy resources as finite – <a href="http://wws.princeton.edu/news-and-events/events/item/panic-pump-energy-crisis-past-present-and-future">not limitless</a>. </p>
<p>Most radical, though, the new standards redefined vehicles in a way that returned to the ethic of Henry Ford when vehicles possessed <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Crude_Reality.html?id=rnm-GyofjUoC">neither options nor variations</a>. Behind the options and bling, the auto could now be measured primarily for the effectiveness with which it carried out its basic purpose: transporting humans. As a remarkable example of the “<a href="http://www.environmentandsociety.org/mml/lovins-amory-b-soft-energy-paths-towards-durable-peace">softer energy paths</a>” extolled by environmental scientist Amory Lovins and others in the 1970s, CAFE standards recast the primary purpose of autos in the U.S. beyond devices for personal transportation. While they could offer various comforts and symbols of “bling,” American-made cars now had to perform their basic purpose – transportation – <a href="https://academic.oup.com/envhis/article-abstract/20/3/535/436699">efficiently</a>. </p>
<p>The 1975 law required that each vehicle openly post its miles per gallon rating, similar to listing ingredients in food that was required by the Food and Drug Administration. The law also required manufacturers to achieve the more challenging goal of improving fuel efficiency to reduce pollution and limit dependence on foreign oil. And they did: In 1978, American autos <a href="http://wws.princeton.edu/news-and-events/events/item/panic-pump-energy-crisis-past-present-and-future">averaged 13 miles per gallon compared to 22 mpg</a> in other Western countries; the law set the goal at 28 mpg for new American cars by 1985, which <a href="https://theconversation.com/government-fuel-economy-standards-for-cars-and-trucks-have-worked-94529">manufacturers achieved</a>. </p>
<h2>Political shifts</h2>
<p>Left open to political shifts, the CAFE standards have been adjusted up and down by each administration. </p>
<p>After rising significantly in the 1970s and early 1980s to 27.5 mpg, the fuel efficiency standards <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/fuel-efficiency/fuel-economy-basics.html#.WsjSVoIh2L4">stayed more or less steady</a> until the 2000s. In many cases, the auto industry lobbied against raising levels. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5IaQM/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="100%" height="450"></iframe>
<p>Then in 2007, Congress under President George W. Bush passed an energy law that put in place the first changes to U.S. fuel-economy standards in almost 20 years, raising the levels for auto manufactures to meet. In 2009, the Obama administration raised the goals even further and tied the decrease in emissions to <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/28/obama-administration-finalizes-historic-545-mpg-fuel-efficiency-standard">progress toward fighting climate change</a>, not only reducing oil consumption. </p>
<p>The Trump administration’s proposal would require manufacturers to meet the 2020 level of 37.5 mpg, but not meet the Obama administration’s more ambitious goals of over 50 mpg after that date. </p>
<p>The proposal reflects the Trump administration’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-deregulatory-record-doesnt-include-much-actual-deregulation-96161">commitment to deregulation</a> as a way to stimulate the economy. It also demonstrates a major change in how the U.S. views oil and gasoline. In the 1970s, the U.S. experienced how dependent it was on foreign suppliers; today, the U.S. is now one of the <a href="https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=oil_where">world’s leading producers of oil</a>. </p>
<p>Even if most consumers wouldn’t make efficiency a primary rationale for selecting a vehicle, time has shown that Americans from a <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/%7E/media/assets/2011/04/history-of-fuel-economy-clean-energy-factsheet.pdf">wide swath of the electorate look favorably</a> on spending less cash on gasoline. </p>
<p>California said it intends to <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/400769-california-tees-up-regulatory-counter-to-trumps-car-emissions">fight back against the proposal</a>, which suggests that CAFE standards will be a primary battlefront in the effort by states willing to stand against loosening environmental regulation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94467/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian C. Black does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Trump administration’s move to freeze fuel economy standards reflects a sea change in American energy policy first born during an era of oil shortages and environmental crises.Brian C. Black, Distinguished Professor of History and Environmental Studies, Penn StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1005742018-08-02T20:54:33Z2018-08-02T20:54:33ZTrump administration and California are on collision course over vehicle emissions rules<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230457/original/file-20180802-136649-1gb0mnx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">California and the Trump administration are going different directions on mileage standards.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Car-Pollution-Rules/4c98b6670bc941e5ac88ea7ecccc6ba6/13/0">AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Trump administration on Aug. 2 formally announced a <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/safer-and-affordable-fuel-efficient-vehicles-proposed">proposal</a> to freeze fuel economy standards and tailpipe emission standards for new cars. In addition, it is proposing to revoke California’s authority to set more stringent rules.</p>
<p>This move by the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, while expected for months, is the most significant action yet in rolling back efforts by the Obama administration and California to cut greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. It also sets up an unprecedented legal battle between California and the federal government while breaking with decades of practice on regulating tailpipe pollution.</p>
<p>In fact, only hours after the announcement California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/400076-california-readies-lawsuit-against-trump-administration-over-car">indicated</a> he intends to file a lawsuit in conjunction with 19 other state attorneys general to challenge the proposal. </p>
<h2>Taking aim at California’s waiver</h2>
<p>Under current regulations put in place by the EPA and NHTSA under Obama in 2012, auto manufacturers must make continuing improvements in fuel economy and tailpipe carbon emissions through 2025, up to an average of 54 miles per gallon and 163 grams of CO2 per mile. Built into the Obama-era regulations was a review process to assess manufacturers’ ability to meet those standards. The Obama administration conducted its own <a href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100QQ91.pdf">midterm review</a> in January 2017, concluding the planned increases in fuel economy and more stringent tailpipe standards should remain in place. </p>
<p>In April 2018, the agencies under the Trump administration <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-04-13/pdf/2018-07364.pdf">reversed their earlier position</a>, finding the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/midterm-evaluation-light-duty-vehicle-greenhouse-gas">standards were not feasible</a>. Now, the agencies have finished their review and seek public comment on a proposal to freeze both sets of standards at 2020 levels. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230471/original/file-20180802-136649-3p3n6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler has said that he wants a national mileage standard and, along with the Department of Transportation, is taking on California’s ability to set more stringent fuel economy rules.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/EPA-Wheeler/73f4fbeb9c4a4b1fab7e3de05b1e1d0e/7/0">AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the EPA and NHTSA’s proposal doesn’t stop at the national standards. The agencies are also attacking California’s ability to set its own, more stringent standards. Because 13 other states and the District of Columbia have chosen to adopt California’s standards, <a href="http://calcleancars.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Clean-Cars-Campaign-State-Backgrounder.pdf">35 percent</a> of the U.S. population would be impacted by any change. </p>
<p>What legal questions does this showdown between California and the federal government raise? In general, the <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-04-13/pdf/2018-07364.pdf">Supremacy Clause</a> of the United States Constitution provides that federal laws pre-empt, or supersede, conflicting state laws. Some federal laws also contain “express pre-emption clauses” that lay out the exact kinds of state laws Congress intends to pre-empt. The Clean Air Act’s express pre-emption clause generally bars states from setting their own laws relating to motor vehicle emissions. </p>
<p>But <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-california-gets-to-write-its-own-auto-emissions-standards-5-questions-answered-94379">California has the unique authority</a> to set its own motor vehicle emission standards due to the state’s notoriously poor air quality and its history of regulation predating congressional action on vehicle emissions. This authority dating back to 1967 is enshrined in a Clean Air Act provision, allowing California to seek a pre-emption “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7543">waiver</a>” from the EPA. Other states can then <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7507">opt in</a> to California’s standards. California has received <a href="https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/vehicle-emissions-california-waivers-and-authorizations">numerous waivers</a> from the EPA over the years for each new iteration of the state’s vehicle regulations. </p>
<p>The EPA and NHTSA have proposed revoking California’s most recent waiver granted in 2013 for its <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program">Advanced Clean Cars program</a>, an unprecedented attack against California’s historical authority. The EPA has only once denied California’s request for waiver, and even this was promptly <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/california-greenhouse-gas-waiver-request">reversed</a> following a change in administration from Bush to Obama. In the 50 years since the Clean Air Act was enacted, the EPA has never revoked an existing waiver. And there is no textual authority in the Clean Air Act’s <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7543">waiver provision</a> for the EPA to do so.</p>
<h2>Legal arguments</h2>
<p>In particular, the Trump administration is seeking to eliminate California’s greenhouse gas tailpipe emission standards and the state’s Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) program, which mandates an increasing percentage of vehicles sold in the state be zero-emission vehicles, such as electric vehicles. The EPA and NHTSA have proposed <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-08/documents/420f18903.pdf">three possible legal arguments</a> for revoking California’s waiver for these standards. </p>
<p>The first two arguments are based on the Clean Air Act’s criteria for denying a request for a new waiver, which have never before been used to justify revoking an existing waiver.</p>
<p>One of the three criteria that allow EPA to deny a request for waiver is if the state does not need the proposed regulations to meet “compelling and extraordinary conditions.” The Trump administration argues that the greenhouse gas tailpipe standards and the ZEV program are not needed to meet compelling and extraordinary circumstances particular to the state because climate change is a global problem. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230479/original/file-20180802-136667-1us45t7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">California’s ‘waiver’ to set its own air quality standards was driven historically by its bad air quality but foes of the waiver have questioned whether it can also cover the state’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gases.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/cwsteeds/5337739724/in/photolist-98Fj4f-indSyV-aQY4qK-oqvuf5-9v5Kca-mMbW4q-mMfzPk-q1kEJA-rxAAsh-qyQdJs-efyDYB-pZybKo-ks6Pft-aQGtVP-9uwtHE-cKK9zu-9WtWJD-nmf7X4-5Pn8SJ-coL8TS-mKqnFT-767RQ7-iag9jk-fU2a2y-oySWQg-fU29Eb-q12sbz-mMcriB-RzLk6T-aQY4RZ-9W2uK6-mNeAWW-nhqSWd-efEfsE-njbECr-dxmAhL-mMccaC-ssj83U-njvGDA-mMcaMX-efEzCY-mMdtEQ-9Fiind-njvHuU-9TVJjD-oHXzQP-saY2Zh-dbwi1i-mQQJsV-5pX6ug">Clinton Steeds</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But this ignores that the ZEV program was <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0364-0112">originally enacted</a> in the 1990s for the purpose of reducing conventional pollutants like nitrogen dioxides (NOx) and other smog precursors as a necessary part of California’s statutory duty to meet health-based ambient air quality standards for ozone. Indeed, California’s unique smog and ozone problems are <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-california-gets-to-write-its-own-auto-emissions-standards-5-questions-answered-94379">the primary reason</a> the Clean Air Act allows California to seek a waiver in the first place. California continues to have the <a href="https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/hnc.html">worst ozone problems</a> in the country, and the ZEV program remains a key part of <a href="https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2016sip/rev2016statesip.pdf">the state’s plan</a> to meet the ozone standards.</p>
<p>Second, the EPA and NHTSA argue California’s greenhouse gas tailpipe standards and ZEV program are technologically infeasible, another basis on which the Clean Air Act allows the EPA to deny a request for waiver. Once again, we find that this argument ignores existing evidence to the contrary. The California Air Resources Board <a href="https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/mtr/acc_mtr_summaryreport.pdf">recently concluded</a> that automakers were already over-complying with the state’s greenhouse gas tailpipe standards and exceeding the ZEV program’s annual requirements. </p>
<p>Finally, the EPA and NHTSA argue that California is pre-empted from regulating vehicle greenhouse gas emissions under a different federal law. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, or EPCA, was enacted in 1975 and set up the framework for NHTSA to issue national fuel economy standards. EPCA <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/32919">expressly pre-empts</a> any state laws “relating to” fuel economy. The EPA and NHTSA argue that California’s Clean Air Act pre-emption waiver to set vehicle emission standards does not extend to greenhouse gas tailpipe standards or the ZEV program because such standards are “related to” fuel economy, and thus pre-empted by EPCA. </p>
<p>As fellow UCLA law scholar Ann Carlson has <a href="http://legal-planet.org/2018/04/27/the-new-epa-plan-to-roll-back-auto-emissions-standards-and-revoke-the-california-waiver-is-legally-indefensible/">explained in detail</a>, this argument has already been explicitly rejected by <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1483620/green-mountain-chrysler-plymouth-dodge-v-crombie/">two</a> <a href="https://www.leagle.com/decision/20071680529fsupp2d115111597">different</a> federal courts, each of whom concluded that California’s greenhouse gas tailpipe standards are not pre-empted by EPCA because protecting public health by regulating greenhouse gas emissions is not the same thing as increasing energy efficiency by regulating fuel economy.</p>
<h2>What comes next</h2>
<p>While the announcement was made with great fanfare, it is still at this stage only a proposal. Under federal administrative law, the EPA and NHTSA first publish a proposal for how they intend to regulate. Once it is officially published in the Federal Register, every member of the public – the auto industry, the energy sector, states, environmental groups and everyday citizens – will have an opportunity to submit comments. Public hearings are also being scheduled in Washington D.C., Detroit and Los Angeles. Agencies must consider what the public has to say about the standards before they can be finalized.</p>
<p>Once the new regulations are finalized, the litigation will begin. <a href="https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/california-and-states-representing-over-40-percent-us-car-market-sue-defend">States</a> and <a href="https://www.edf.org/media/trump-administration-poised-attack-usas-successful-clean-car-standards-news-reports">environmental nonprofits</a> are chomping at the bit to sue the Trump administration over its actions to freeze fuel economy and tailpipe emission standards. California has <a href="http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-ol-patt-morrison-mary-nichols-fuel-economy-20180509-htmlstory.html">already warned</a> it will challenge any determination that limits its long-standing authority to set more stringent standards.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1025021124608835584"}"></div></p>
<p><a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44699.pdf">Judicial review</a> will focus on whether the relevant scientific and technical evidence support the EPA and NHTSA’s final decision. Judges often defer to agencies on these types of questions on the basis that agencies have the necessary technical expertise, but will force agencies to reconsider decisions when they are out of step with the weight of the evidence before them. </p>
<p>The coming litigation will most likely focus both on the evidentiary question of whether the EPA and NHTSA have adequately supported their determination that the Obama-era standards are infeasible, and the legal questions surrounding California’s authority to regulate vehicle emissions.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100574/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Law scholars from California unpack the legal questions raised by the Trump administration’s plan to roll back mileage standards and revoke California’s ability to set more stringent rules.Meredith Hankins, Shapiro Fellow in Environmental Law and Policy, University of California, Los AngelesNicholas Bryner, Assistant Professor of Law, Louisiana State University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/942742018-04-05T10:46:16Z2018-04-05T10:46:16ZStronger fuel standards make sense, even when gas prices are low<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213258/original/file-20180404-189813-w0fm7o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Staffers listen to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt discuss this policy reversal
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/EPA-Fuel-Standards/f6ef086848bc4022b5cecd3c96d1aded/4/0">AP Photo/Andrew Harnik</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-04/documents/mte-final-determination-notice-2018-04-02.pdf">It’s official</a>: The Trump administration is reversing steps its predecessor had taken to <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-ghg-emissions-standards-cars-and-light-trucks-should-be">curb gasoline and diesel consumption</a> through stricter car pollution and fuel economy standards. </p>
<p>Rather than heed growing <a href="https://www.umenergysurvey.com/2018-rising-belief/">concerns about climate change</a>, EPA Administrator <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-01/documents/mte-stakeholder-letter-2017-01-12.pdf">Scott Pruitt has formally moved to nix</a> the Obama administration’s carefully written rules. In 2012, the EPA set standards that aimed to <a href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100EZ7C.PDF?Dockey=P100EZ7C.PDF">halve the global warming pollution</a> from new cars and light trucks by 2025. It made those tailpipe limits in coordination with the Department of Transportation’s separate <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/3/15/14828070/trump-fuel-economy-standards">fuel-economy standards</a>, which targeted a near doubling of new vehicle miles-per-gallon over the same time frame.</p>
<p>Embracing auto lobbyists’ rhetoric, Pruitt declared in a press release that the existing policy “<a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-ghg-emissions-standards-cars-and-light-trucks-should-be">didn’t comport with reality</a>, and set the standards too high.” </p>
<p>As a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wQ5IYG4AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">scholar who has researched</a> automotive <a href="https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-1325">technology gains</a> in recent decades, I believe this move is not justified by either a lack of technical know-how or the decline in prices at the pump since the government issued its standards six years ago. My own <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1294-52">research has long shown</a> that engineering advances offer many ways to ramp up fuel economy and cut tailpipe emissions without making vehicles too costly. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"981239876971565056"}"></div></p>
<h2>Industry pressure</h2>
<p>This backward step was no surprise. The day after Donald Trump’s election victory, <a href="http://www.autonews.com/article/20161110/OEM11/161119989/automakers-reach-out-to-trump-on-regulation-seek-review-of-fuel">auto industry lobbyists dusted off their anti-regulatory scripts</a> and pleaded their case to the incoming White House. </p>
<p>Automakers <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/business/energy-environment/automakers-pruitt-mileage-rules.html">pressed for weaker standards</a>, arguing that the necessary technologies cost too much, would not be ready on time, and ran counter to consumer trends. </p>
<p>However, I believe that the EPA had more than adequately addressed these concerns in the draft <a href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100OYFR.PDF?Dockey=P100OYFR.PDF">report it issued in July 2016</a>. That analysis built on the earlier technology and economic assessments that justified the <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/28/obama-administration-finalizes-historic-545-mpg-fuel-efficiency-standard">landmark standards</a> established four years earlier.</p>
<h2>Cheaper gas</h2>
<p>One of the Trump administration’s main arguments is that gas costs less now than it did when the government established these standards six years ago. While that affordability clearly benefits consumers, it is no reason to slow down pollution-cutting progress. </p>
<p>Lower fuel prices do trim the immediate economic benefits of stronger standards. But the main rationale for the EPA’s standards is reducing the emissions that cause global warming, and that’s unchanged. Moreover, maintaining stricter standards would protect Americans from very real risks to their wallets if and when oil prices soar again. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/030315/why-did-oil-prices-drop-so-much-2014.asp">Fuel prices</a> nosedived in mid-2014, <a href="http://www.zdnet.com/article/oil-and-gas-price-forecast-for-2014/">contrary to industry expectations</a>. After ticking up slowly for the past two years, they remain <a href="https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/weekly/">about US$1.25 lower</a> than when the standards were first conceived. </p>
<p>When it issued the standards in 2012, the <a href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100EZ7C.PDF?Dockey=P100EZ7C.PDF">EPA estimated</a> that any added upfront vehicle costs would be paid back by fuel savings within three and a half years on average. I estimate that today’s lower fuel prices would push the payback period to about five years. That’s still a good deal given that the average vehicle stays on the road for <a href="https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fact-997-october-2-2017-average-age-cars-and-light-trucks-was-almost-12-years">nearly 12 years</a>. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"979012010057830400"}"></div></p>
<p>Lower gasoline prices do make consumers less eager to seek cars and trucks that get more miles per gallon. And it’s quite true that many top-selling models are <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/best-selling-cars-and-trucks-in-us-2017-2018-1#1-ford-f-series-896764-93-20">gas-thirsty trucks like the Ford F-150, Dodge Ram and Chevrolet Silverado</a>. </p>
<p><iframe id="ofyV4" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ofyV4/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>But the auto industry had the EPA build enough flexibility into the rules to accommodate such shifts in taste. Trucks, for example, are already held to weaker standards than cars, and the standards are automatically relaxed as any given type of vehicle gets larger. For that reason, the regulatory relief that automakers are seeking is not really needed.</p>
<p>What’s more, <a href="https://goo.gl/aELcX5">engineers are forging ahead</a> with an array of technological enhancements designed to make even the largest pickup trucks more fuel-efficient, such as engines that automatically idle at stoplights, auto bodies made from lighter and stronger kinds of steel and other engineering advances.</p>
<h2>Striking a balance</h2>
<p>The conundrum the EPA faces is a classic one of how to balance consumer concerns about health and safety with their everyday wish to drive appealing vehicles that meet their needs and fit their budget. </p>
<p>The Trump administration seems to believe that automakers’ natural desire to cater to short-term market desires outweigh long-term concerns about the environment. That brings us back to the real reason the country needs strong and steady clean car rules. History shows that regulations work, and the fact that car manufacturers have clearly <a href="https://one.nhtsa.gov/nhtsa/timeline/index.html">improved safety</a> and <a href="https://autoalliance.org/energy-environment/clean-car-progress/">cut emissions</a> even while <a href="https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2016-sets-all-time-car-sales-record.html">vehicle sales reached new highs</a> contradicts the industry’s argument that regulations force them to build cars that customers don’t want to buy. </p>
<p>Automotive technology is always advancing, and at any given point in time it can be used to either reduce emissions or offer more horsepower, added capacity, or any number of other amenities such as heated seats. And the list goes on. There’s nothing wrong with these features, but they don’t justify doing less to curtail global warming. </p>
<p>The history of automotive policymaking shows that consumers can in fact have cars that are both nicer and cleaner. The first car I owned – a 1967 Ford Custom 500 with a stick shift that got less than 20 miles per gallon – was quite spartan by today’s standards. It was no match for my family’s current car, a 2012 Toyota Camry hybrid that gets over 35 miles per gallon and is far more powerful, safer and comfortable while still quite affordable. </p>
<p>Without regulations, that Camry would no doubt be at least as nice in terms of creature comforts, but it would not be as safe, efficient and clean. That is why I’m certain that carefully crafted regulations do strike the right balance, in spite of automakers’ complaints to the contrary. </p>
<p>In short, the Trump administration’s main justification for weakening the standards – less-than-expected consumer interest in efficiency due to lower gas prices – is actually the reason why the nation needs more stringent standards in the first place.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94274/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John DeCicco's work is supported by the University of Michigan Energy Institute, whose financial partners and advisory board members include federal agencies, national laboratories, energy, financial, automotive and other manufacturing companies and nonprofit organizations. </span></em></p>Manufacturers always have to make trade-offs when they design new cars, balancing the need to protect public health and the environment with their urge to wow customers.John DeCicco, Research Professor, University of MichiganLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/938402018-03-29T10:30:30Z2018-03-29T10:30:30ZWhy EPA’s U-turn on auto efficiency rules gives China the upper hand<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212474/original/file-20180328-109204-jhpv2v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Fuel economy and air pollution regulations have lowered pollution and pushed industry to innovate.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/cosmic_spanner/95909221">Mike Roberts</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Trump administration on Monday, April 2, took steps to ease pollution and efficiency rules for new passenger cars and trucks, giving automakers a reprieve from more stringent Obama-era standards. But in the process, the move could yield global leadership in the auto sector to the Chinese.</p>
<p>Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-ghg-emissions-standards-cars-and-light-trucks-should-be">announced</a> a plan to revise existing tailpipe standards that were going to apply for model years 2022 to 2025, saying the current standards “are not appropriate” and were set “too high.” Pruitt also said the EPA is re-examining the state of <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-13/epa-chief-signals-showdown-with-california-on-tailpipe-standards">California’s</a> historic ability to adopt tailpipe standards that are more ambitious than the federal government’s. </p>
<p>One might think of this as another case of <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-automakers-emissions/automakers-say-u-s-fuel-economy-standards-unrealistic-cite-costs-and-consumers-idUSKBN1CB2UY">industry versus environmentalists</a>. After all, the automakers are <a href="https://www.bna.com/carmakers-harmonization-push-n57982088999/">calling</a> for eased regulatory burdens and “harmonized” standards across the states and the federal government. Environmentalists <a href="http://www.autonews.com/article/20180323/OEM11/180329841/cafe-moves-bring-uncertainty">decry the move</a> as undermining our nation’s efforts to cut carbon pollution.</p>
<p>But the EPA’s planned rollback of fuel economy rules defies the simple narrative that businesses and environmentalists are butting heads. Over the last half century, tailpipe emissions rules have helped the nation develop a vibrant, globally competitive automotive sector. As a former senior energy congressional staffer and now a law professor, I have learned that well-designed environmental standards can spur innovation and give our domestic companies a “<a href="https://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Auto-Industry-Intl-Competitiveness_ICCT_Briefing_23052017_vF.pdf">first-mover advantage</a>.” </p>
<p>As a policy professional, I met countless times over two decades with car makers, their suppliers, technologists, environmental advocates and entrepreneurs. In my view, reversing course on the EPA’s tailpipe standards threatens to yield this competitive advantage to other nations. </p>
<h2>Parts suppliers versus car makers</h2>
<p>Some segments of the auto industry understand the importance of emissions standards. A recent <a href="http://www.calstart.org/News_and_Publications/CALSTART-in-the-news/CALSTART-Press-Releases/New-Survey-Shows-Automotive-Suppliers-strongly.aspx">survey</a> done on behalf of a clean transportation industry group found that 95 percent of auto parts suppliers agreed that more ambitious standards encourage innovation and investment in the U.S. </p>
<p>These companies overwhelmingly want the EPA standards maintained or even strengthened and are <a href="https://www.bna.com/automakers-parts-suppliers-n73014464219/">letting policymakers know</a> that any relaxation will cost U.S. manufacturing jobs. Suppliers of pollution control technologies have <a href="http://www.meca.org/attachments/3034/MECA_Comments_on_EPA_Final_Determination_Reconsideration___appendix_10052017.pdf">told</a> the EPA that weakening the standards could strand current investments and jeopardize new investments in domestic manufacturing of clean car technologies. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212476/original/file-20180328-109207-xeq5ll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">China’s more aggressive push for plug-in vehicles has attracted investment from automakers in batteries and other emerging auto technologies.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/dragonpreneur/6882360381/in/photolist-buaTXT-d1fVZS-d1eSHE-cUtnBA-cUVkbo-jsnris-cUj3y7-d1oJdE-cZrhRQ-d1fW47-jsm1Rz-aGc4mc-Y4k9qN-d1oJaJ-jsoTod-cTTWAy-cUj3hA-cYKDfU-cYNKKQ-bx8bin-dxqiP-cUWzKw-jsoZou-buaVDi-buaX42-cYcvFG-jspe7w-cYNKQJ-cUVk2b-9mzRbr-cYdrQY-jsnvw6-9AEckG-cYMMrY-cYNKTm-cYKD8h-Ypp9Xt-cYMvGU-cYMMzj-buaExT-cYKkmm-cYNKWJ-cUmrtW-qbf9s1-99FoZP-5s9qFC-cZrhNh-p5r1r6-643ijs-jsmUpx">Philip McMaster</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These parts suppliers employ hundreds of thousands of workers and their market is expected to grow to US$23 billion by the end of the decade. In their <a href="http://www.meca.org/attachments/3067/MECA_comments_on_EPA_Glider_Reconsideration_01052018.pdf">own words</a>, the industry group Manufacturers of Emission Controls Association said its members continue “to grow and add more jobs in response to environmental regulations.” In 2017 alone, these manufacturers invested over $3 billion in developing technologies that reduce emissions from mobile sources. </p>
<p>Although Pruitt <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-ghg-emissions-standards-cars-and-light-trucks-should-be">said in a statement</a> that the standards are based on “assumptions that do not comport with reality” and are set “too high,” the manufacturers responsible for producing technological options for compliance have <a href="http://www.meca.org/attachments/3034/MECA_Comments_on_EPA_Final_Determination_Reconsideration___appendix_10052017.pdf">said</a> that there are “well known technologies … to meet the 2025 standards” including some new technologies that weren’t anticipated when the standards were last reviewed but are now expected to be available.</p>
<h2>Developed and made in America</h2>
<p>The landmark Clean Air Act, passed in 1970 and strengthened in 1990, has two key policy features that have spurred innovation and economic activity in the auto manufacturing sector. </p>
<p>First, the act <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2013-title42/html/USCODE-2013-title42-chap85-subchapII-partA-sec7521.htm">says</a> that EPA standards for cars and trucks take effect after the period “necessary to permit the development and application of the requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to the cost of compliance within such period.” This even-handed approach ensures that the auto manufacturers have the time they need to develop pollution control technology, and that the EPA can set standards stringent enough to require the development and deployment of new technology. </p>
<p>This “technology-forcing” approach has brought innovation to an industry that hasn’t always embraced it – from the industry’s well-known resistance to catalytic converters decades ago to today’s <a href="https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1114552_automaker-push-to-delay-modify-or-kill-cafe-is-nothing-new">reluctance</a> to adopt available technology to improve the efficiency of conventional internal combustion engines.</p>
<p>Second, Congress has <a href="https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/vehicle-emissions-california-waivers-and-authorizations">preserved the ability</a> of California to set its own tailpipe standards – an authority the state has exercised since before the EPA was created in 1970. Other states may opt-in. In the case of California’s greenhouse gas standards for cars and trucks, <a href="https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/111617-CleanCarStds-presentation-REV.pdf">13 states have decided to do so</a>, creating a combined market pull of <a href="https://www.wired.com/2017/03/want-gut-emission-rules-prepare-war-california/">approximately 30 percent</a> of the nation’s annual new passenger car and truck sales. </p>
<p>The world can then follow. This “<a href="https://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Auto-Industry-Intl-Competitiveness_ICCT_Briefing_23052017_vF.pdf">California effect</a>” occurs as jurisdictions within and outside of the United States trade up to more stringent emissions standards to achieve their benefits and simplify compliance. </p>
<p>Under this virtuous cycle, the U.S. leads with tougher standards that drive research, technology development, commercialization and manufacturing. That technology is then sold to the world. </p>
<h2>California vs. China</h2>
<p>China, however, is leap-frogging the U.S. policy. </p>
<p>In 2010, the Chinese government designated “new energy vehicles” – essentially those that plug in to electrical outlets – as a “strategic emerging industry.” Officials have done this not only to reduce urban smog but also as <a href="http://www.eiu.com/industry/article/285962212/the-road-ahead-chinas-new-energy-vehicles/2017-10-04">a tool for industrial development</a>. It helps Chinese industry capture domestic market share while establishing Chinese automakers as global leaders in the technology; it also develops their domestic battery-making sector. </p>
<p>California also requires automakers to supply a growing number of plug-in vehicles. But that program, which has seemed ambitious domestically and has <a href="https://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/newsrelease.php?id=934">shared goals and approaches</a> with China, simply is not at the same scale as China’s. </p>
<p>This has created an opportunity that China seeks to capitalize on in the coming decades. China’s recently adopted goals for plug-in vehicles overtake California’s program by requiring an <a href="https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1115740_why-the-future-of-electric-cars-depends-on-chinas-war-on-pollution">aggressive deployment</a> of plug-in vehicles beginning in 2019 with a target of <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-autos-electric/china-targets-35-million-vehicle-sales-by-2025-nevs-to-make-up-one-fifth-idUSKBN17R086">7 million new plug-in cars sold per year</a> by 2025. The Chinese government is even <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/11/news/china-gas-electric-car-ban/index.html?iid=EL">openly discussing</a> the appropriate date to discontinue sales of internal combustion engine vehicles within China. </p>
<p>By comparison, automakers will be able to comply with California’s zero emission vehicle requirement if <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/what-will-it-take-for-automakers-to-meet-californias-ev-requirements-not-as-much-as-you-might-think">just 8 percent</a> of new cars sold in 2025 are electric. If 2 million new cars continue to be sold in California in 2025, that would amount to just 160,000 electric vehicle sales annually. </p>
<p>China’s policies are being reflected in corporate decisions. Even as Daimler teams with a Chinese partner to invest $2 billion in a manufacturing plant in China, Chinese automaker Geely has accumulated <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-23/china-s-geely-is-said-to-be-buying-9-billion-stake-in-daimler">nearly 10 percent</a> of Daimler’s stock <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-daimer-geely-stake-berlin/daimler-in-2-billion-china-investment-with-baic-as-geely-swoops-idUSKCN1G90FS">reportedly in a bid</a> to secure its electric and autonomous vehicle technology. Ford has committed to a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ford-motor-china-electric-vehicle/ford-chinas-zotye-auto-invest-756-million-in-electric-vehicle-jv-idUSKBN1D81L4">$765 million investment</a> to jointly build electric vehicles with a Chinese partner. </p>
<p>Given the essential need to reduce carbon pollution from the transportation sector, I see the policy rationale for fuel efficiency and pollution reduction mandates in the years to come as ironclad. </p>
<p>From an economic point of view, clean car technology represents a tremendous opportunity for the nation willing to step up and lead as the world transitions in the decades to come. While it may still be an open question as to which country will benefit the most from this transition, the EPA decisions could tilt the playing board away from U.S. companies.</p>
<p><em>This article was updated on April 2 with details from the EPA’s announcement.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93840/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Greg Dotson is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress.</span></em></p>The Trump administration announced a plan to relax fuel economy standards, but well-designed regulations can drive clean car innovations that make U.S. industry globally competitive.Greg Dotson, Assistant Professor of Law, University of OregonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/919142018-02-15T23:58:14Z2018-02-15T23:58:14ZCommon products, like perfume, paint and printer ink, are polluting the atmosphere<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206695/original/file-20180215-131000-1ie7l5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We need to measure the volatile compounds that waft off the products in our homes and offices.</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Picture the causes of air pollution in a major city and you are likely to visualise pollutants spewing out of cars, trucks and buses.</p>
<p>For some types of air pollutants, however, transportation is only half as important as the chemicals in everyday consumer products like cleaning agents, printer ink, and fragrances, according to a study <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6377/760?utm_source=AusSMC%20mailing%20list&utm_campaign=9d3433ba95-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_15&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_90d9431cd5-9d3433ba95-137625618">published today in Science</a>.</p>
<h2>Air pollution: a chemical soup</h2>
<p>Air pollution is a serious health concern, <a href="https://theconversation.com/air-pollution-causes-more-than-3-million-premature-deaths-a-year-worldwide-47639">responsible for millions of premature deaths each year</a>, with even <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-set-to-increase-air-pollution-deaths-by-hundreds-of-thousands-by-2100-81830">more anticipated due to climate change</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-set-to-increase-air-pollution-deaths-by-hundreds-of-thousands-by-2100-81830">Climate change set to increase air pollution deaths by hundreds of thousands by 2100</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Although we typically picture pollution as coming directly from cars or power plants, a large fraction of air pollution actually comes from chemical reactions that happen in the atmosphere. One necessary starting point for that chemistry is a group of hundreds of molecules collectively known as “volatile organic compounds” (VOCs).</p>
<p>VOCs in the atmosphere can come from many different sources, both man-made and <a href="https://blogs.csiro.au/ecos/beating-eucalypt-blues-new-ways-model-air-quality/">natural</a>. In urban areas, VOCs have historically been blamed largely on <a href="https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/15/9983/2015/">vehicle fuels (both gasoline and diesel) and natural gas</a>.</p>
<h2>Fuel emissions are dropping</h2>
<p>Thanks in part to more stringent environmental regulations and in part to technological advances, VOCs released into the air by vehicles have <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120810134105.htm">dropped dramatically</a>.</p>
<p>In this new study, the researchers used detailed energy and chemical production records to figure out what fraction of the VOCs from oil and natural gas are released by vehicle fuels versus other sources. They found that the decline in vehicle emissions means that – in a relative sense – nearly twice as much comes from chemical products as comes from vehicle fuel, at least in the US. Those chemicals include cleaning products, paints, fragrances and printer ink – all things found in modern homes.</p>
<p>The VOCs from these products get into the air because they evaporate easily. In fact, in many cases, this is exactly what they are designed to do. Without evaporating VOCs, we wouldn’t be able to smell the scents wafting by from perfumes, scented candles, or air fresheners.</p>
<p>Overall, this is a good news story: VOCs from fuel use have decreased, so the air is cleaner. Since the contribution from fuels has dropped, it is not surprising that chemical products, which have not been as tightly regulated, are now responsible for a larger share of the VOCs.</p>
<h2>Predicting air quality</h2>
<p>An important finding from this work is that these chemical products have largely been ignored when constructing the models that we use to predict air pollution – which impacts how we respond to and regulate pollutants.</p>
<p>The researchers found that ignoring the VOCs from chemical products had significant impacts on predictions of air quality. In outdoor environments, they found that these products could be responsible for as much as 60% of the particles that formed chemically in the air above Los Angeles.</p>
<p>The effects were even larger indoors – a major concern as <a href="https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/ambient-air-quality/topic/indoor-air-quality-2">we spend most of our time indoors</a>. Without accounting for chemical products, a model of indoor air pollutants under-predicted measurements by a whopping 87%. Including the consumer products really helped to fix this problem.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-afford-to-ignore-indoor-air-quality-our-lives-depend-on-it-87329">We can't afford to ignore indoor air quality – our lives depend on it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What does this mean for Australia?</h2>
<p>In Australia we do a <a href="http://www.npi.gov.au/resource/total-volatile-organic-compounds">stocktake of our VOC emissions</a> to the air every few years. Our vehicle-related VOC emissions <a href="https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/ambient-air-quality/topic/2016/management-sources-pollution#figure-atm41-historical-and-projected-trends-in-road-transport-emissions-1970%E2%80%932030--117456">have also been dropping</a> and are now only about a quarter as large as they were in 1990.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206687/original/file-20180215-131013-1yyp71q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Historical and projected trends in Australia’s road transport emissions of VOCs.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided, adapted from Australia State of the Environment 2016: atmosphere</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nonetheless, the most recent check suggests most of our VOCs still come from <a href="https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/ambient-air-quality/topic/2016/volatile-organic-compounds">cars and trucks, factories and fires</a>. Still, consumer products can’t be ignored – especially as our urban population <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-population-booms-and-the-only-way-is-up-and-in-20160911-grdv4b.html">continues</a> <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/4-million-5-million-8-million-how-big-is-too-big-for-liveable-melbourne-20170630-gx1uo9.html">to</a> <a href="http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/acts-population-projected-to-hit-421000-by-2020-20170313-guwqzv.html">grow</a>. Because these sources are spread out across the city, their contributions can be difficult to estimate accurately.</p>
<p>We need to make sure our future VOC stocktakes include sources from consumer products such as cleaning fluids, indoor fragrances and home office items like printing ink. The stocktakes are used as the basis for our models, and comparing models to measurements helps us understand what affects our air quality and how best to improve it. It was a lack of model-to-measurement agreement that helped to uncover <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/22/vw-scandal-caused-nearly-1m-tonnes-of-extra-pollution-analysis-shows">the VW vehicle emissions scandal</a>, where the manufacturer was deliberately under-estimating how much nitrogen gas was being released through the exhaust.</p>
<p>If we can’t get our predictions to agree with the indoor measurements, we’ll need to work harder to identify all the emission sources correctly. This means going into <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/87d5dedd-62c2-479c-a001-a667eae21f7c/files/indoor-air-project-dwellings.pdf">typical Australian homes</a>, making air quality measurements, and noting what activities are happening at the same time (like cooking, cleaning or decorating).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/heading-back-to-the-office-bring-these-plants-with-you-to-fight-formaldehyde-and-other-nasties-87758">Heading back to the office? Bring these plants with you to fight formaldehyde (and other nasties)</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What should we do now?</h2>
<p>If we want to keep air pollution to a minimum, it will become increasingly important to take into account the VOCs from chemical products, both in our models of air pollution and in our regulatory actions.</p>
<p>In the meantime, as we spend so much of our time indoors, it makes sense to try to limit our personal exposure to these VOCs. There are several things we can do, such as choosing fragrance-free cleaning products and keeping our use of scented candles and air fresheners to a minimum. Research from NASA has also shown that growing house plants like weeping figs and spider plants can help to <a href="https://www.boredpanda.com/best-air-filtering-houseplants-nasa/">remove some of the VOCs from indoor air</a>.</p>
<p>And of course, we can always open a window (as long as we keep the outdoor air clean, too).</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91914/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jenny Fisher receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Department of the Environment, and the L'Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science Fellowship programme. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kathryn Emmerson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A surprising study published in Science found that as fuel emissions drop, consumer products are playing a larger role in air pollution.Jenny Fisher, Senior Lecturer in Atmospheric Chemistry, University of WollongongKathryn Emmerson, CSIROLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/904422018-01-22T19:07:27Z2018-01-22T19:07:27ZAustralia’s ‘electric car revolution’ won’t happen automatically<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202785/original/file-20180122-110087-12tjlvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/bk1bennett/2927663559/in/photolist-5sH3nV-9NBBMn-ZLdb6T-9NDZCz-aiprfD-p6mivJ-8ZKVFP-91rGsn-4aDKcw-8iiPsT-91pvZN-7pxLrE-91moqk-7xv7Gy-mBLKbV-72MmvF-91n215-5YHCb3-eZKgEK-kCnuZh-6bMfye-mKvdtV-Chreb-GZbdUh-oQT5DH-oQZpcc-22Ry7up-e61krG-otgQMV-aSV9Sx-23kDjFw-dF5YdS-9udmax-tmGyg-iM9EAR-uWcDF-8fHJS9-aFHjwB-ZjmDZp-aSV9Se-orw634-9vw2Bh-nuLmj7-3Ubx5-oQSZRr-asZFa9-AiueK-cVGkoN-9Xdfv3-6Nc2on">bk1bennett/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Electric cars might finally be having their moment in Australia, after British billionaire Sanjeev Gupta approached the South Australian government about retooling Adelaide’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-22/sanjeev-gupta-plan-to-revive-car-making-at-holden-site/9348030">defunct Holden factories into a new manufacturing hub</a>. </p>
<p>Last week federal energy minister Josh Frydenberg wrote that as costs fall, Australia will “inevitably” see an <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/stand-by-australia-for-the-electric-car-revolution-20180112-h0hazy.html">electric car revolution</a>. He cited surveys showing up to half of Australian motorists would consider going electric the next time they buy a car.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Read more:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/sustainable-shopping-with-the-right-tools-you-can-find-an-eco-friendly-car-76080">Sustainable shopping: with the right tools, you can find an eco-friendly car</a></em></p>
<hr>
<p>But falling costs alone won’t convert consumer sentiment into <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gec3.12358/full">actual sales</a>. Our research – partly covered in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/negative-charge-why-is-australia-so-slow-at-adopting-electric-cars-86478">previous article on The Conversation</a> – examines how different countries handle the three major issues: vehicle cost, recharger availability, and demystifying the public. </p>
<h2>Recharge network</h2>
<p>Our research shows that the most important factor that affects consumers’ decision to buy an electric car is the availability of a fast recharging network, especially on long trips away from home. </p>
<p>This was far more important than the availability of cheaper vehicles, the second most cited barrier to uptake. </p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Read more:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/negative-charge-why-is-australia-so-slow-at-adopting-electric-cars-86478">Negative charge: why is Australia so slow at adopting electric cars?</a></em></p>
<hr>
<p>Even if people can afford the available electric car models, they also need to be assured that they can recharge conveniently and quickly on those long journeys they occasionally make during the year. We need to be ready for this transition.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202763/original/file-20180122-110084-1cmyfnf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Uptake of EVs in selected countries as percentage of new car registrations by market; showing top, mid and low performers for 2013-2016.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While there have been some commendable efforts to build infrastructure, including by Queensland’s Labor government and the NRMA, there needs to be some federal coordination, for several reasons.</p>
<p>First, standards are needed for the recharging plug; there are quite a few types out there, and to avoid having some very unhappy investors this issue needs to be urgently addressed. </p>
<p>Second, not all electric models can accept superfast direct current charge in addition to the usual alternating current used in household electricity supplies. </p>
<p>Third, having cars with a bigger range doesn’t mean you can do without rechargers on major intercity roads and in country towns. </p>
<p>Australia needs a comprehensive network. This means fast chargers with standardised fittings available every 50-100km on highways and in country towns. An app to help motorists find their nearest recharger - without locking them into membership of any particular company – are essential. </p>
<h2>What about charging at home?</h2>
<p>While a nationwide network of chargers is important, most people will be recharging their cars overnight. This raises another question: how many people have access to a power point within a few metres of where they park their car?</p>
<p>For people with garages, it is unlikely to be an issue. But apartment living is <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0%7E2016%7EMain%20Features%7EApartment%20Living%7E20">increasing every year in our big cities</a>, and there are plenty of suburbs where off-street parking is not the norm. </p>
<p>Ideally, federal regulations would step in to ensure that apartment-dwellers don’t end up having to be electric car have-nots. We can look to California for an example of <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB2565">legislation</a> that can inspire Australia. </p>
<p>Making it easy for people to recharge at night could also allay fears about increasing demand on the electricity grid. If the cost of off-peak power at night is lower than during the peak, people will get into the habit of flicking the recharger switch on when they go to bed.</p>
<p>It would make sense to ensure that everybody has access to off-peak pricing; people will then act in their own financial self-interest and recharge at night if they are given the opportunity. </p>
<p>In fact getting everyone to go electric as quickly as possible will save us billions of dollars in imported oil. In 2016 Australia imported almost <a href="http://dfat.gov.au/trade/resources/trade-at-a-glance/pages/top-goods-services.aspx">A$15 billion</a> worth of refined petroleum, much of it for <a href="https://www.energy.gov.au/publications/australian-petroleum-statistics-2017">road transport</a>. We could fund a lot of infrastructure with the money saved. </p>
<h2>Dropping cost</h2>
<p>As Frydenberg pointed out, electric cars are getting cheaper. The cost of batteries, the <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-06/the-electric-car-revolution-is-accelerating">biggest single factor</a> in the vehicle’s price, is falling. It is reasonable to predict that electric cars will cost the same as their conventional combustion counterparts within a few years.</p>
<p>Charging with electricity is also cheaper than filling up with petrol or diesel, especially once home solar is taken into account.</p>
<p>There are other hidden costs to conventional cars that we need to take into account. For example, fossil fuels are known to cause <a href="https://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2012/pdfs/pr213_E.pdf">cancer</a> and <a href="http://www.occupationalasthma.com/occupational_asthma_causative_agent.aspx?id=84">asthma</a>. Australia is currently one of the only developed countries in the world without <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-car-industry-ignored-the-elephant-in-the-room-carbon-emissions-66759">minimum fuel efficiency standards</a>. This is an astonishing state of affairs.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Read more:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-weaker-emissions-standards-allow-car-makers-to-dump-polluting-cars-48172">Australia’s weaker emissions standards allow car makers to ‘dump’ polluting cars</a></em></p>
<hr>
<h2>Demystifying electric cars</h2>
<p>One of the countries we studied was Norway, which has the highest sales of electric cars by a country mile. Nearly 35% of all new cars sold there in 2017 were electric, and Norway has the densest recharging network in the world. </p>
<p>Yet even in this environment, we found that when thinking about buying their next vehicle, Norwegians who had never owned an electric car were three times more concerned about running out of charge. What’s more, Norwegians who didn’t have any friends who owned an electric car were far less likely than others to consider buying one.</p>
<p>This highlights the importance of practical exposure to electric cars. We found that providing accurate information about costs, vehicle range and the basic experience of driving an electric car, well before people arrive at the point of sale, is likely to increase their adoption. </p>
<p>We can’t rely on the market to create an “electric car revolution” in Australia. Funding infrastructure, creating industry standards, legislating to reward and cheapen less-polluting cars, and educating the public are all part of the challenge. </p>
<p><br></p>
<hr>
<p><em>The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of Danielle Drozdzewski to this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90442/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite persistent buzz, the falling cost of electric cars isn’t enough to guarantee sales in Australia.Graciela Metternicht, Professor of Environmental Geography, School of Biological Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW SydneyGail Broadbent, Post Graduate Researcher Electric Vehicles, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/789202017-06-08T19:34:45Z2017-06-08T19:34:45ZAustralia has stalled on car efficiency<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172889/original/file-20170608-31975-5y0je5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia is falling far behind other countries in improving car pollution. , </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">CSIRO/Wikimedia commons</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last year, Australia’s new cars were just 1.1% less polluting than the year before, according to a <a href="https://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(35220AEE-C4EA-9AC6-1BB6-88D8C66D80F5).pdf">report</a> released this week by the National Transport Commission.</p>
<p>This is the smallest improvement on record, and largely due to our growing preference for SUVs and utes. In addition, some locally manufactured cars actually became less efficient. </p>
<p>But the backdrop of this poor performance is Australia’s astonishing lack of mandatory vehicle efficiency standards (adopted by <a href="https://theconversation.com/emissions-standards-on-cars-will-save-australians-billions-of-dollars-and-help-meet-our-climate-targets-74623">80% of the world</a>), which allows foreign manufacturers to offload their least efficient cars in Australia.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172857/original/file-20170608-30402-1tfxd6i.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the absence of strong regulation, vehicle emission reduction has plateaued.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">‘Improving the efficiency of new light vehicles’, Commonwealth of Australia 2016</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These findings vindicate a 2016 report from the <a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics</a>, which advised that in the absence of policy changes, the rate of emissions improvement could return to around 1%. The report also warned that Australia would be increasingly left behind by other countries. </p>
<p>Both predictions have come true. The NTC report shows the average emissions intensity for new passenger vehicles sold in Australian was 46% higher than their European Union counterparts. </p>
<p>This gap jumps to 80% for locally manufactured cars. Our local vehicle efficiency has not improved <a href="https://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(7D7B720E-DA94-7518-9F26-2B14367ED1C9).pdf">since 2012</a> and actually went backwards between <a href="https://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(C19AD85F-32EC-4605-886F-8448F1CB00A2).pdf">2015</a> and <a href="http://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(35220AEE-C4EA-9AC6-1BB6-88D8C66D80F5).pdf">2016</a>. The difference is largely attributable to a 5.8% increase in Holden’s average emission intensity in 2016.</p>
<h2>We’re buying more polluting cars</h2>
<p>The NTC report found that consumer preferences play a large role in the slowing rate of vehicle efficiency improvements. Australians bought more SUVs and utes, but far fewer “green cars” (vehicles that emit less than 120g of carbon dioxide per kilometre). </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172846/original/file-20170608-24647-13q2oe5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Green car sales have fallen dramatically.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Carbon Dioxide Emissions Intensity for New Australian Light Vehicles 2016, National Transport Australia</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The proportion of green cars sold in <a href="http://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(35220AEE-C4EA-9AC6-1BB6-88D8C66D80F5).pdf">2016 fell to 2.5%</a> of total car sales, from 4.7% in 2015. Lower consumer demand has reduced the number of green car models available, from 72 green car models in 2015 to <a href="http://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(35220AEE-C4EA-9AC6-1BB6-88D8C66D80F5).pdf">51 green car models</a> in 2016.</p>
<p>Finally, total sales of electric vehicles dropped 80% in 2016 (219 sales) compared to 2015 (1,108 sales)</p>
<h2>Strong government action</h2>
<p>The cheapest way for Australia to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions is to introduce mandatory fuel efficiency standards. Without them, global manufacturers have no incentive to offer more efficient models, and a 2016 <a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">government report into fuel efficiency</a> found that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The best-performing variants sold in Australia were about 27% worse on average than the most efficient model variants offered in the UK. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The same report investigated the costs and benefits of <a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">three different options</a> for efficiency regulations, which could be phased in between 2020 and 2025. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=253&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=253&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=253&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172844/original/file-20170608-29582-1a1mhu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The cost and benefits of three proposed emissions targets for new light vehicles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">‘Improving the efficiency of new light vehicles’, Commonwealth of Australia 2016</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172877/original/file-20170608-23590-1h4v99s.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Target A, the most strict fuel efficiency option being considered by the government, would deliver 6% of Australia’s 2030 emission reduction target.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">‘Improving the efficiency of new light vehicles’, Commonwealth of Australia 2016</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All three options provide a net financial benefit, with the most stringent regulation saving the most money (primarily though reducing the cost of fuel, but also by helping stay within our carbon budget).</p>
<p>Adopting target A, which proposes all new cars release a maximum of 105g of CO₂ per kilometre by 2025, will prompt car manufacturers to import the most efficient vehicles available. The price increase in cars would be recouped by dramatically lower fuel costs, as shown in the table below.</p>
<p>It will also <a href="https://theconversation.com/emissions-standards-on-cars-will-save-australians-billions-of-dollars-and-help-meet-our-climate-targets-74623">deliver 6%</a> of Australia’s 2030 emissions-reduction target.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=227&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=227&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=227&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=286&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=286&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172851/original/file-20170608-23590-157cu7q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=286&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">At a retail fuel price of $1.30 per litre, an average motorist (as defined by the 2014 census) could recoup additional purchase costs for an average performing passenger vehicle within four years.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">‘Improving the efficiency of new light vehicles’, Commonwealth of Australia 2016</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However the dire state of Australia’s road emissions makes a strong case for introducing new efficiency standards before 2020. Light vehicles currently account for 10% of Australia’s annual greenhouse gas emissions, <a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/environment/forum/files/Vehicle_Fuel_Efficiency_RIS.pdf">about 57 million tonnes</a>.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the NTC report found that if all new vehicles bought in 2016 in Australia had been the <a href="https://theconversation.com/sustainable-shopping-with-the-right-tools-you-can-find-an-eco-friendly-car-76080">most efficient in their class</a>, emissions would have been <a href="http://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(35220AEE-C4EA-9AC6-1BB6-88D8C66D80F5).pdf">reduced by 59%</a>. </p>
<p>Until we have firm fuel efficiency standards that create a consumer incentive towards low-emission vehicles and prevent global manufacturers from offloading highly polluting models in Australia, we’ll fail to make real progress in reducing road emissions.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78920/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anna Mortimore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia’s road emissions have plateaued – last year showed the smallest reduction on record.Anna Mortimore, Lecturer, Griffith Business School, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/749762017-04-24T23:24:48Z2017-04-24T23:24:48ZCan we design a better fuel economy label?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/164904/original/image-20170411-26730-1fcj5kg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Everyone looks for price, but there are smarter ways to communicate fuel efficiency on car labels. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/alaska-circa-2000s-cars-sale-usa-148909511?src=NjVErX5GpC66xnDjGBgSfQ-1-0"> Joseph Sohm/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Transportation contributes approximately <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions">26 percent</a> to greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, governments around the world are looking for ways to increase consumers’ use of fuel-efficient vehicles. One of the most straightforward ways to provide this information is in the form of <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.032">labels</a>. </p>
<p>In the United States, the so-called Monroney sticker – named after an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroney_sticker">Oklahoma senator</a> who sponsored a law to disclose more vehicle information to consumers – is the label required to be displayed in all new automobiles, which describes various fuel economy metrics. The Monroney sticker was updated for all automobiles beginning in model year 2013.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162291/original/image-20170323-4924-g22smg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Example of the Monroney sticker for a gasoline vehicle.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Research has shown that people can be overwhelmed with <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01972240490507974">too much information</a>. Thus, a basic question arises when designing a label: What few pieces of information are most valuable to include?</p>
<p>Our recent <a href="http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/full/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2703">research</a> provides insights about these questions by testing how consumers reacted to different combinations of information taken from the Monroney sticker.</p>
<h2>Signposting</h2>
<p>The new Monroney sticker from 2013 describes gas consumption in terms of miles per gallon (MPG) over city, highway and combined. However, another metric has also been added. It describes gallons of gas consumed per 100 miles, which is the inverse of MPG. </p>
<p>This metric was added in direct response to some of our <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/320/5883/1593">previous research</a> demonstrating that consumers fail to realize the curvilinear relation between MPG and gas consumption. That is, not all increases in MPG are equal. For example, more gas is saved upgrading from an MPG 10 to 20 car than upgrading from an MPG 20 to 50 car. </p>
<p>Yet few consumers are aware of this “<a href="http://www.mpgillusion.com/">MPG illusion</a>.” As a result, consumers underestimate the gas savings that come from seemingly small improvements on inefficient vehicles.</p>
<p>In addition, the new Monroney sticker describes estimated cost information including annual fuel cost (assuming 15,000 miles per year at US$3.70 per gallon) and a comparison of fuel costs spent or saved over five years compared to the average new vehicle. The sticker provides a 1-to-10 greenhouse gas rating, where a higher rating corresponds to fewer carbon dioxide emissions released per mile, and a 1-to-10 smog rating, where a higher rating corresponds to fewer tailpipe pollutants. </p>
<p>Upon closer inspection of the new Monroney sticker, you may notice that all of the different metrics are simply different expressions of the same global attribute: the amount of gas consumed. These different expressions, which we term “translated attributes,” are indeed closely related to each other and highly correlated. Nevertheless, each translation also highlights different aspects and consequences of fuel economy. </p>
<p>Although translated attributes may seem unnecessary, we believe that they are valuable because they serve as “signposts” to consumers: They remind them of outcomes they care about, and point them in the right direction to achieve those outcomes.</p>
<h2>Conscious consumerism</h2>
<p>Inspired by the new Monroney sticker, we carried out a number of experiments to examine how different translations of fuel economy were related to preference for more fuel-efficient cars. Rather than use the sticker itself, though, we took pieces of information from it and presented it to our respondents in a table. </p>
<p>In one set of online <a href="http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/full/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2703">studies</a>, we asked 1,745 American adults to make a hypothetical choice between two different vehicles, one cheaper and the other more fuel-efficient. What we changed from person to person was how fuel efficiency information was presented: Some people were presented with either annual fuel cost or greenhouse gas rating alone, some with annual fuel cost together with gallons per 100 miles and some with annual fuel cost together with the greenhouse gas rating. We made two interesting observations. </p>
<p>First, people were more likely to prefer the fuel-efficient car when presented with two fuel-efficiency metrics compared to one. The more reasons one provides (such as cost and the environment), the more people prefer the efficient car. </p>
<p>Second, those who identified themselves as pro-environmental were more likely to choose the fuel-efficient car when presented with the greenhouse gas rating (but not in its absence). This is the signpost effect: Green-oriented consumers neglected the benefits of efficiency until reminded that they cared about it and that it could be achieved with the efficient vehicle.</p>
<p>We have also published <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jppm.12.151">research</a> describing the most effective way to express fuel efficiency if you had to rely on just one piece of information and were trying to encourage consumers to choose greener options. Again, we asked 908 American adults to make a hypothetical choice between two different vehicles, one cheaper and the other more fuel-efficient. </p>
<p>This time, we changed how fuel efficiency information was presented: Some people were presented with the gas consumption over 100 miles (as is currently on the new Monroney sticker), some over 15,000 miles (approximately annual miles driven) and some over 100,000 miles (approximately lifetime miles driven). We did the same for costs. </p>
<p>We found that consumers were most likely to prefer the fuel-efficient car when presented with the “cost of gas consumed per 100,000 miles.” Therefore, the metric comparing fuel costs spent or saved over five years compared to the average new vehicle now on the Monroney sticker is a move in the right direction. We recommend that consumers use online calculators to make <a href="http://gpmcalculator.com">similar calculations for themselves</a>.</p>
<p>Overall, our research suggests that the updated<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjbyENwvKPQ"> Monroney sticker is well-designed</a> to encourage consumers to purchase more fuel-efficient vehicles: Presentation of multiple “translated attributes” actually eases decision-making by better aligning consumer’s objectives and choices. </p>
<p>More generally, translated attributes could be used in many other contexts including online customization. For example, the website <a href="http://www.fueleconomy.gov/">www.fueleconomy.gov</a> allows a person to compare the fuel economy of different vehicles. The information is presented under different tabs, such as “Fuel Economy” and “Energy and Environment,” which the user is free to click on. We can easily imagine a more customizable interface that enabled the presentation of tailored information to specific users or user segments.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74976/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian R. Camilleri was supported by an Alcoa Foundation Fellowship (2787_2012) received from the American Australian Association.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Elke U. Weber receives funding from the US and the European National Science Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eric J. Johnson receives funding from the National Institute of Aging and the National Science Foundation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rick Larrick has received past funding from the National Science Foundation.</span></em></p>It’s all in the presentation: In studies, consumers were more apt to choose fuel-efficient vehicles depending on how the same pieces of information were displayed on labels.Adrian R. Camilleri, Lecturer in Marketing, RMIT UniversityElke U. Weber, Professor of Psychology and Public Affairs, Princeton UniversityEric J. Johnson, Norman Eig Professor of Business, Columbia UniversityRick Larrick, Professor of Management and Organizations, Duke UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/740652017-03-10T04:19:16Z2017-03-10T04:19:16ZNow under attack, EPA’s work on climate change has been going on for decades<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160227/original/image-20170309-21020-nwiy1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The current EPA administrator says the agency should prioritize clean air and clean water, rather than deal with greenhouse gases. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/billy_wilson/3280739522/in/photolist-5ZUDyw-64h3EF-hJm1nj-biC6sD-393ojY-4zsZ4V-oM6sMt-JBHF4u-Sbbjgp-NLLaY-932NtL-cEcDid-ngDtm6-SgHp4e-9ewkG-dpdpYn-4xVqg1-8RRoQW-r9CDa2-4EbJgs-4zhooX-35g9p3-F4RFX-4nMkUt-EPRpkX-bX5Hm-912Ffy-7sPYc-92z9yd-QGNGMu-khQCNP-tiQJm-QzWieo-8ZDv3L-pHH2h-8BDu9B-nsEyE-PTFH-d22wM7-6id6-4nRpo9-2Rw5My-biog1D-iGdoyG-7WcHnt-iquMmw-pXopEP-it6FWt-7FQuCc-5avqKj">billy_wilson/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Trump administration intends to roll back two pillars of the Obama administration’s climate policy – regulations to limit <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/us/politics/trump-vehicle-emissions-regulation.html">carbon emissions from vehicles</a> and <a href="http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060051196">power plants</a>. </p>
<p>Under President Obama, the Environmental Protection Agency was central to these regulations. But new EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/0e505de4-aa91-4dcc-ba23-dc9ddab01c0b/scott-pruitt-opening-statement-final-.pdf">has said</a> he plans to return the agency to its “core mission” of ensuring <a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/02/25/Scott-Pruitt-says-EPA-could-begin-rolling-back-Obama-rules-next-week/7681488062952/">clean air and clean water</a>, rather than addressing climate change. </p>
<p>Pruitt has <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxHk4vM0qLY">characterized</a> climate change as a recent diversion from EPA’s main mission and has stated that accordingly the Clean Power Plan, an Obama rule to address carbon pollution from power plants, would have to be done away with. Pruitt has also said that carbon dioxide is not the <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html">primary contributor to global warming</a> and has appointed former staffers of Sen. James Inhofe, a prominent climate skeptic, to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/us/politics/scott-pruitt-environmental-protection-agency.html?ref=politics">serve under him</a>. </p>
<p>But a look at the history of the EPA shows that work on climate change has long been part of the agency’s mission.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=689&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=689&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=689&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=866&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=866&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160058/original/image-20170308-24177-1ljz2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=866&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">William Ruckelshaus being sworn in as the first Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Richard M. Nixon Presidential Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Within a <a href="https://www.epa.gov/history">month</a> of the creation of the EPA 46 years ago, President Nixon signed the Clean Air Act of 1970 into law. In that law, Congress gave the new agency the mission to protect the “public health and welfare” from air pollution and <a href="http://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=84&page=1710">specified</a> that “welfare” includes effects on “climate.” </p>
<p>The 1970 Clean Air Act also <a href="http://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=84&page=1683">gave</a> the EPA the authority to regulate emissions from power plants and other large sources. The Supreme Court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-174.pdf">ruled</a> in 2011 that this language “provides a means to seek limits on emissions of carbon dioxide from domestic power plants.” This is the law the Obama EPA would ultimately rely upon for the landmark Clean Power Plan, which was designed to reduce carbon emissions from power plants.</p>
<p>So EPA has had the mission and the authority to act on climate change for nearly 50 years. While the agency hasn’t moved to regulate greenhouse gases until the last decade, EPA does much more than just issue regulations and enforce them. The agency conducts research, educates the public, runs voluntary programs, creates partnerships and is a resource for the states and the rest of the federal government. In these areas, the agency has been involved in efforts to protect against the effects of climate change for decades.</p>
<p>For instance, the EPA has <a href="https://www.epa.gov/climate-research/science-inventory-products-about-climate-change-research">supported and produced</a> hundreds of reports and academic journal articles, spanning Republican and Democratic administrations. These have been invaluable in building our understanding of causes, impacts and potential solutions to climate change.</p>
<h2>Presidential support</h2>
<p>Over the years presidents of both parties have called on the EPA more explicitly to act on climate change. In 1987, President Reagan signed the <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title15/html/USCODE-2011-title15-chap56.htm">Global Climate Protection Act</a> into law, giving the EPA the lead agency role in developing and proposing a “coordinated national policy on global climate change.”</p>
<p>In 1992, President George H. W. Bush negotiated the landmark climate treaty the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Upon reaching the agreement, Bush EPA Administrator Bill Reilly <a href="https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/road-rio.html">wrote</a> that a number of EPA programs would play “a key role in enabling the United States to meet the goal of the Climate Change Convention: to cut greenhouse gas emissions using a benchmark of 1990 levels.” For example, EPA’s Green Light Program which Reilly had initiated in 1991 <a href="https://www.energystar.gov/about/history/major-milestones">gave birth</a> to the Energy Star program in 1992, a voluntary <a href="https://www.energystar.gov/about/history">program</a> that helps businesses and individuals protect the climate through energy efficiency.</p>
<p>When the U.S. Senate ratified the Framework Convention in 1992, Senator Mitch McConnell <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/261215-republican-legacy-on-international-climate-policy">said</a> it was “a fine agreement.” The EPA assumed the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-04/documents/us-ghg-inventory-2016-main-text.pdf">duty</a> of preparing the official U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions to comply with the nation’s commitments under the treaty.</p>
<p>During the Clinton administration, EPA continued to develop and implement voluntary programs to cut greenhouse gas pollution. In 1993, the EPA launched the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/natural-gas-star-program/natural-gas-star-program">Natural Gas STAR</a> program to work with industry to limit emissions of the potent greenhouse gas methane. The agency also started the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/cmop">Coalbed Methane Outreach Program</a> in 1994 to encourage mine owners and operators to productively capture methane rather than allowing it to escape into the atmosphere. The EPA also ran a suite of environmental stewardship <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=MCNJ0GUhAqQC&pg=PA37&dq=high+GWP+Environmental+Stewardship+Programs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjYpPTtvsXSAhUC1mMKHSOwCagQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=high%20GWP%20Environmental%20Stewardship%20Programs&f=false">partnership programs</a> to address the most potent greenhouse gases emitted from the aluminum, semiconductor, refrigerant, power and magnesium industries. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/160229/original/image-20170309-21056-17wowlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President George W. Bush directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to act on greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Charles Dharapak</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>During the George W. Bush administration, EPA continued to conduct research and implement voluntary programs to explicitly address climate change. For example, the Bush II EPA launched the <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20060922193739/http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/SHSU5BNQ6E/%24File/ch4.pdf">Clean Energy Initiative</a> “with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions” by expanding markets for renewable energy and working with state and local governments to develop policies that favor clean energy.</p>
<h2>Broad reach consistent with founding</h2>
<p>In an attempted retreat from action, the Bush II EPA argued at one point that the Clean Air Act did not provide the agency with authority to regulate carbon dioxide. The Supreme Court <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/549/497/">rejected</a> that argument in 2007, <a href="https://apps.oyez.org/player/#/roberts2/opinion_announcement_audio/21938">finding</a> that the Clean Air Act’s definition of air pollutant unambiguously included greenhouse gases. Importantly, President Bush accepted the court’s ruling and subsequently issued an <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-05-16/pdf/07-2462.pdf">executive order</a> directing EPA “to protect the environment with respect to greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.” </p>
<p>EPA did not complete this directive prior to the end of President Bush’s second term. But when the Obama administration finalized the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-model-year-2012-2016-light-duty-vehicle">EPA rule</a> in 2010, the agency worked with the auto industry to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/opinion/dont-roll-back-the-vehicle-fuel-standards.html">ease</a> industry concerns even while cutting pollution and saving consumers money. </p>
<p>This broad reach of the EPA’s responsibilities is fully consistent with the principles upon which the agency was founded. When President Nixon created the EPA in 1970, he <a href="https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/reorganization-plan-no-3-1970.html">detailed</a> that in addition to setting and enforcing environmental protection standards, the agency should research adverse effects of pollution, pollution control approaches and new policies to strengthen environmental protection programs.</p>
<p>Notably, the president stated that EPA’s “<a href="https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/reorganization-plan-no-3-1970.html">broad mandate</a>” would allow the agency to “develop competence in areas of environmental protection that have not previously been given enough attention.” </p>
<h2>Obama pushes harder</h2>
<p>When President Obama assumed office, he <a href="https://archive.epa.gov/ocir/hearings/testimony/111_2009_2010/web/pdf/2009_0422_lpj.pdf">urged</a> Congress to pass a law providing additional tools for reducing carbon dioxide pollution. While Congress was willing to provide funding for EPA to take on a host of climate change-related activities, it was unable to pass a comprehensive climate change bill.</p>
<p>When the Republicans took over Congress in 2011, their resistance to climate change hardened. The Republican House attempted and <a href="https://morningconsult.com/opinions/flawed-congressional-argument-clean-power-plan/">failed</a> to strip greenhouse gas emissions out of the Clean Air Act, leaving EPA’s authority to regulate intact.</p>
<p>Confronted with a Congress that refused to help cut dangerous carbon pollution and with a law that called for action to protect the public health and welfare, President Obama <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf">concluded</a> that failure to respond to the threat of climate change would “betray our children and future generations.” Accordingly, he <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/25/presidential-memorandum-power-sector-carbon-pollution-standards">directed</a> EPA to use its authority to regulate carbon emissions from power plants. </p>
<p>As history demonstrates, climate change has been at the heart of EPA’s mission since its creation, and administrations of both parties have moved forward to mitigate this threat – with varying levels of ambition and enthusiasm – for 30 years.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74065/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dotson worked for Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA) and the House Energy and Commerce Committee on energy and environmental issues.</span></em></p>EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has said the agency’s purview should not include climate change, but a look at its history under both Republican and Democratic presidents says otherwise.Greg Dotson, Assistant Professor of Law, University of OregonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/720972017-02-14T19:08:39Z2017-02-14T19:08:39ZEnd of the road? Why it might be time to ditch your car<p>The average car is stationary 96% of the time. That’s a fairly consistent finding <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/road-congestion-solutions">around the world</a>, including in <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-the-lucky-country-is-blowing-its-luck-20151005-gk1odq.html">Australia</a>. A car is typically parked at home 80% of the time, parked elsewhere 16% of the time, and on the move just 4% of the time. And that doesn’t include the increasing time we spend at a standstill in traffic.</p>
<p>Bill Ford, executive chair of the Ford Motor Company, says we’re <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-08/bill-ford-says-global-gridlock-is-threat-to-car-making">heading for “global gridlock”</a>. And <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2015/s4326611.htm">he’s not alone</a> in saying we cannot simply keep adding more cars to our roads.</p>
<p>The funny thing is that while we own more cars than ever, we’re actually <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4133094.htm">using them less</a>. You might think that’s a good thing; that we’re responding to <a href="http://media.wix.com/ugd/8d60ea_527216124507432787a521c43abe984e.pdf">worsening congestion and health</a>, debt and environmental damage by opting to drive fewer kilometres.</p>
<p>But the problem is, we’re still choking our cities and harming our health, finances and environment by continuing to waste our resources on these increasingly dormant vehicles.</p>
<p>It’s not just the car itself that’s wasted. Consider the resources and infrastructure – both private and public – needed to design, mine, manufacture, ship, sell, fuel, move, store, secure, insure, regulate, police, maintain, clean, repair and dispose of all these cars.</p>
<p>David Owen, a staff writer with The New Yorker, has called cars “<a href="http://www.davidowen.net/david_owen/the-conundrum.html">consumption amplifiers</a>”. They are emblematic of a hyper-consumerist lifestyle that <a href="https://theconversation.com/enoughs-enough-buying-more-stuff-isnt-always-the-answer-to-happiness-70703">doesn’t really make us any happier</a>.</p>
<p>Our declining car use gives us an opportunity. If we can adjust our car ownership patterns to match our actual needs, we can plan our lives and cities in ways that don’t revolve around a mode of transport that no longer serves us like it used to.</p>
<h2>Fast cars?</h2>
<p>By default, we still think of cars as fast and convenient. It might appear that way on the street, but the overall reality is quite different.</p>
<p>For a start, cars are a woefully inefficient way to transport a person from A to B. Typically, <a href="http://www.worldcarfree.net/resources/freesources/mythcar.htm">only around 20%</a> of the energy from fuel combustion is converted into motion. </p>
<p>If we assume that the average car weighs roughly 20 times more than its driver, we can estimate that for a single-occupant car journey, with no significant other cargo, the effective fuel efficiency drops to just 1% (adding a passenger only raises this to 2%). And that’s before we take into account the broader resource and infrastructure requirements, as mentioned above, for that journey to take place.</p>
<p>The urban car isn’t terribly fast either. <a href="http://tasmaniantimes.com/images/uploads/SKMBT_C45212011011290.pdf">Research</a> shows that when we take into account not only the time in transit but also the time spent working to pay for the car and its operation, the car’s average “effective speed” in cities is generally well under 13km per hour. This has been called the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/not-so-fast-how-car-commuting-is-taking-your-time-9682">urban speed paradox</a>”. As cyclist and author Greg Foyster has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/for-a-leisurely-life-cycle-20140522-zrkwi.html">pointed out</a>, “your typical commuting cyclist can beat that without breaking a sweat”.</p>
<p>These and other factors have resulted in what’s called “<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/futuretense/peak-car/6831354">peak car</a>”. The average distance travelled per person by car has been declining for more than a decade. Commuting distances and average urban driving speeds have also peaked and the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4133094.htm">rate of new licences is plummeting</a>.</p>
<p>Ford Motor Company’s future trends manager, Sheryl Connelly, has <a href="https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=42550#.WHrkkbFh21t">suggested</a> that cars no longer symbolise freedom to this generation in the way they did to baby boomers. The rise of car-sharing schemes has also caused renting to lose its stigma. Young people now prize access over ownership.</p>
<p>Yet, for too many of us, a privately owned car remains the default for almost every transport task. There are times when cars are useful, but for general urban commuting, based on what we’ve seen above, it is like using a chainsaw to carve butter. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154878/original/image-20170130-4417-136t6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It pays to think about whether your car is the best tool for the job.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Expanding the transport toolkit</h2>
<p>Many urban areas around the world are seeing a rapid shift away from private cars as the dominant form of transport. Areas of some cities are even going <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/cities-going-car-free-2016-8/?r=AU&IR=T/#oslo-norway-will-implement-its-car-ban-by-2019-1">car-free</a> while <a href="http://gizmodo.com/6-freeway-removals-that-changed-their-cities-forever-1548314937">reallocating old road space</a> to public or active transport, or back to nature.</p>
<p>In Australia, the City of Port Phillip has <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/hundreds-of-new-car-share-parks-in-plan-to-steer-people-away-from-car-ownership-20160407-go0zw2.html">devised a plan</a> to halt the growth in car ownership, even as the city’s population doubles, by converting hundreds of parking spots into car-share bays. Each share-car is reported to take up to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/sustainability-roundtable-interface">14 cars off the road</a>, while cutting the costs of personal mobility by <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-the-lucky-country-is-blowing-its-luck-20151005-gk1odq.html">up to 60%</a>.</p>
<p>One local resident was reported as saying the recent addition of a car-share spot at the end of his family’s street had prompted them to sell their rarely used car. “Now that there is a really good number of cars close by, we can make that move to going completely car-free.”</p>
<p>Then there’s the rapid development of other shared transport such as bike-share programs. By 2014, the number of cities with bike-share programs had <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-the-lucky-country-is-blowing-its-luck-20151005-gk1odq.html">increased to 850, up from only 68 in 2007</a>.</p>
<p>Alongside all this are new planning models for activity centres, integrated transport networks, and carless or <a href="http://www.canadianbusiness.com/business-news/industries/consumer-goods/car-use-declining-in-north-america/">near-carless</a> residential developments.</p>
<p>All the while, <a href="https://www.healthybydesignsa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ReduceSpeedSnapshot_Feb13.pdf">speed limits are decreasing</a>, <a href="https://farefreepublictransport.com/city/">free public transport</a> (at point of access) is increasing, and <a href="https://rac.com.au/car-motoring/info/why-use-public-transport">automobile</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIpG_SFGYHA&feature=youtu.be">business associations</a> are advocating for heavy investment in active and public transport.</p>
<h2>Transport in 2017 and beyond</h2>
<p>None of this is meant to demonise cars or their drivers, or to suggest that no one should own a car. What I am saying is that the model of <em>everyone</em> owning their own car is best relegated to the 20th century. This leads to the question of what the optimal level of car ownership might be, where we achieve the transport benefits without the waste, damage and expense.</p>
<p>What if in 2017 we focused on developing our personal and collective toolkits beyond the chainsaw, to do a better job of moving ourselves around? </p>
<p>You might get to know your local matrix of transport options better, from walking, cycling and skating routes to public transport, shared transport (car-share, ride-share, bike-share, taxis) and rented transport (cars, trucks, motorbikes, bicycles). Over time, you could then home in on how they work best together.</p>
<p>More of us could consider placing our cars in peer-based car-share or ride-share programs (informal or formal). Or we could even choose to sell our cars, and opt into one of the above schemes as a user rather than provider.</p>
<p>Peak car is upon us, and with it comes the opportunity to choose new models of urban transport that better match our current needs for quality, sustainable living. It is vital work. And like any good tradie, we need to make sure we have the right tools for the job.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/72097/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anthony James does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Think you couldn’t possibly do without your car? There are more options than you might think.Anthony James, Lecturer, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/707412016-12-22T22:30:34Z2016-12-22T22:30:34ZFuel efficiency standards could help curb Australia’s persistently growing emissions<p>This week, the Australian government <a href="http://www.joshfrydenberg.com.au/guest/mediaReleasesDetails.aspx?id=297">announced plans</a> that will ultimately require cars sold in Australia to match international fuel efficiency standards. </p>
<p>The resulting savings over the life of a typical vehicle would more than offset higher initial costs. The saving on fuel costs is estimated at up to A$28 billion a year by 2040. </p>
<p>Not coincidentally, this measure would also help to cut carbon dioxide emissions, which are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/22/australias-greenhouse-gas-emissions-are-rising-official-figures-show">currently growing</a> at a rate that makes achievement of the government’s commitments for 2030 virtually impossible.</p>
<h2>Up to speed</h2>
<p>Putting Australia’s vehicle standards on a par with other developed nations sounds like such an obvious idea that we might ask why it hasn’t been done already. There are several reasons, although none of them can justify the years of inaction to date.</p>
<p>First, until quite recently, politicians were overridingly concerned with the fate of Australia’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-car-industry-ignored-the-elephant-in-the-room-carbon-emissions-66759">domestic car manufacturing industry</a>, which focused primarily on the production of large cars like the Holden Commodore and Ford Falcon. While fuel efficiency standards are designed to take account of a vehicle’s “footprint”, the domestic industry naturally saw the idea as an extra burden.</p>
<p>With the <a href="https://theconversation.com/toyota-names-2017-end-australian-car-making-to-cease-experts-react-23037">end of domestic production in sight</a>, this issue becomes irrelevant. Indeed, you might think, given that Australia is now set to rely solely on imported cars, that we would automatically gain the benefits of international standards without needing to upgrade our own. But it turns out that imported cars sold in Australia are generally <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-weaker-emissions-standards-allow-car-makers-to-dump-polluting-cars-48172">less fuel-efficient</a> than cars of the same make and model sold in markets with more demanding standards.</p>
<p>There are several reasons for this. The most immediate is that it’s cheaper to make a less efficient car. New car buyers, particularly fleet buyers, are sensitive to the sticker price of the car but much less so to the running costs, most of which will be paid by others, including subsequent owners. So even though fuel savings outweigh the increased purchase price over the life of the car, it’s easier to sell a cheaper, less efficient version.</p>
<p>Another problem is that Australia also has lower standards for fuel quality, particularly sulfur content, which creates problems for more efficient vehicles. These standards will have to be revised soon for public health reasons, but until now the task of coordinating fuel efficiency and fuel quality standards has proved too difficult. </p>
<p>The government is now proposing to address both issues at the same time. The options are to reduce sulfur content for all kinds of petrol, or to <a href="http://www.watoday.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australias-most-popular-type-of-petrol--unleaded--could-be-phased-out-within-two-years-20161221-gtft1v.html">phase out “regular” 91-octane fuel</a> in favour of the more efficient, but more expensive, 95-octane.</p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, this measure is facing resistance from the <a href="http://www.aip.com.au/">Australian Institute of Petroleum</a>, which is warning of the costs to Australian refineries. The institute can at least claim consistency here: it fought the removal of lead from petrol in the 1980s. More disappointing is the <a href="http://www.aaa.asn.au/news-and-publications/news/article/?id=aaa-statement-regarding-the-commencement-by-government-of-consultation-on-vehicle-emissions">negative response of the Australian Automobile Association</a>, which purports to champion sustainability but evidently thinks cheap petrol is more important than clean air or a stable climate.</p>
<p>The final problem is that there is a trade-off between fuel efficiency and perceived performance. This has led some manufacturers to “game” the regulations by producing vehicles that are fuel-efficient in lab testing but less efficient and more responsive on the road.</p>
<p>The most notorious case was that of Volkswagen, which <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-vw-scandal-exposes-the-high-tech-control-of-engine-emissions-48234">installed special software</a> to detect, and cheat, lab testing equipment. The resulting scandal <a href="https://theconversation.com/volkswagen-ceo-has-fallen-on-his-sword-but-is-it-the-death-of-diesel-47980">cost chief executive Martin Winterkorn his job</a> and has left the company <a href="http://www.biznews.com/global-investing/2016/01/05/us-justice-department-files-law-suit-threatening-volkswagen-with-bankruptcy/">flirting with bankruptcy</a>.</p>
<h2>Play by the rules</h2>
<p>Of course, regulations of all kinds can be evaded. But the catastrophic consequences of being caught, as shown by the Volkswagen case, mean that manufacturers who want to stay in business will be more cautious in future.</p>
<p>Any policy to tackle climate change has costs as well as benefits. But there are few cases in which the balance is so clearly weighted to benefits. And with its 2030 climate targets in serious doubt, Australia needs to pick every piece of low-hanging fruit it can.</p>
<p>The only remaining issue is politics. The influential right wing of the Coalition government is dogmatically committed to climate science denial, and will oppose any measure to address the problem. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has already <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-government-rules-out-an-emissions-intensity-scheme-70039">collapsed spectacularly</a> on the issue of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/emissions-trading-for-electricity-is-the-sensible-way-forward-70137">emissions intensity scheme for the electricity sector</a>. That policy, like the fuel standards upgrade, came recommended by the Climate Change Authority (of which I am a member). </p>
<p>If Turnbull is to salvage any credibility, he needs to face down the opposition of ideologues and vested interests on this question. Whether he will do so remains to be seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70741/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Quiggin is a Member of the Climate Change Authority. This article represents his personal views.</span></em></p>Australia’s plan to bring fuel efficiency standards up to par with the US and Europe could see us say goodbye to regular unleaded, and hello to a useful way of cutting our rising greenhouse emissions.John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/667592016-10-11T02:17:29Z2016-10-11T02:17:29ZAustralia’s car industry ignored the elephant in the room: carbon emissions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/141156/original/image-20161011-3864-nf7o00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia's car industry got left behind on emissions standards. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Exhaust image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ford’s closure of its Geelong manufacturing plant on Friday is part of a broader story about <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-ford-plant-closure-is-sad-loss-of-manufacturing-know-how-65651">Australia’s manufacturing sector</a>. But one side of this story has so far been overlooked: the role of Australia’s lax attitude to vehicle emissions. </p>
<p>Globally, car manufacturers are taking climate action seriously by significantly <a href="https://www.globalfueleconomy.org/media/203446/gfei-state-of-the-world-report-2016.pdf">improving fuel economy</a>, in turn reducing a car’s CO₂ emissions. </p>
<p>Repeated policy failure and a marked reluctance by the Australian car industry to shift from manufacturing mostly high CO₂-emitting vehicles contributed to Ford ending operations. The Australian car industry ignored the elephant in the room. </p>
<p>This effectively contradicts former-Treasurer Joe Hockey’s assertion that <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/g20/climate-change-is-no-impediment-%20%20%20to-economic-growth-says-joe-hockey-20141115-11nlzs.html">climate change has no impediment on economic growth</a>, as Australia gets left behind in a world embracing action on climate change.</p>
<h2>Warning signs</h2>
<p>In 2008, the international community launched the Global Fuel Economy Initiative (GFEI) to facilitate and promote large reductions of greenhouse gas emissions by establishing a global target to improve fuel efficiencies. The target included a 50% improvement in vehicle fuel economy in new light duty vehicles by 2030. <a href="http://ewp.industry.gov.au/sites/prod.ewp/files/submissions/Energy%20White%20Paper//EWPGP099-713.pdf">The GFEI offered to assist successive Australian governments</a> in the development of better fuel policy. </p>
<p><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ropr.12100/abstract">European car manufacturers made slow progress</a> and continued manufacturing larger high-performance vehicles. But in 2009, the European Parliament introduced CO₂ emission standards of 130 grams of CO₂ per km by 2015 and long-term target of 95g CO₂ per km by 2021. </p>
<p>By 2013, <a href="http://www.theicct.org/info-tools/global-passenger-vehicle-standards">80% of global passenger vehicle sales</a> were subject to CO₂ standards. Complementary economic measures were introduced to support the standards by influencing consumers into choosing low CO₂-emitting vehicles.</p>
<h2>Australia left behind</h2>
<p>In 2005, the Australian car industry adopted <a href="http://www.fcai.com.au/library/publication/1216168398_document_fcai_final_submission.pdf">voluntary targets of 222g CO₂ per km by 2010</a>. This wasn’t in line with international standards and masked the poor fuel efficiency of locally manufactured vehicles as shown in the chart below. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/GdtJp/1/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="503"></iframe>
<p>With voluntary standards, the local car industry was under no pressure from the government to improve its fleet’s fuel efficiency. The Australian car industry failed to meet the target. <a href="https://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(DF694ECD-E315-41C8-367C-19D67D2A6FF5).pdf">Average emissions from cars manufactured in Australia</a> in 2010 were 247g per km – 11% higher than the voluntary target.</p>
<p>In April 2012, the Australian government mandated that 100% of all Commonwealth vehicles would be Australian made. This explicitly excluded acquiring vehicles on the grounds of “<a href="http://www.finance.gov.au/vehicle-leasing-and-fleet-management/fleet-guidance-and-related-material.html">environmental considerations, such as fuel efficiency</a>”.</p>
<p>In 2013, the government announced a <a href="http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/automotive/report/automotive.pdf">Productivity Commission review</a> of the industry that would examine international competitiveness, exports, trade barriers and long-term sustainability. At this point the <a href="https://theconversation.com/holden-to-cease-making-cars-in-australia-by-2017-experts-react-21369">local car industry</a> announced its decision to abandon manufacturing in Australia. As a result, the commission didn’t examine the impact of climate policy measures on the local car industry, although it did suggest that environmental policies could serve as a barrier to international trade. </p>
<p>Industry actors also criticised other measures such as vehicle or excise taxes that it said would impede Australian exports.</p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585641100053X">Ireland’s 36% vehicle tax</a> on new light passenger vehicles with emission greater than 225g per km would apply to most Australian-made vehicles. Such measures support emission standards, and are imposed on all vehicles sold (whether imported or manufactured domestically) for the protection of the environment. They have been effective in shifting consumer demand to fuel-efficient vehicles.</p>
<p>Under the <a href="http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envt_rules_exceptions_e.htm">rules of the World Trade Organization</a> national governments can ban imports that do not comply with product standards, if they do not constitute non-tariff barriers. To meet this exception, the policy must be measurable (such as an excise tax based on CO₂ emissions), apply to all goods sold (domestic and imports), and contribute to the fight against climate change. </p>
<p>The adoption of regulatory standards and supporting economic instruments, meant car manufacturers/importers will not be able to sell as many larger high CO₂-emitting vehicles. To sustain economic production runs, manufacturers will seek to sell these vehicles to countries with lenient or no standards, such as Australia, which then become “<a href="https://theconversation.com/could-australia-become-a-dumping-ground-for-high-emission-vehicles-38299">dumping grounds</a>”.</p>
<h2>Government and industry caught off guard</h2>
<p>In 2014, the Abbott government supported the <a href="http://www.g20australia.org/sites/default/files/g20_resources/library/g20_energy_efficiency_action_plan.pdf">G20 Energy Efficiency Action Plan</a>, which included “improving vehicle energy efficiency and emissions performance” by strengthening domestic standards in vehicle emissions and vehicle fuel efficiency. Despite the plan, there was no recommendation to introduce emissions standards in the government’s <a href="http://ewp.industry.gov.au">2015 Energy White Paper</a>.</p>
<p>Successive Australian governments, trade unions, and industry actors have all failed to appreciate the impact of climate action on the economic interest of the local car industry. The Australian government is now examining <a href="http://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/pf/releases/2016/february/pf018_2016.aspx">fuel efficiency standards</a> and complementary measures, but will only report next year. It’s a little too late to save the industry. </p>
<p>Forcing the local car industry to meet similar standards would have been to its benefit and would have outweighed the costs of being shut out from the market. As more global car manufacturers began adopting emissions standards more pressure was placed on car manufacturers to remain competitive. </p>
<p><a href="http://globalchange.mit.edu/files/document/MITJPSPGC_Reprint_13-20.pdf">Car manufacturers were known to lobby their governments</a> to adopt European emission standards to increase their competitiveness and restrict importation of high CO₂-emitting vehicles. The former Vice-Chairman on General Motors, Bob Lutz, said the <a href="http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110523/OEM02/305239961/1432#axzz2V8MLH900">fall of GM in the United States</a> was largely a result of a terrible government policy on fuel economy, which gave its competitors, the Japanese automakers, a free pass. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.manufacturing-policy.eng.cam.ac.uk/futures-documents-folder/eu-eu-manufacturing-industry-what-are-the-challenges-and-opportunities-for-the-coming-years/view">European Commission stated that</a> if a car industry fails to embrace a shift towards more fuel-efficient vehicles, it will continue to be structurally unprepared for the future.</p>
<p>To compete globally, the Australian car industry had to decide whether to embrace cleaner technology to meet the standards of its importers, or abandon the export market. Unfortunately for the workers, Ford chose to close its operations on October 7, and GM Holden and Toyota will close by the end of 2017.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66759/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anna Mortimore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia’s lax attitudes to vehicle emissions has been overlooked in Ford’s exit.Anna Mortimore, Lecturer, Griffith Business School, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/564822016-03-24T10:07:17Z2016-03-24T10:07:17ZCheap gas could delay America’s efficiency targets for cars and trucks<p>Cars and trucks in the United States are supposed to achieve great fuel efficiency gains over the next decade. But now that gasoline prices have plunged, those plans may be delayed.</p>
<p>In 2012, the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), issued regulations that require automakers to meet progressively more stringent fuel standards to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The regulations, which cover cars and light trucks from model years 2017 to 2025, will require automakers to reach a corporate average fuel efficiency (CAFE) standard of 41 miles per gallon by model year 2021. Then, the average fuel efficiency for automakers’ vehicles needs to reach 54.5 MPG by model year 2025.</p>
<p>But the exact details of rules and the timing of their implementation are not cast in stone. Next year, the initial set of targets will come up for review, and executives at car companies have <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/auto-makers-regulators-on-fuel-economy-collision-course-1421174452?cb=logged0.9301889809816075">already suggested</a> pushing out the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/23/business/energy-environment/low-gas-prices-create-a-detour-on-the-road-to-greater-fuel-economy.html?ref=business&_r=0">timetable for complying</a>.</p>
<p>As this midterm review approaches, the key questions to consider are: first, how have fuel price projections changed since the period in which regulations were initially developed (2009-2012), and, second, what are the implications of these changes on regulatory implementation? </p>
<p>In a <a href="https://spea.indiana.edu/doc/research/working-groups/fuel-economy-policy-022016.pdf">recently published study</a>, my colleagues and I suggest how to reevaluate vehicle fuel economy and greenhouse gas regulations in the upcoming midterm review in light of the dramatic changes in the price of gasoline. </p>
<p>Among our suggestions is that fuel economy standards should be reevaluated during the midterm review to take into account expected lower fuel price and how low prices affect consumer interest in fuel-efficient vehicles. </p>
<h2>Crash in gasoline prices</h2>
<p>As anyone who has filled up lately knows, there has been a significant decrease in fuel prices since the federal CAFE and vehicle GHG regulations were developed. As a result, <a href="https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/section_energyprod.cfm#petroleum">official government projections</a> of fuel prices have been revised downward and remain relatively low through 2030.</p>
<p>Back when the regulations were being formed, the NHTSA and EPA used gasoline price projections based on the early release of the 2012 Annual Energy Outlook of the Energy Information Administration (EIA) to estimate monetary savings under the regulatory program. The projection path included the following assumptions for the price per gallon of gasoline: US$3.53 in 2015, $3.76 in 2020, $4.04 in 2030 and $4.57 in 2050.</p>
<p>Since then, the world oil market has undergone significant changes. Prices have fallen, with the national <a href="http://energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-915-march-7-2016-average-historical-annual-gasoline-pump-price-1929-2015">average price</a> in 2015 being $2.31. EIA has revised its forecasts and <a href="http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/">now expects</a> the average national price of fuel at $2.74 in 2020 and $3.20 in 2030. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/QNEV5/2/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="500"></iframe>
<p>These changes in the fuel price environment are noteworthy because consumer interest in fuel-efficient vehicles wanes with lower fuel prices and rises when prices at the pump are higher. </p>
<p>Also, automakers’ costs of complying with more stringent vehicle standards are often passed on to the consumer. Because very fuel-efficient vehicles are expected to be more expensive than their less efficient counterparts, the consumer payback period for a fuel-efficient vehicle is considerably longer in a low-fuel price environment. </p>
<p>A longer payback period can translate to lower consumer interest and, ultimately, lower vehicle sales. Sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius, for example, <a href="http://247wallst.com/autos/2016/01/21/toyota-prius-sales-drop-11/">fell for the first time in 2015</a>.</p>
<p>Consumer interest in fuel-efficient vehicles matters because an auto manufacturer’s ability to meet federal CAFE and vehicle GHG standards over time is contingent upon consumers purchasing its vehicles. Clearly, it is not enough for manufacturers to design and produce highly fuel-efficient vehicles to meet regulatory standards – consumers must also prefer these vehicles to their less fuel-efficient, more powerful models.</p>
<p>New vehicle sales matter because the automotive industry plays a central role in the health of the U.S. economy. The rate of new vehicle sales is also important because it affects the achievement of the regulations’ environmental objectives, since the rate of new vehicle sales influences the pace of retirement of old vehicles from the fleet. </p>
<p>Thus, in light of changes to fuel price projections, and related expectations about consumer payback periods and new vehicles sales, my colleagues and I concluded that federal CAFE and vehicle greenhouse gas regulations should be reevaluated during midterm reviews. </p>
<h2>Linking gas prices to regulations</h2>
<p>How should regulators alter the fuel efficiency targets in a way that considers environmental goals, consumer interest and the economic impact of vehicle sales? </p>
<p>Regulators could link the pace of the efficiency targets to EIA forecasts of fuel prices for model years 2022-2025. EIA will publish forecasts of 2025 fuel prices annually between now and 2025, drawing from the best available information on global oil markets and other factors that influence fuel prices in the U.S. </p>
<p>Using those data, regulators could adjust the requirements for complying with the regulations.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116104/original/image-20160322-32291-adxsej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As gas prices have gone down, American consumers have started driving more and buying bigger, less fuel-efficient cars and trucks.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/librariesrock/16378928540/in/photolist-qXmhPE-rLRH7r-BnFwbX-rxbcxg-raWezm-rYsRcQ-BEYTzt-qKbrgr-qodSpx-AYFBUy-qL9EzW-rzHxCz-rS4LwQ-rhogKT-rcFHHJ-rMT7dY-qUbMcN-qJHHPm-rbZ3yP-CVF2RM-qFNGdC-qPrfEf-r7HJm5-rQfjCA-CWe7yr-qpNjT8-ri7s1E-ALuA5T-qYft4H-s2dFRU-r4v2wE-AKv9MB-CDBhZB-B6DCmr-qKVhp6-qGf7K8-pNZtk1-qNjyM4-zNBF8x-BZfH3S-qLkm1L-rtDYcv-qNabun-BB4nZf-qaCPeq-sg5sBx-BMxCJn-ra7bJf-rbM1kX-s29NSq">librariesrock/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The NHTSA and EPA should not adjust regulatory requirements annually, since manufacturers need sufficient lead time – four to six years for a new model – to adjust their product plans for new regulatory requirements. But, EPA and NHTSA could design, in the midterm review process, a planned linkage between fuel forecasts for 2025 and the 2022-2025 regulatory requirements. </p>
<p>Here is a hypothetical illustration of how fuel-price forecasts might be linked to regulatory requirements. If EIA’s fuel price forecasts for 2025 rise significantly above $4 per gallon by 2020, then the federal requirements for model years 2022 to 2025 might remain as currently scheduled. </p>
<p>If those fuel price forecasts for 2025 are less than $3 per gallon, then the ramp-up should be slowed considerably, possibly stretched out to 2035. If fuel price forecasts for 2025 land between $3 and $4 per gallon, then a stretch-out to 2030 might be appropriate.</p>
<p>The review process formally kicks off in mid-2016 when the NHTSA and EPA publish a draft technical assessment report. Given how much has changed since the rules were first written, it makes sense for regulators to reconsider these rules. A good way to do that would be to explicitly link gas prices with fuel efficiency mandates. Although this linkage could delay the rules’ implementation, this method ultimately achieves both environmental and economic goals.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/56482/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Saba Siddiki receives funding from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.</span></em></p>Faced with stringent fuel economy standards but cheap gas, automakers may seek to delay CAFE rules. What’s the best way to reevaluate these emissions-cutting rules?Saba Siddiki, Assistant Professor of Public and Environmental Affairs, IUPUILicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/553632016-02-26T13:49:57Z2016-02-26T13:49:57ZWill self-driving cars reduce energy use and make travel better for the environment?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113074/original/image-20160226-26687-1g95dox.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Google</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>I started learning driving only three years ago, and – inevitably – failed my first test. Naturally, I was disappointed: but then it occurred to me that I could avoid the whole issue, if only I could get my hands on a driverless car. And this triggered the research question: what would the overall impact on travel demand, energy use and carbon emissions be if driverless cars were readily available to the likes of you and me? </p>
<p>I joined a few like-minded academics in the US – <a href="http://www.ce.washington.edu/people/faculty/faculty.php?id=120">Don MacKenzie</a> and <a href="http://www.esd.ornl.gov/people/leiby/">Paul Leiby</a> – to <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415002694">research</a> how the automation of road transport might affect energy use, and to quantify the potential range of these impacts.</p>
<p>We found that a widespread adoption of self-driving vehicles could indeed help to reduce energy consumption in a number of ways. For example, on motorways, automated vehicles can interact with each other and drive very closely as a “platoon”. This can reduce the total energy consumption of road transport by 4% to 25%, because vehicles which follow closely behind each other face less air resistance. </p>
<p>What’s more, when vehicles can interact with each other and road infrastructure – such as traffic control systems – this will smooth out the traffic flow. The result will be less congestion and a reduction in energy use of up to 4%. On top of this, automated “ecodriving” – a driving style which controls speed and acceleration for more efficient fuel use – can reduce energy use by up to 20%.</p>
<p>When you are riding in your self-driving car, obviously you won’t be at the controls, so you will no longer be able to enjoy the rapid acceleration of your driving days – so perhaps the desire for more powerful engines could diminish. And given that vehicle safety is <a href="https://theconversation.com/where-we-are-on-the-road-to-driverless-cars-50079">expected to improve dramatically</a> in self-driving cars, some of the heavy safety features could be removed, making cars lighter. Each of these changes could reduce energy use by up to 23%. </p>
<h2>The bigger picture</h2>
<p>So far, so good – all of these mechanisms improve the efficiency with which a car travels. But, as a society, our interest lies in reducing total energy use, or total carbon emissions – and energy efficiency forms only one half of this picture. Our total carbon emissions also depend on the demand for travel. So, while improving the energy efficiency of cars by automating the driving process will reduce the carbon emissions of individual vehicles, the overall impact of this change will depend on how many people use them.</p>
<p>For instance, consider what would happen if large numbers of people switched to self-driving cars from travelling by train. We generally prefer the <a href="http://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-15-why-do-people-travel-by-car.pdf">privacy and convenience</a> of travelling by car, but using public transport means we can concentrate on other stuff – such as reading a book or getting some work done. A self-driving car offers all of these benefits. As a result, we found that driverless cars could prove so attractive that they increase car travel by up to 60% in the US. </p>
<p>As you can see below, the features of driverless cars may have a range of impacts on energy consumption – both positive, and negative. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113070/original/image-20160226-27003-1fobd8l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Changes in energy consumption, due to various mechanisms facilitated by automation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wadud Z, MacKenzie D and Leiby P</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Self-driving cars could also encourage a completely new group of people to own vehicles – for example, the elderly, the disabled and possibly those too young to drive themselves. This would increase the welfare of that demographic by giving them greater mobility. Yet travel demand, energy use and carbon emissions would all rise: our estimate for the US is an increase between 2% and 10%.</p>
<h2>Sharing is caring</h2>
<p>But it’s not all bad news: self-driving cars could encourage a move away from current car-owning culture to a car-sharing or on-demand culture. This opens up a few different possibilities. For one thing, by making the per-mile costs more visible to the user, car sharing or automated taxis could reduce travel demand from individuals. Yet these shared automated cars may still travel empty for some parts of their trips, so this option could lead a reduction of energy use between 0% to 20%. </p>
<p>But even greater energy savings are possible if the size of the self-driven shared car is matched to the trip type: for example, if a one-person commute trip is undertaken by a compact car, while for a family leisure trip a medium-sized sedan is used. This approach could reduce energy demand by 21% to 45%.</p>
<p>One thing we haven’t touched in great detail is the potential for self-driving cars to encourage a switch to alternate fuels such as electricity and reduce carbon emissions. Imagine the car dropping you off at your destination and finding a charging point to recharge itself. </p>
<p>So, automation does have the potential to reduce energy use for road transport. But this is not a direct result of automation per se; rather, it is due to how automation changes vehicle design, operations and ownership culture. It’s also interesting that some of the energy-saving benefits of self-driving cars are possible at a lower level of automation, through increased interaction between vehicles and infrastructure. </p>
<p>It is clear that the benefits of self-driving cars will depend on how we use them. The widespread adoption of automated vehicles could well have some unexpected effects, so it’s vital that we find and implement ways to realise the full energy-saving and carbon-reducing potential of self-driving cars. Until then, we’d better keep practising our driving.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/55363/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zia Wadud does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Self-driving cars are way more energy efficient than your average vehicle – but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll reduce carbon emissions.Zia Wadud, Associate Professor, University of LeedsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.