I recall that during the summer of 2000-01 there was a call for legislation in NSW against bullbars on SUVs. Bob Carr, presumably under pressure from the Right of the ALP, refused these calls on the basis of the supposed need for SUV drivers in the far-flung reaches of the states to be able to protect their vehicles against errant bulls, roos, sheep, etc. This begged the question of why SUV drivers in Sydney's eastern suburbs and lower north shore also needed bullbars on their SUVs.
As it happened, that summer I was on a cycling and camping holiday to, and in, the Bundjalung and Yuraygir National Parks. I saw plenty of SUVs with bullbars on the Pacific Highway en route to holiday spots, and no SUVs on the dirt roads and tracks in the Yuraygir National Park when I cycled them, but I did observe a clutch of SUVs with bullbars on the beach at Minnie Water, along with their well-fed fisherbloke owners, which could only have reached the beach via the sealed road through the National Park.
In addition to the many points you have raised is the elephant in the room in Labor wanting to work with the crossbench as little as possible, because this is a one of those issues that can definitely put wind in the sails of those on the crossbench I would contend.
I still don't understand why the government was too timid to tell the car salesmen to just suck it up. It's not like they would've had any trouble getting the original proposal through the Senate.
The piece shares one assumption with the proponents of the policy it criticizes, viz. that policy makes a difference to the EV revolution. The history of PV generation offers a cautionary tale here. Up to about 2010, PV was generally more expensive than fossil generation, and the rate of adoption was sensitive to the changing details of policy incentives. PV kept getting cheaper, and fell below price parity at least a decade ago. The surviving incentives have a marginal effect on the pace of change and its geographical distribution, but they are no longer a necessary condition for large-scale adoption.
The same thing is bound to happen in EVs. For small markets like Australia, there is some interest in predicting when. But pundits should by now be paying less attention to legacy policy arcana like fleet economy standards, and more to the question whether the plans of Chinese investors are making these irrelevant. CATL, the worlds largest battery maker with a global market share of 37%, and runner-up BYD with 16%, are slashing prices: https://cnevpost.com/2024/01/17/battery-price-war-catl-byd-costs-down/ "Several automakers will switch to the CATL cell in mid-2024 at a price not exceeding RMB 0.4/Wh". The going rate was twice that in mid-2022.
BYD and other Chinese carmakers sell adequate and conventionally shaped 4-door small city runabout EVs in their home market at around $10,000. European and American carmakers are getting alarmed, as they don't by and large have competing models. The cheap e-utes will come later to humour the crazy gaijin - but in 2026 nobody in Australia will be buying ICE ones.
JQ failed to mention that based on US experience, utes are more dangerous than conventional sedans and hatchbacks. https://attorneybrianwhite.com/blog/are-pickup-trucks-more-dangerous-than-other-vehicles/ The high bonnet means that in a collision with a pedestrian, the latter is thrown down to the road rather than less lethally up. The sense of security given by riding in a big vehicle is an illusion, as greater mass and momentum adds lethal energy to a collision. Visibility of pedestrians and cyclists is worse. IIRC utes are more prone to rollovers.
How often do we have to point out that only a tiny minority of Australians live "out in the bush" and in a working democracy their interests count for much less than those of the typical Australians who live in the suburbs of cities? The US version is "but an EV won' let me tow a boat on a trailer across the Rockies". True but so what. If you ever need to do this, which you won't, the sensible solution is to hire.
"Extremely short battery life, high maintenance and repair costs.." FUD. Show us data or quit moaning.
Electric vehicles are OK for short city commutes but utterly useless for people like me, who live out bush. I have a traditional small ICE ute that has done 400,000 km and it will probably last me another 10 years. It would be insane for me to replace it with a Muskrat Tesla or any other EV vehicle for numerous reasons, including the extremely short battery life, high maintenance and repair costs and the utterly hopeless range which is in most cases nowhere near the advertised range.
Let's tax big high polluting vehicles to reduce GHG emissions and improve air quality but realise that 100% electric vehicle transport is utter bollocks, just like the full self driving nonsense that the "smart" people were chirping about until a few years ago.
And again and of course this also reflects a choice on what age groups to listen to. The main buyers of these things are men in their 50s, they're pretty roundly detested in the 18-29 age group.
This penchant for “big but useless stuff” reveals something disquieting about the Australian people’s aesthetic sensibilities as well.
I recall that during the summer of 2000-01 there was a call for legislation in NSW against bullbars on SUVs. Bob Carr, presumably under pressure from the Right of the ALP, refused these calls on the basis of the supposed need for SUV drivers in the far-flung reaches of the states to be able to protect their vehicles against errant bulls, roos, sheep, etc. This begged the question of why SUV drivers in Sydney's eastern suburbs and lower north shore also needed bullbars on their SUVs.
As it happened, that summer I was on a cycling and camping holiday to, and in, the Bundjalung and Yuraygir National Parks. I saw plenty of SUVs with bullbars on the Pacific Highway en route to holiday spots, and no SUVs on the dirt roads and tracks in the Yuraygir National Park when I cycled them, but I did observe a clutch of SUVs with bullbars on the beach at Minnie Water, along with their well-fed fisherbloke owners, which could only have reached the beach via the sealed road through the National Park.
Interesting politics being played here John.
In addition to the many points you have raised is the elephant in the room in Labor wanting to work with the crossbench as little as possible, because this is a one of those issues that can definitely put wind in the sails of those on the crossbench I would contend.
Thanks for this one.
I still don't understand why the government was too timid to tell the car salesmen to just suck it up. It's not like they would've had any trouble getting the original proposal through the Senate.
The piece shares one assumption with the proponents of the policy it criticizes, viz. that policy makes a difference to the EV revolution. The history of PV generation offers a cautionary tale here. Up to about 2010, PV was generally more expensive than fossil generation, and the rate of adoption was sensitive to the changing details of policy incentives. PV kept getting cheaper, and fell below price parity at least a decade ago. The surviving incentives have a marginal effect on the pace of change and its geographical distribution, but they are no longer a necessary condition for large-scale adoption.
The same thing is bound to happen in EVs. For small markets like Australia, there is some interest in predicting when. But pundits should by now be paying less attention to legacy policy arcana like fleet economy standards, and more to the question whether the plans of Chinese investors are making these irrelevant. CATL, the worlds largest battery maker with a global market share of 37%, and runner-up BYD with 16%, are slashing prices: https://cnevpost.com/2024/01/17/battery-price-war-catl-byd-costs-down/ "Several automakers will switch to the CATL cell in mid-2024 at a price not exceeding RMB 0.4/Wh". The going rate was twice that in mid-2022.
BYD and other Chinese carmakers sell adequate and conventionally shaped 4-door small city runabout EVs in their home market at around $10,000. European and American carmakers are getting alarmed, as they don't by and large have competing models. The cheap e-utes will come later to humour the crazy gaijin - but in 2026 nobody in Australia will be buying ICE ones.
JQ failed to mention that based on US experience, utes are more dangerous than conventional sedans and hatchbacks. https://attorneybrianwhite.com/blog/are-pickup-trucks-more-dangerous-than-other-vehicles/ The high bonnet means that in a collision with a pedestrian, the latter is thrown down to the road rather than less lethally up. The sense of security given by riding in a big vehicle is an illusion, as greater mass and momentum adds lethal energy to a collision. Visibility of pedestrians and cyclists is worse. IIRC utes are more prone to rollovers.
How often do we have to point out that only a tiny minority of Australians live "out in the bush" and in a working democracy their interests count for much less than those of the typical Australians who live in the suburbs of cities? The US version is "but an EV won' let me tow a boat on a trailer across the Rockies". True but so what. If you ever need to do this, which you won't, the sensible solution is to hire.
"Extremely short battery life, high maintenance and repair costs.." FUD. Show us data or quit moaning.
Electric vehicles are OK for short city commutes but utterly useless for people like me, who live out bush. I have a traditional small ICE ute that has done 400,000 km and it will probably last me another 10 years. It would be insane for me to replace it with a Muskrat Tesla or any other EV vehicle for numerous reasons, including the extremely short battery life, high maintenance and repair costs and the utterly hopeless range which is in most cases nowhere near the advertised range.
Let's tax big high polluting vehicles to reduce GHG emissions and improve air quality but realise that 100% electric vehicle transport is utter bollocks, just like the full self driving nonsense that the "smart" people were chirping about until a few years ago.
And again and of course this also reflects a choice on what age groups to listen to. The main buyers of these things are men in their 50s, they're pretty roundly detested in the 18-29 age group.