Emissions standards could close down Ford's Geelong plant

[cosmo20btt]

Originally Posted by flappist

No Nazi

USA, Japan & Singapore....

None of these are really applicable to Australia, they are designed for different conditions.

So adopting them just to be the same as everyone else is not really a good idea is it?

I agree with flappist where does the buck stop on this enviro issue of trying to make air come out of your exhaust pipe, it will never happen, we just have to be happy with what we got now, besides most the CO comes from cows farting not exhaust pipes from what I've been reading.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by flappist

So adopting them just to be the same as everyone else is not really a good idea is it?

Would that not go against Fords vision of a global platform tho?? or would Aus have engines built "Not for use outside of Australia"

Edit:.... It was not to that long ago we where all jumping for joy at the thought of Aus picking up more export markets for our cars, well if we don't comply with overseas regs what hope is there of that.....

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by flappist

No Nazi

USA, Japan & Singapore....

None of these are really applicable to Australia, they are designed for different conditions.

So adopting them just to be the same as everyone else is not really a good idea is it?

I didn't say for us to adopt them to be like everyone else because it is fashionable. I would like us to adopt them so we have a set of established standards that we can base our vehicle design upon. it then opens up our cars to other markets where such standards are already in place. Having our own really restricts our cars to our market and how long do you think the locals could survive on that?

Why go through the process of re inventing the wheel when Euro emissions standards are already available to be used? We already do this for ANCAP which is pretty much the Euro NCAP tests renamed.

The standards are there for efficiency and cutting emissions out of exhausts. They don't force you to drive a car a certain way. They still produce exciting cars that can go long distances in all conditions, I don't see the problem here.

I suggest some of you actually read through the Euro emissions standards to get a better understanding.

By the way cows are not the big emitters of CO2, they emit large amounts of methane which is far more dangerous than CO2, but that's the topic.

[cosmo20btt]

Originally Posted by Wretched

I didn't say for us to adopt them to be like everyone else because it is fashionable. I would like us to adopt them so we have a set of established standards that we can base our vehicle design upon. it then opens up our cars to other markets where such standards are already in place. Having our own really restricts our cars to our market and how long do you think the locals could survive on that?

Why go through the process of re inventing the wheel when Euro emissions standards are already available to be used? We already do this for ANCAP which is pretty much the Euro NCAP tests renamed.

The standards are there for efficiency and cutting emissions out of exhausts. They don't force you to drive a car a certain way. They still produce exciting cars that can go long distances in all conditions, I don't see the problem here.

I suggest some of you actually read through the Euro emissions standards to get a better understanding.

By the way cows are not the big emitters of CO2, they emit large amounts of methane which is far more dangerous than CO2, but that's the topic.

I knew it was some thing like that.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Wretched

I didn't say for us to adopt them to be like everyone else because it is fashionable. I would like us to adopt them so we have a set of established standards that we can base our vehicle design upon. it then opens up our cars to other markets where such standards are already in place. Having our own really restricts our cars to our market and how long do you think the locals could survive on that?

Why go through the process of re inventing the wheel when Euro emissions standards are already available to be used? We already do this for ANCAP which is pretty much the Euro NCAP tests renamed.

The standards are there for efficiency and cutting emissions out of exhausts. They don't force you to drive a car a certain way. They still produce exciting cars that can go long distances in all conditions, I don't see the problem here.

I suggest some of you actually read through the Euro emissions standards to get a better understanding.

By the way cows are not the big emitters of CO2, they emit large amounts of methane which is far more dangerous than CO2, but that's the topic.

And while we're at it, let's drop those infuriating and farcical Australian Design Standards and just
adopt Euro Spec. cars. That would save a whole bunch of aggro with importing new Fords from elsewhere.

[morak001]

Originally Posted by jpd80

And while we're at it, let's drop those infuriating and farcical Australian Design Standards and just
adopt Euro Spec. cars. That would save a whole bunch of aggro with importing new Fords from elsewhere.

Curiously, when I brought my '97bmw out from UK with me it had Au design standard tags on the seatbelts already and child seat restraint mounting points in the parcel shelf, these were not accessible so I assume these are not part of their standards.
It appears that at least some of our standards are either identical to theirs or they build parts in to all vehicles so they are compatible with o/s market standards.

[vztrt]

New-car CO2 emissions under review

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...2576D90006F3C1

Australia is on the right road to reducing CO2, but are the targets tough enough?

1 March 2010

By TERRY MARTIN

REDUCING carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from motor vehicles has become one of the most significant issues for the industry in recent years, to the point where it is now heavily influencing government policy and consumer purchasing decisions.

To their credit, most car companies have been quick to respond to the changing environmental landscape – with some leading the way – not just in the development of cleaner conventional and alternative powertrains but in their decisions to import to Australia more CO2-friendy and economical model variants sold overseas.

The question of economy is a vexed one, for in 2005 the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) abandoned its policy of setting a national average fuel consumption target as a measure of improving environmental performance of new vehicles sold here. The target was 6.8L/100km by 2010 – one that clearly would not have been met.

Instead, “to reflect the need to reduce carbon emissions” the FCAI switched to a voluntary CO2 target of 222g/km by 2010 – a figure it has easily achieved with the rising tide of new technology, an influx of hi-tech diesel models (in conjunction with better quality diesel fuel) and changing consumer preferences, not just for greener cars, but smaller ones, too, to the detriment of our local manufacturing industry.

The National Average Carbon Emission (NACE) figures – which are simply the average grams of CO2 per kilometre for all new cars, SUVs, utes and vans – show how far our nation has come.

In 2002, Australia’s NACE was 252.4g/km. It was down to 244.7 by 2005 and has continued to fall consistently – but not dramatically – to the point where the 2010 target was reached in 2008 (with 222.4g/km). Last year’s figure was 218.5g/km.

Break that latter figure down and we can see that passenger cars were at 197.5g/km (down from 201.7g/km in 2008), SUVs at 246.3g/km and LCVs at 252.8g/km.

The CO2 average of light-sized cars actually rose last year by 0.19 per cent, although with 158.5g/km this segment has by far the lowest emissions. Small cars are the only others to have an average below 200g/km (182.1g/km), while large cars stand at 253.6g/km.

Other segments of note include medium cars (209.5g/km), upper-large (283.7g/km), sportscars (218.4g/km) and people-movers (246g/km), while the SUVs range from 225g/km for compacts to 292g/km at the large end. Utes range from 248.9g/km for 4x4s (reflecting the uptake in diesels) to 263.9g/km for 4x2s, while vans are at 232.6g/km.

The FCAI is negotiating a new 2015 NACE target with the federal government. This is almost certain to fall below 200g/km for the industry as a whole. It could also shift from a voluntary to mandatory target, and apply these to specific categories.

Based on a continuation of the current trends, and the emergence of new hybrid and electric vehicles, Australia will achieve a sub-200g/km CO2 average with ease.

The question is: how low can we go?

By comparison, the European parliament passed legislation in December 2008 requiring all new passenger cars to reach 130g/km by 2015, with 65 per cent of all new cars reaching the target by 2012, 75 per cent by 2013 and 80 per cent by 2014.

Tough individual targets are set for low-volume (sub-10,000 a year) manufacturers, while niche car-makers (10,000 to 300,000) have also been handed an easier target. For the rest, any manufacturer exceeding the target will be heavily fined per additional gram of CO2 emitted, for every car registered across Europe.

Based on Australia’s current 197.5g/km average for passenger cars, and the current rate of decline, our equivalent CO2 average would still be well over 170g/km. With niche EVs, new hybrids and a raft of new smaller cars thrown in, that figure would be lower. But as low as even 150g/km?

In the UK, which is still to publish 2009 figures, new cars were down to 158g/km in 2008, after falling 4.2 per cent on 2007.

With light commercials, the European Commission proposed a tough new law in October last year which, if passed, would see vans – which tend to have a longer product-development cycle than cars – set a fleet average target of 175g/km by 2016. On current figures, Australian vans would still be averaging more than 200g/km.

Australia is on the right path, but more significant reductions in CO2 hinge on a range of factors, not least of which will be the level of government incentives for low-carbon cars such as EVs and hybrids. A drastic drop in excise on diesel fuel would also have a substantial impact.

[vztrt]

http://theage.drive.com.au/green-mot...303-1bfef.html

Some people are never happy.

Vehicle CO2 reductions not enough: Greens Stephen Ottley
March 3, 2011 - 10:19AM

A small reduction in the average carbon dioxide emissions of new cars is promising but doesn’t go far enough according to the Greens.

Australian cars are getting greener, but not fast enough. Despite another year of reduced average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions there are calls for stricter emissions standards.

The Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries released the National Average Carbon Emissions (NACE) figures this week and reported a further reduction of 2.7 per cent. The drop means the average output of CO2 from vehicles is 212.6g/km.

Despite the improvement Australia is still well behind Europe; although NACE includes a wider spectrum of vehicles than European reports. The European Union has set a target of 130g/km for car makers to average across their line-up by next year.

Advertisement: Story continues below Australian Greens Deputy Leader Senator Christine Milne has called on the government to mandate stricter emissions targets for the new car industry to speed up the reductions.

“While it is good news that Australia’s new vehicles are slowly becoming more efficient and less polluting, this progress is far too slow in the face of the urgent need to address the climate crisis and will not do anywhere near enough to even see us keep up with global progress towards ultra-efficient cars and high-performance electric vehicles,” Milne says.

“The Greens believe that, if we adopt ambitious mandatory vehicle fuel efficiency standards, top notch government purchasing policies and more, we can open up an exciting array of opportunities for the community, manufacturers and the economy.”

The NACE figures come as the FCAI prepares to discuss in federal government’s proposed carbon tax.

FCAI chief executive Andrew McKellar says he is waiting for more details about the Prime Minister’s plans and how it will affect the local car industry.

“Too early to tell,” McKellar says. “It will only become more apparent as the details are outlined ... the potential impact on the local industry is one of the issues we need to address.”

McKellar says the reduction in the average figure is a positive sign the car industry is responding to demands for cleaner and more efficient cars.

In a worrying sign the largest segment of the market, small cars, recorded one of the lowest reductions, only 0.81 per cent.

In contrast SUVs (four-wheel-drive-style wagons) achieved the best reduction of 3.35 per cent despite the thirstiest of the lot – large 4WDs – increasing slightly to 292.7g/km (up 0.18 per cent).

[Road_Warrior]

It's the Greens, what do you expect? Even if everyone did exactly what they wanted, they would still whinge.

[Ben73]

I would probably care more if CO2 was bad for the earth. But it's not. Man made Co2 is small enough that it doesn't really effect the world.

I know we will run out of fuel one day so something has to be done. But it has nothing to do with the environment.


Also do you really think if Australian car manufactures made "Australian 1 Emission standards" anyone else in the world would care? They wouldn't even bother to try and comply, they would just laugh it off.

We don't live in Europe. Australia is very different from Europe.

[bobthebilda]

Originally Posted by Ben73

I would probably care more if CO2 was bad for the earth. But it's not. Man made Co2 is small enough that it doesn't really effect the world.

Ben, scientists have invented quite a simple test to work out how dangerous exhaust fumes are. You run a tube from the exhaust, into the car, and sit in it. You then run the car for approx 365 hours (to simulate 365 days x 1 hour), and you report the results. The results of this test are a little inconclusive due to the participants never recording the results.

[2011G6E]

The biggest problem is the crap fuel we have in Australia.

In most other countries, what we call "Premium Unleaded" is "standard unleaded", and they have another level above that of even higher octane that we can only dream of. If our third-world refineries were forced to do as the rest of the civilised world does, we would have a minimum octane of 95 to 98, and a Premium of 100 or maybe a bit more.

Hell, I run Premium in my GSX-1400 motorbike, and sometimes pass through a small town and have to keep on going as there isn't a premium pump. Imagine if they forced everyone to have to use it?

the part I don't like in that article is the telling words "The Greens believe that...". I don't care what those idiots believe...everyone is concerned about the environment, but it must be tempered with realism...we have one of thier leaders telling us in Queensland that she wants to "shut down" coal fired power stations and coal mines on a maximum timespan of only 20 years. They also say fuel taxes should be much higher to "force people to stop relying on cars and move into public transport".
Really? I take it then that energy sources (other than the evil nuclear) which can run all our industry and technology with sufficient base-load-demand capability will magically pop into existance? I also suppose those of us in rural and regional country areas with literally zero public transport and zero choice but to use our own cars to drive sometimes long distances just to go shopping will be exempt from paying the higher fuel taxes?

Idiots...even if Australia shut down all our industry, stopped all mining, took each and every vehicle off the road, and went back to living a purely Amish agrarian way of life, it wouldn't change the world one bit...we aren't, honestly, important, and contribute a total of less than 1% of greenhouse gases. Why should we "go first" just to prove a point and ruin ourselves if massive polluters refuse to do anything?

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

The biggest problem is the crap fuel we have in Australia.

In most other countries, what we call "Premium Unleaded" is "standard unleaded", and they have another level above that of even higher octane that we can only dream of. If our third-world refineries were forced to do as the rest of the civilised world does, we would have a minimum octane of 95 to 98, and a Premium of 100 or maybe a bit more.

In alot of countries your paying $2.50-$3 per litre. Better fuel cost more at the bowser. Also our fuel is alot better then it use to be and will get better as emmision laws get more strict and we need better refined fuel.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by vztrt

In alot of countries your paying $2.50-$3 per litre. Better fuel cost more at the bowser. Also our fuel is alot better then it use to be and will get better as emmision laws get more strict and we need better refined fuel.

I agree...but the problem is that the costs will be carried by the public, on decisions made by people who haven't paid for a liter of petrol in thier Commonwealth cars for decades...

[vztrt]

Will effect the plant.

Carbon price ‘to add $220 to $412 to car cost’

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...25789300242202

Industry study counts the cost of a carbon tax on local car-makers

17 May 2011

By RON HAMMERTON

A CARBON tax could add between $222 and $412 to the cost of each car made in Australia if the carbon price is set at between $20 and $30 a tonne, according to a report prepared on behalf of the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI).

The investigation, by PricewaterhouseCoopers Australia (PWCA), found that the overall cost to the $6.2 billion domestic automotive industry was likely to be between $30 million and $84 million, depending on factors including compensation.

The report warned that additional cost burdens could threaten plans for growth in the automotive industry, which it described as “vulnerable”.

The opposition leader Tony Abbott used the figures during a visit to Ford’s factory at Geelong in Victoria today to raise the spectre of lost jobs in the motor industry due to Labor’s carbon tax.

“If the carbon tax turns out to be the nail in the coffin of the motor manufacturing industry in this country, that spells disaster for Australia as a first-world economy,” he said.

“We want to be a country that makes things, and the risk with this carbon tax is that we will stop being a country that makes things any more – an absolute disaster for Australia.”

The federal government is set to spell out the details of its carbon tax plan by July, with the scheme set to be introduced on July 1, 2012.

The PWCA report said each domestically made vehicle would have a CO2 footprint of between 11.1 tonnes and 13.6 tonnes.

The largest proportion – between 6.0 and 7.8 tonnes – would be embodied in the manufacturing of materials such as steel, aluminium and plastics.

Parts manufacturing would generate between 2.6 and 3.5 tonnes and vehicle assembly 1.5 tonnes, while small amounts would be contributed by air-conditioning gases, the retailing of the vehicle and transportation.

The report said the extent of greenhouse gas emissions depended on factors such as the size of the vehicle, extent of local content, vehicle configuration and energy supply mix.

Of the materials used in the typical vehicle, steel was by far the biggest contributor of greenhouse gases, at 67 per cent, followed by aluminium on 26 per cent. Plastics rated only two per cent.

PWCA warned in its report that the local automotive industry was likely to have little or no ability to pass on any additional cost burden, due to the highly competitive international market.

It said the three local manufacturers were likely to source components from international markets to avoid incurring a carbon price within automotive products.

“The automotive industry is a highly value-adding industry, and a reduction in its competitiveness in the global automotive market could ultimately result in a loss of these value-adding activities offshore,” the report concluded.

The visit to Ford by Mr Abbott and shadow minister for industry, Sophie Mirabella, was pointed, as the Geelong engine plant has been described as one the most vulnerable of the Australian car company factories.

Ms Mirabella said a carbon price was going to price Australian cars out of the market, with imported vehicles swarming the market.

“If the Labor Party cares for workers, for their families, who work at Ford, who work in manufacturing across Australia, they must start to listen to their concerns.

“They must start to listen to what they want, and they want to keep their jobs. They want to continue to make things in Australia, they don’t want a carbon tax.”

Mr Abbott said the coalition accepted climate change and humanity’s impact on global warming.

He said the coalition would use $1 billion saved out of the budget to reduce emissions by planting more trees on suitable land, getting more carbon into the soil and turning carbon dioxide waste from power stations into thing such as biodiesel and stock feed.

[FalconXV]

I don't think that would send jobs overseas. Businesses should be pressured to absorb the tax, as it is them who are most accountable.

[Fireblade]

Originally Posted by FalconXV

I don't think that would send jobs overseas. Businesses should be pressured to absorb the tax, as it is them who are most accountable.

Do you actually understand how much pressure manufacturing in Australia is under with our strong economy at the moment, the Aus dollar is getting stronger against the US dollar and is tipped to go a lot higher yet, the manufacturing industry in Australia is under threat in a big way, at my work, even if we become perfect in our processes it most probably won't be enough to stay open in the future, so I could imagine how this would affect the Auto industry.

[robbo/region15]

Originally Posted by F6 FOON

Do you actually understand how much pressure manufacturing in Australia is under with our strong economy at the moment, the Aus dollar is getting stronger against the US dollar and is tipped to go a lot higher yet, the manufacturing industry in Australia is under threat in a big way, at my work, even if we become perfect in our processes it most probably won't be enough to stay open in the future, so I could imagine how this would affect the Auto industry.

Well said,spot on mate!Lets hope the Aussie $ doesnt go over $1.50 US.....The US currency is in Dire trouble,as we all read....How many TRILLION in Debt this morning?

[Fireblade]

We have been tipped here the US dollar might hit $1.70 by september, and if so there isn't much we can do to compete with imports then, as it is we are already struggling.