From The GWPF Original story at The Australian
- Date: 26/08/19
- The Australian
Electric vehicles in Australia’s eastern states are responsible for more carbon dioxide emissions than regular petrol vehicles, according to an expert report that warns Labor’s green cars policy would require up to $7 billion in upgrades and installation of recharging infrastructure across the nation.
A pre-election briefing obtained by The Australian, which was prepared by engineering firm ABMARC, concedes the immediate benefit of electric vehicles in Australia “is not guaranteed”. It also states Bill Shorten’s electric vehicle target of 50 per cent of new car sales by 2030 would need between $5bn and $7bn in recharging infrastructure and additional investment in “switchboards, transformers and poles and wires”.
“Installing this level of charging infrastructure would require a significant increase in the rate of investment in recharging infrastructure,” the report says.
Bill Shorten’s pre-election green cars pledge would have required up to $7 billion in upgrades and installation of recharging infrastructure. Picture: Kym Smith
The report, released to stakeholders in May, also provides a breakdown comparing average CO2 emissions of hybrid, petrol, diesel and electric vehicles in Australia.
ABMARC, which is used by government departments, motoring firms and major energy companies, reveals “CO2 emissions from electric vehicles in Victoria are particularly high, similar to the average diesel CO2 emissions”.
On average, in NSW, Victoria, ACT and Queensland, petrol vehicles “provide less CO2 than electric vehicles”, with ABMARC linking the emissions disparity with “Australia’s continued reliance on coal-fired power stations”. The consultancy firm also notes that the Australian Average Diesel emissions data was “heavily skewed by light commercial vehicles (utes) and larger SUVs”.
The report says hybrid vehicles “provide greater environmental benefits in nearly all states and territories” than electric vehicles with the exception of Tasmania, which primarily uses hydro-electricity.
The ABMARC analysis also unravels the argument for Australia to replicate Norway’s electric car market, which imposes heavy taxes on passenger vehicles and provides generous incentives for EVs.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Something wrong here. The diesel cycle is more efficient that the petrol/otto cycle so produces less CO2 per mile. Beats me how they arrived at such a large average CO2 footprint for the diesel fleet compared with the petrol fleet.
Notice diesels would include heavy transport in the ‘vehicles’ averages-
“The report, released to stakeholders in May, also provides a breakdown comparing average CO2 emissions of hybrid, petrol, diesel and electric vehicles in Australia.”
Because they included light commercial, which is dominated by diesel vehicles.
Yes not heavy transport but light commercials you can see here-
https://www.caradvice.com.au/781090/vfacts-new-vehicle-sales-for-july-2019/
Take out the biz diesel workhorses- Toyota Hilux/Landcruiser, Ford Ranger, Mitsubishi Triton and the towhorse Toyota Prado and you’re left with small to medium SUVs and sedans that private buyers opt for largely with petrol engines although business and Govt buy/lease the largest number of new cars that trickle down into private hands.
Interestingly if you look at the predominant ‘Carsales’ online website advertising new and used cars you find the median asking price around $25000 when new EVs start at $50k and at that price and over you’re only left with around 18% of the market and that’s often dual cab ute workhorse and towhorse country that EVs don’t compete in at present. Not hard to see why the EV dream will remain just that without the massive Norway slushfunding and mandates- https://www.carsales.com.au/
(you see the total number of cars for sale and simply plug in price ranges to get the numbers)
Bear in mind too that 88% of new car buyers use finance (around half dealer and half BYO) and that’s why purchase price and consequent depreciation is the big cahuna in overall running costs-
https://www.racq.com.au/cars-and-driving/cars/owning-and-maintaining-a-car/car-running-costs
The EV fan club will quickly go into complete denial whenever you point out these facts and hang their tinfoil hat on EV battery prices coming down like computing power prices. It all runs on e-motion for them and unlimited taxpayer slushfunding.
You doubting Thomases don’t understand how EVs are so much cheaper to run than ICE cars anyway –
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jul/02/norway-electric-cars-subsidies-fossil-fuel
You just have to drive them in Norway with Krone capitalism.
The Norwegian EV subsidy money coming from their massive oil and gas sales, I assume?
I have an EV and have kept records for more than 6 years.
Average fuel cost/mile for the EV has been 3.4 cents (U.S.) vs. 7.6 cents for a gas car of equivalent size, exclusive of taxes on either side.
I recently compared 2013 model year gasoline and diesel vehicles against ZEVs for air pollution and GHG emissions for USA using a unique perspective. I found today’s super clean gasoline and diesel vehicles could be cleaner for air pollution and GHG depending on fueling used. I would love to hear the groups response and contrast to the Australian study. I am updating this analysis with 2019 model year vehicles which are even cleaner and with higher fuel economy than the 2013 model year strengthening the findings.
https://stillwaterassociates.com/how-do-zev-emissions-stack-up-against-super-clean-gasoline-and-diesel-engines/
The Great Barrier Reef is dying by extension from EV pollution. 9 out of 10 Australian psychologists agree.
The fuel suppliers for internal combustion engines had ~ 100 years to invest and erect their own filling station network globally.
Why should that be different with electric vehicles.
In case you just landed on Earth, our country is run by electricity – lots of it and it is available EVERYWHERE. Those filling stations that are installing CCS IONITY chargers did not need
to wait for a “network of electricity to be created.” MOST ALL electricity that is used by electric cars come from the owners own house, and usually the EV is recharged during the night hours, when plenty of excess electricity exists.
There’s no “excess electricity” at night, only “excess generating capacity.”
I write as someone who owns an EV but rejects the AGW religion. Not only that, but I doubt there are too many other people whose EV has a National Rifle Assn. sticker on the back window. I bought it at a deep discount in the banruptcy sale by Think, a Norwegian outfit that was once Ford’s EV divison. My other vehicle is a one-ton Ram diesel truck. If nothing else, I hope this supports my claim to objectivity.
The CO2 emissions from operating an EV depend entirely on how the electricity is generated. Yep, if it’s made by burning coal, the emissions will be higher. You can play that game on all sides. I happen to live in a place where 97% of the juice comes from hydro, wind, and a nuke. Not that it matters to me except in the abstract, but if EVs in coal-heavy Australian states “produce” more CO2 than ICEVs, then I guess I deserve special AGW cult merit points? God forbid.
Come on, folks, this kind of crap is what the other side specializes in. It’s unbecoming for an otherwise highly valuable source as Wattsup to play these kinds of games. You should be better than that. I’m VERY far from being an EVangelist. I laugh at them, quite frankly. Still: “Thou shalt not cherry-pick the data.” Even if it makes you feel good. In fact, especially if it makes you feel good.
Fossil fuels will disappear for several reasons – 1) advanced nuclear power (molten salt) is cheaper. And 2) no one can complain about C02 emissions stabilizing or perhaps being reduced somewaht, along with other harmful emissions