What do you all think?

[Seduce XR6]

The Greens are pushing for a mandatory fuel efficiency standard in Australian cars in line with European targets.


http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...ID=69917&vf=26

[Dr. Feelgood]

Who is going to reimburse the folks whose current cars don't conform, eh?

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by Dr. Feelgood

Who is going to reimburse the folks whose current cars don't conform, eh?

You do understand the proposal/idea is for new cars... not everyones cars..

[jpd80]

Presently, the national fleet CO2 Average for new vehicles is around 212 gm/km,
that's also way in front of the previous 218 gm target set for 2010 so that
190 gm/km target set for 2015 is quite soft especially if fuel price increases.

The legislation sounds wonderful but is basically how FCAI see the market trending....

Bit of a yawn actually....

[pottery beige]

greens is full of bored opinionated uni students who bludged off their parents for way too long and have lost all grasp of reality...

[TheZHLANE]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

greens is full of bored opinionated uni students who bludged off their parents for way too long and have lost all grasp of reality...

This man is a legend!!

[FPV+fteT3]

Last time I checked we were still an island continent not attached to europe with a totally different population and land area so who cares what europe does? like emission targets Euro 4 ,5, 6 what about aussie 1 compliance (it goes, it stops, its safe) we dont have 20 million people living in each others pockets

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by FPV+fteT3

Last time I checked we were still an island continent not attached to europe with a totally different population and land area so who cares what europe does? like emission targets Euro 4 ,5, 6 what about aussie 1 compliance (it goes, it stops, its safe) we dont have 20 million people living in each others pockets

Yes because isolating our manufacturing standards from the rest of the world (with a bigger market potential) is really going to secure manufacturing here. Build cars that can't be bought anywhere else.
With One Ford full swing ahead, expect FoA to push the local arm into complying with international standards that are more widely recognised.

I wouldn't vote greens but I am all for standardising compliance. How many here keep ramping on about how good the locals are and how they can compete with the imports? Well here is their chance to really prove it. Ford OZ can leverage from their European and US counterparts.

Next step, rid of ADR.

[Struggo]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

greens is full of bored opinionated uni students who bludged off their parents for way too long and have lost all grasp of reality...

Originally Posted by STANI

This man is a legend!!

I second that

[My poor XF]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

greens is full of bored opinionated uni students who bludged off their parents for way too long and have lost all grasp of reality...

And even they won't give me a job.... lol

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

greens is full of bored opinionated uni students who bludged off their parents for way too long and have lost all grasp of reality...

You forgot their smug sense of superiority and desperation to be seen as the most progressive.

[tranquilized]

Whats the problem? We've all read so much about One Ford, Toyota are already a global company, GM heading that way also.

This means;
a: making cars that conform with European/World standards should be par for the course anyway.
b: If the Australian industry is allowed to continue producing cars that can only be sold in this country, they'll fall further behind, quickly become irrelevant, and cease to exist altogether.

Vote +1 Green!

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Whats the problem? We've all read so much about One Ford, Toyota are already a global company, GM heading that way also.

This means;
a: making cars that conform with European/World standards should be par for the course anyway.
b: If the Australian industry is allowed to continue producing cars that can only be sold in this country, they'll fall further behind, quickly become irrelevant, and cease to exist altogether.

Vote +1 Green!

great.. and while theyre at it lets ban all mines, yucky power stations and all that cool stuff.. Blaa.. Blaa.. Greens.. flick the switch let the ?@%* freeze in the dark..

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Whats the problem? We've all read so much about One Ford, Toyota are already a global company, GM heading that way also.

This means;
a: making cars that conform with European/World standards should be par for the course anyway.
b: If the Australian industry is allowed to continue producing cars that can only be sold in this country, they'll fall further behind, quickly become irrelevant, and cease to exist altogether.

Vote +1 Green!

You’re either taking the p155, or you’re on drugs. Which one is it?

Originally Posted by pottery beige

great.. and while theyre at it lets ban all mines, yucky power stations and all that cool stuff.. Blaa.. Blaa.. Greens.. flick the switch let the ?@%* freeze in the dark..

That pretty much sums it up.

[adelaidecrows02]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

great.. and while theyre at it lets ban all mines, yucky power stations and all that cool stuff.. Blaa.. Blaa.. Greens.. flick the switch let the ?@%* freeze in the dark..

epic stuff...

[vztrt]

New labour policy.

Gillard commits to fuel consumption standards by 2015

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...25776D00123BF7

Australia to follow US and Europe with CO2 emissions standards under Gillard policy

27 July 2010

By JAMES STANFORD

A GILLARD government would introduce mandatory motor vehicle fuel efficiency standards from 2015 under a newly announced policy that effectively endorses a stance taken by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI).

Prime Minster Julia Gillard said that, if re-elected, her government would introduce new mandatory carbon dioxide standards for new cars, starting in 2015.

It quoted the benefits of 190g/km national average by 2015 and a further reduction to 155g/km in 2024, but was careful not to lock in these numbers.

“We would need to put this through a regulatory impact process to determine the details after discussing it with the industry,” a government source told GoAuto.

Labor said the 190g/km and 155g/km targets would form the “starting point for discussions with industry and stakeholders”, indicating it could be willing to alter these numbers should they risk job losses for locally produced models.

The new industry standards would be in the form of fleet average, meaning they would be an average of all models offered by a brand allowing for high performance models with higher consumption would be compensated by small more efficient vehicles.

The FCAI says the average emission figure of new vehicles is 222g/km, down from 226g/km in 2007 and 230g/km in 2006.

It had previously been opposed to mandatory emission standards, but now supports them after the introduction of similar legislation in the US and Europe, although it insists the standards are not too tough.

General News center imageThe peak motoring body will wait until after the election to start discussing details and is unwilling to say too much given the announcement is a policy announcement made during an election campaign.

FCAI chief executive Andrew McKellar issued a statement expressing the body’s support for the emission standards program, which it was involved in shaping along with public officials and suggested the industry was ready for it. “The industry is confident we will reach agreement with any incoming government on the detailed structure of a new standard, including ways to recognise the uptake of emerging low emission technologies and alternative fuels,” he said.

Mr McKellar said the automotive industry had already shown a willingness to cut emissions.

“The industry is proud of the improvements in engine and transmission technologies in recent years that have helped reduce emissions from new vehicles,” he said.

“The intense competition between brands has led to improved fuel efficiency and a reduction in CO2 emissions of 10 per cent in the past five years.”

Local manufacturers Holden and Toyota declined to comment on the proposed emission standards, but Ford Australia spokeswoman Sinead McAlary said: “We support the idea in principal and look forward to working with the government on the details, if they are returned to government.”

According to the data supplied by the car-makers, the only Australian-made vehicle to come in under the proposed 2015 fleet-wide standard is the Toyota Camry Hybrid, which produces an official average of 142g/km.

Among the details that still need to be discussed how the fleet average would be applied, whether sub-brands such as Ford Performance Vehicles or Holden Special Vehicles would have their emissions included in the fleet averages of Ford and HSV and the penalties for non-compliance.

The Labor Party also reinforced its commitment to the existing $6 billion New Car Plan for a Greener Future which supports local production of more efficient vehicles up to 2020.

It mentioned electric vehicles in its latest release on the proposed emission standards, but is yet to develop a policy other than promising to lead a ‘work program’ to ensure “Australia’s energy markets are ready to support the potential large-scale adoption of electric vehicles and related technologies”.

It also said it would, through the Ministerial Council on Energy, ask the Australian Energy Market Commission to review Australia’s energy market frameworks to see if there are potential barriers to the uptake of electric vehicles.

The proposed emissions standards would not have any impact on the upcoming Euro 5 and Euro 6 emissions standards. In January, the Rudd government released a draft report prepared by the transport department recommending the Euro 5 emissions standard be introduced in Australia between 2012 and 2014. It went on to suggest the petrol engines would need to meet the Euro5 regulation by 2013.

A Labor party source said it would not lock in a date for the Euro 5 emissions standard now that the election had been called.

[Professor Farnsworth]

this is a political thread so is on shaky ground from the start.

word of advice to keep the thread about the idea, not your opinions on that particular party.

[SSD-85]

I think if that is what they want to do, then so be it. Im not interested in forking out for a new car just to keep the whimsical idea of "climate change" on life support. We have the ability to make nice new cars thatll keep the hippies happy. As long as I get to keep driving my noisy, smelly, inefficient, petrol powered pushrodosaurus V8s then all is well.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Scotty85

pushrodosaurus

Funny you mention that, everyone thinks pushrods are ancient (which they are) but DOHC:

When DOHC technology was introduced in mainstream vehicles, it was common for it to be heavily advertised. While used at first in limited production and sports cars, Alfa Romeo is one of the twin cam's greatest proponents. 6C Sport, the first Alfa Romeo road car using a DOHC engine, was introduced in 1928. Ever since this, it has been a trademark of all Alfa Romeo engines.[3]

Pushrods:

In 1949, Oldsmobile introduced the Rocket V8. It was the first high-compression I-head design, and is the archetype for most modern pushrod engines

Throw a spanner in the works there.

[Elks]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Funny you mention that, everyone thinks pushrods are ancient (which they are) but DOHC:

Hilarious

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Elks

Hilarious

Hilariously useless

[jpd80]

Anyone who thinks tougher CO2 limits are not coming for cars
is kidding themselves.

[SSD-85]

I think the concept is that pushrods are obsolete, regardless of whether they were introduced after OHC or not. OHC is the modern acceptable valvetrain design. Yes I am aware that GM still employ OHV in their LS engines, and im sure others still do too. I wont try and debate which is a more efficient design, im not an engineer. But many feel that is the consensus.

I just love the term because i find it a humourous play on words.
Plus it makes my opinion on the matter more obvious to those that blindly follow what is fed to them (not that im trying to imply this on my fellow forum members). Thats all.

[kpcart]

i think its a gud idea

[mik]

its probably inevitable we will be driving one brand of motor car in 30 years, the politically correct wizz kids makeing all the decisions, will put 99% of industry out of business, theres no need to have 20 different car companies makeing an 88 cc 2 seat hyundai getz, anything bigger will waste energy, use more power than an electric kettle, and put out more pollutants than a cat farting after eating Mc Donalds(SARCASM).

[vztrt]

Seems Australia is doing well with voluntry targets.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...25783E00837E6A

Australian CO2 tailpipe emissions fall

National CO2 average falls 2.7 per cent in 2010 as new mandatory targets draw near

22 February 2011
By TERRY MARTIN
CARBON dioxide tailpipe emissions from new vehicles on sale in Australia are continuing to fall, with the latest National Average Carbon Emissions (NACE) figures released this week placing the industry-wide average CO2 figure for light vehicles at 213 grams per kilometre in 2010.

As the federal government prepares to release a discussion paper for a new mandatory 2015 CO2 target, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) has revealed that the average CO2 emissions of passenger cars was down 2.5 per cent last year to 192.5g/km, while SUVs fell 3.35 per cent to 238g/km and light commercial vehicles dropped 1.1 per cent to 250g/km.

The overall NACE figure of 212.6g/km, which simply represents the average grams of CO2 per kilometre for all new cars, SUVs, utes and vans sold in Australia, was down 2.7 per cent from 218.5g/km in 2009 and is well below the voluntary target of 222g/km set for 2010 five years earlier.

In part, it reflects buyer trends toward smaller vehicles and the increasing popularity of diesel-powered models.

It also reflects the introduction of Euro 4 emissions regulations that came into force on July 1 last year and brought improvements to locally manufactured cars, as well as the move in Europe to tougher Euro 5 emissions late in 2009, which in turn has brought upgrades to imported vehicles.

However, Australia remains well behind Europe, where the EU is phasing in a 130g/km limit for passenger cars by 2012 (with conditions) – and has set a limit of 95g/km by 2020.

Last year, average CO2 emissions for passenger cars in the UK were down to 144.2g/km – 48.3 grams ahead of Australia.

FCAI chief executive Andrew McKellar told GoAuto this week that the 2010 NACE result was a significant achievement and reflected the continuing uptake of economical powertrains, particularly diesels.

“Anything over two per cent (drop) is a pretty significant change in one year so I think it’s a very good result,” he said.

Mr McKellar rejected the suggestion that Australia’s rate of progress in lowering CO2 emissions was slow compared to Europe, noting aspects such as a deep-rooted preference for petrol fuel here and limited availability of diesel, and predicted that reductions would continue – and deepen – in the years ahead.

Prime minister Julia Gillard promised a new mandatory CO2 standard during last year’s election campaign, quoting a 190g/km national average from 2015 and a further reduction to 155g/km by 2024.

However, she refused to commit to these targets, which were based on a draft regulation impact statement and, in the case of the 2015 target, according to Mr McKellar, reflected “the independent umpire’s view of what was a realistic and achievable, but nonetheless challenging, target in the Australian context”.

As GoAuto has reported, the federal government has since abandoned a number of eco-oriented vehicle programs, including the proposed vehicle scrappage scheme and the Green Car Innovation Fund (GCIF).

As well as supporting the local car industry, all of these measures were designed to reduce CO2 tailpipe emissions.

Transport minister Anthony Albanese was this week unavailable for comment on the proposed new CO2 regulations, as well as its proposed timetable for tougher Euro 5 and Euro 6 emissions standards – initially set at 2012 and 2016 respectively, but which has been under review after the industry warned of implications such as the viability of Australian engine plants.

Mr McKellar said he expected the government to shortly release a discussion paper canvassing how it proposes to proceed in addressing its CO2 election commitments.

“We’ve obviously had a number of discussions with the minister’s office and the department, but we need to see the detail,” he said.

“One of the most important points that we’ve outlined in those discussions is that the key issue to be resolved is to examine the mechanism that would be adopted to allocate any target across all the brands.

“Whether that is a uniform percentage reduction, whether it is based on a weight-based formula, or whether it’s on a footprint-based formula, those are the sort of key questions – the key analysis that has to be undertaken – to ensure that we understand what the impact is going to be down to the individual brand level.

“The reality is that there’s no perfect formula. Each of the approaches that has been used elsewhere in the world has its advantages and disadvantages, so there’s no one approach that is, I think, without flaw. But it is important to understand just how the impact will be spread across individual brands.

“Obviously, the impact on local manufacturers is one thing. But I think we have to ensure that there is a fair approach across the entire industry.”

Mr McKellar said dividing the CO2 targets between passenger cars and LCVs, as is the case in Europe, was “feasible, and that’s something that really has to be part of the analysis”.

He also said the scrapping of the GCIF and the so-called ‘Cleaner Car Rebate’ scheme “does change the context somewhat” of the industry’s response to the government’s proposed new CO2 standard, as well as to its carbon pricing mandate.

“Certainly the Green Car Innovation Fund was a program that was enabling local manufacturers to really gear up and to support them and assist them in competitively putting in place the necessary investments for a range of lower-emissions technologies, so there’s no doubt that does have an impact and that needs to be taken into account,” he said.

Australia’s NACE figure has decreased steadily over the past eight years. In 2002, the CO2 average was 252.4g/km, dropping to 249.5, 246.5 and 244.7 over the following three years.

As emissions regulations tightened and changes were made to Australian Design Rules, CO2 emissions continued to fall, with the NACE figure down to 230.3g/km in 2006, then to 226.1 in 2007, 222.4 in 2008 and 128.5 in 2009.

CO2 Emissions by vehicle segment:



2009 2010 Variance
CO2 (g/km) CO2 (g/km) +/- %
Passenger

Light 156.9 158.5 -1.01
Small 180.6 182.1 -0.81
Medium 199.6 209.5 -4.75
Large 252.4 253.6 -0.47
Upper Large 278.2 283.7 -1.94
People-movers 249.5 246.2 1.36
Sports 205.7 218.4 -5.79
Passenger Total
192.5
197.5 -2.52



SUV
SUV Compact 222.3 225.0 -1.20
SUV Medium 253.5 263.0 -3.61
SUV Large 292.7 292.2 0.18
SUV Luxury 231.5 250.2 -7.49
SUV Total 238.0
246.3 -3.35


Light Commercial
Light Buses 268.6 269.5 -0.32
Vans 230.9 232.6 -0.71
PU/CC 2WD 259.8 263.9 -1.56
PU/CC 4WD 247.8 248.9 -0.43
Trucks 2.5-3.5 GVM 257.8 267.7 -1.11
LCV Total 250.0 252.8 -1.11

TOTAL 212.6 218.6 -2.74

[sanchoXB]

This might get me shot but instead of trying to decrease emissions, why dont they cut emissions altogether and start building hydrogen powered cars, the only thing that comes from the exhaust pipe is water. Electric cars are the wrong way to go, hydrogen is the future. Set a date, say 2015 and all cars manufactured from that date must be hydrogen powered, and Im sure they can still build V8s. We can all drive Twin turbo 8 Litre V12 cars without polluting the planet. There could be an exeption for historical & classic vehicles which we all drive rarely anyway.

[Iggypoppin']

Originally Posted by sanchoXB

This might get me shot but instead of trying to decrease emissions, why dont they cut emissions altogether and start building hydrogen powered cars, the only thing that comes from the exhaust pipe is water. Electric cars are the wrong way to go, hydrogen is the future. Set a date, say 2015 and all cars manufactured from that date must be hydrogen powered, and Im sure they can still build V8s. We can all drive Twin turbo 8 Litre V12 cars without polluting the planet. There could be an exeption for historical & classic vehicles which we all drive rarely anyway.

I could be wrong but I think cost is the prohibitive factor in hydrogen cars.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by Iggypoppin'

I could be wrong but I think cost is the prohibitive factor in hydrogen cars.

I believe that's true.

If they made hydrogen cars that were as good as the cars we have today, just without the exhaust, then I would have no problem with buying one.
James May on hydrogen cars... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZvyYvbXjEM

Greenies and environmentalists are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.
Last year they decided they would save the environment by chaining themselves to coal trains and train tracks in the Hunter Valley. So they made a website, using dirty electricity, and told everyone to go to a camp site in the Hunter Valley.
So all these people drove from all around Australia to this camp site just east of Musswellbrook.
I found passing the campsite was interesting. Commodores, 15yo+ vans, BMW x5, and Mitsubishi Pajaro were just some of the cars driven by these enviro nuts that were 'saving the world'. Not a prius or any other particularly 'green' car in sight.

So these people chain themselves to train tracks, police drive their cars down (mostly V8 Holdens and Vans) and arrest these people for trespassing.

Meanwhile trains are stopped and idling away using hundreds of litres of fuel without even turning a wheel.

Then these people decided to sneak into coal mines and chain themselves to more heavy equipment. So they drive to fences in the middle of nowhere and trespass on mine property. Police called, more V8's and vans turn up and arrest some more people.
Mine's hire extra security to drive laps around the property to stop anymore trespassers.

Then at the end of it all these people who were arrested have to go to court. So they all have to drive to court at some point.
So at the end of their protest the mines are still mining coal, and a bunch of people did a whole lot of pointless driving that otherwise wouldn't of been done.
How is that saving the world when they say cars are a major factor of "Global warming" and other myths.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by sanchoXB

This might get me shot but instead of trying to decrease emissions, why dont they cut emissions altogether and start building hydrogen powered cars, the only thing that comes from the exhaust pipe is water. Electric cars are the wrong way to go, hydrogen is the future. Set a date, say 2015 and all cars manufactured from that date must be hydrogen powered, and Im sure they can still build V8s. We can all drive Twin turbo 8 Litre V12 cars without polluting the planet. There could be an exeption for historical & classic vehicles which we all drive rarely anyway.

Seeing as power accounts for over half of our 'carbon footprint' its not cars that really should be the priority. But nuclear power can't be used even if its the most effective way for Oz cause the same hippy's have been protesting against it for decades and can't look like hypocrites now can they?