ACT Banning Petrol and Diesel New Car Sales from 2035

tanksinatra on 19/07/2022 - 06:45
Last edited 22/07/2022 - 00:48 by 1 other user

Apparently the ACT is looking to become the first Australian state to set a firm end date for the sale of petrol and diesel-powered new cars.
The ban would be the first of its kind here in Australia, and will come into force in 2035.
We don't have any details on this plan or how it would be enforced.
I'd be interested to know if this would cover utes and other commercial vehicles.

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/act-banning-petrol-die…
https://www.drive.com.au/news/act-to-ban-petrol-diesel-cars-…

Automotive

Comments

        • Vote for Pedro on 20/07/2022 - 08:41

          That’s what the point of government is. To set signals to the market to meet their policy objectives. It happens every single day in a society. As scary as this sounds to you, but you don’t get to do whatever you want when you want. Society (and by extension, governments) set some boundaries.

        • dtoovey on 20/07/2022 - 11:45
          +2

          Its also called "creating certainty" for the market.

        • Roman Sandstorm on 20/07/2022 - 14:57

          what matters to me, and I'm surprised from here, not for many others, is being forced and the choice being removed and restricted.

          But you cannot buy a Leopard tank to drive to Safeway. You don't have the choice to purchase a Falcon 9 heavy lift rocket for your Cape York family holiday. You don't have the choice to buy a flagon of Uranium hexafluouride to clean out your drains.

          Living in a society necessarily enforces constraints and restraints on all members of that society. Ostensibly, and we hope, mostly, this is for the benefit of all.

          Many societies (read: countries) are now making decisions about the longer term regarding fossil fuel usage, and one of the core facets of that is phasing out of ICE for personal and low-level transportation. Is this a giant conspiracy by the climate/big electric/big lithium/anti-petroleum consortium? Or is it the responsible action of governments world-wide in response to changing conditions and circumstances?

          So, Cookie2, you being 'forced' and having your 'choice removed' a decade and a half from now, in one small territory in Australia, appears something of an over-reaction. At least you didn't further delve down the rabbithole of 'rights' or 'sovereign citizenship'. Thank you for that.

          • cookie2 on 20/07/2022 - 22:00
            +2

            @Roman Sandstorm: I think you've got an odd picture painted of me. But alas, like said before, if you don't get it, then you just don't get it. No over reaction, just thought and opinion.

          • wrongwright on 26/07/2022 - 12:39

            @Roman Sandstorm: I think you're taking cookie's point to the extreme and out of a reasonable interpretation (i.e. tanks/rockets as personal transport).

            For transparency, I am an ICE fan as a car enthusiast (not that I hate electric), but recognise that we are in the small minority and the mass market could care less about the technology powering their vehicle.

            I also believe that more action needs to be taken to preserve our environment and reduce pollution, but I think this can be achieved without forcing the market (I think an outright ban is unfair & the easy/lazy way for policy makers to do it).

            Instead we should actually account for the negative externalities of our activities and appropriately tax individuals & business for who engage in activities that pollute the environment (which is not happening under current laws).

            I would propose that we reform the tax law to;

            A: Scrap the current fuel excise and replace it with a flat tax per km (per vehicle weight bracket) for ALL vehicles (electric, ICE, hydrogen etc.) which will be the primary contribution towards the maintenance of road infrastructure. This will anyway likely happen in the future once EV's are dominant.

            B: Introduce a fuel tax for petrol/diesel based by calculating the environmental cost of fossil fuels that environ. scientists could calculate (it would effectively replace the fuel excise). The revenue from which would be solely used to offset environmental damage and in effect disincentivise the use of fossil fuels. This could tweaked and adjusted as necessary to adjust and and would still allow the minority who require and/or are willing to pay the extra cost to purchase and use ICE vehicles.

            Your average consumer (most of the market) would start to mass migrate to EV's as ICE vehicles wouldn't make sense financially (which they are already doing with current fuel prices as a great example). It would not be necessary to have any outright bans on ICE vehicles and I think to cookie's point it would allow consumers the freedom to choose (if they are willing to bear the extra costs in this case).

            tl;dr I think banning ICE vehicles unfairly restricts choice and we can better achieve our objectives of pollution reduction by disincentivising the use fossil fuel vehicles via taxation.

            • Euphemistic on 26/07/2022 - 14:13

              @wrongwright: So you want to scrap a fuel tax and also install a fuel tax?
              FWIW some sort of usage based tax will need to be charged on vehicles in the future. A time the moment m, it’s easy to do that via fuel excise. The more you use the more you pay.

              However I believe installing a km tax is unfair on those in rural areas where they’ll end up paying more for all he cities to reap the benefits of road maintenance. Yes, this is currently the situation with the fuel excise but it could be done better. The majority of the roads budget goes on cities which is where people do the least distance as it’s all slow speed in traffic. Forms of congestion charge would be more appropriate - but that comes with big-brother-tracking-vehicle overtones.

              • wrongwright on 26/07/2022 - 16:55

                @Euphemistic: Yeah I can see how it looks like I'm running in circles by replacing the fuel tax with a fuel tax - but my idea is really about changing it's purpose as currently it's really a road maintenance tax.

                My suggestion was for it to be changed used solely for the purpose of trying to offset environmental impact of fossil fuels (however possible) and have a seperate road usage tax to pay for infrastructure.

                As for the rural road users, under the current fuel excise they would are at a similar disadvantage, using more fuel to travel further and hence they pay more road maintenance tax compared to urban road users.

                I'm sure there are several problems with my proposal - I'm no lawyer, but I think there are smarter solutions than outright bans on ICE vehicle sales (and likely all ICE vehicle usage in the future).

    • whatgift on 20/07/2022 - 08:31
      +2

      The policy isn’t about people buying cars, it’s companies making them. Industry can be slow to make real change so they need a push, and I imagine there will also be incentives down the line as well.

  • CocaKoala on 20/07/2022 - 08:03
    +1

    the ACT is looking to become the first Australian state to

    They're now a state?

    • Vote for Pedro on 20/07/2022 - 08:45
      +1

      Technically correct. The best kind of correct.

  • DingoBilly on 20/07/2022 - 08:30
    +2

    Great initiative. Always liked that about living in ACT, they're a tiny state but they always seemed the most ahead of any other state in terms of policies and good ideas.

    • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 09:05
      +3

      Probably something to do with the demographics. Above average education. Above average public/service sector employment.

  • JuryWheel on 20/07/2022 - 08:57
    +1

    I dont know if a ban is really needed - the market will likely determine when they are phased out. Car buyers will decide what they want, car manufacturers will follow suit. It could well end up 5 years earlier…

    Have we heard anything from BP, Shell, Ampol etc as to what they see their future as - specifically all of these petrol stations?

    • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 09:06
      +1

      Ampols current marketing campaign includes EV recharging.

      Big oil aren’t stupid. They are making record products out of it now while in the background they are transitioning. They know that the oil party is coming to an end.

    • Quantumcat on 20/07/2022 - 11:05
      +1

      The ban is needed. People don't want to buy electric cars because there's no infrastructure. Companies don't want to build infrastructure as there aren't enough people to use it. It's a chicken and egg situation. With the ban coming companies will build the infrastructure as they can see what's coming, and then people will want to buy the cars.

  • frostman on 20/07/2022 - 09:37
    -1

    They want us to drive gutless hybrids whilst they get driven around in Government, Fleet-issued BMW 5 Series which is also the standard police issue car.
    Howabout this dumbass Government replace Highway patrols with more efficient V6 instead of those large American V8 Hemi Chrysler they drive around?
    Essentially let's reserve the fuel for Government MPs and get the public to drive Hybrid and full electric.

    Unless your Hybrid or full electric is on the echelons of Ferrari, Porsche, etc..your Hybrid is gutless.

    I've test-driven Hybrid; Xtrails, Corollas and even Klugars. All gutless..won't get you out of a bit of mud on the floor.

    • boomramada on 20/07/2022 - 11:11

      Cops did short list Tesla in some states but apparently they not reliable enough hence not fit for purpose. Which is understandable. Maybe another 5 years time.

    • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 11:21

      Gutless? It’s all relative. No one really needs more power than that of a 20yo Corolla to keep up with traffic. No one needs 0-100 times of 5s to drive on our streets.

      • frostman on 20/07/2022 - 13:12
        -7

        You've obviously never driven anything above a 2.0L engine, never towed anything, and never went uphill in a loaded car. cool.

        • EFC94 on 21/07/2022 - 23:19
          +1

          And you've obviously never driven an electric vehicle. cool.

          • frostman on 22/07/2022 - 12:59
            -4

            @EFC94: No need to drive electrics champ.
            Thats why they dont make Utes and trucks electric, Towing power is a joke.

            Stick your your sh1tty EV, and come back to me in 10yrs to tell me how you intend to recycle 500kg of Lithium e-waste Plastic

            Oh dont forget the 10years sucking on the powergrid and burning more coal than your ancestors did during the cold war

            • Euphemistic on 22/07/2022 - 14:13
              +2

              @frostman: Don’t let your bias get in the way of any facts will you?

              They make Utes, vans and trucks in BEV. They are just as capable as ICE vehicles except in outright range. Most of them however are built with enough range to suit the average demand they are used for.

              • frostman on 22/07/2022 - 20:15
                -1

                @Euphemistic: No problems, let me know when you spot the next Electric RoadTrain hauling some Dealer Cars on EV (or BEV)…

                Just drive your Hybrid or EV and walk around with a smile noting you've reduced your C02 footprint by smashing the power grid daily and intending to throw a 1/2 tonne battery at landfill lol

    • Drakesy on 20/07/2022 - 14:16
      +1

      *Dumbass previous government.

      Also many of the hybrids today are more powerful than their ICE counterparts.

      • frostman on 22/07/2022 - 13:00
        -1

        Yep, when you compare an ICE Camry to a Hybrid Ferrari SF90 - good note.

        • Drakesy on 22/07/2022 - 14:02
          +2

          Or a hybrid camry to and ICE Camry?
          Hybrid generating 160kw vs ICE's 152kw.

          But that's ok, it sounds like you've already got your blinkers on.

          • frostman on 22/07/2022 - 20:12
            -3

            @Drakesy: Seems as OZb really has no filter requirements for idiocy, how did you pass those Capcha tests BTW?

            You're measuring KW (Speed) compared to Nm (Torque/HorsePower)
            The average Tesla SUV can do 0-100 in 3secs, is that powerful to you?
            A Hyabusa can do 0-100 in 2secs? cool, get the drift?

            Here is the official Toyota Link

            2.5L 4Cyl, Vs 2.5 Hybrid

            Max Torque: 243 @ 4000 - 5000 Vs 221 @ 3600-5200 (LOL)

            And now, we can get to some serious leveling:

            2022 Toyota Camry XSE V6 Auto Specs
            301HP @ 6600 RPM (LOLL)

            Stick to your electric shopping trolley - and try a few more of those Capcha questions, the Bike ones are easy…

            • Euphemistic on 22/07/2022 - 21:06
              +2

              @frostman: Oh no! It’s 20Nm less and only peaks in a more usable rev range.

              Struggling to figure out why you are comparing a hyabusa with a Camry.

              • frostman on 22/07/2022 - 21:24
                -1

                @Euphemistic: So now you conveniently forgot about your stupid comment stating the higher KW is a win for hybrid power, and decided to pull another stupid, albeit conceding comment about my statement in a sarcastic manner?
                You're an absolute pain to deal with… rack off my threads champ..

                • Euphemistic on 23/07/2022 - 07:38
                  +2

                  @frostman: 20Nm isn’t going to make a massive differnce everyday performance, especially when the bigger number is well above the normal rev range used in a Camry.

                  Your reaction to the sarcasm helped figure out you seem to believe what you’re saying and not just trolling.

                  • frostman on 25/07/2022 - 10:26
                    -1

                    @Euphemistic: You 2 bum-buddies really love to argue losing points…is this a new kink?

                    What do you mean 20NM isnt going to make a massive difference? In what context isn't it going to make a difference; Going to Aldi to buy your rice-cakes or towing a Trailer and JetSki up a boat ramp?

                    (facepalm)

                    My whole thread was referring to towing and pulling power of EVs (and Hybrids) compared to single ICE engines, this includes running a loaded car with passengers, going uphill, etc yet you go around talk about "normal rev range"? Torque is ALWAYS measured at the high ranges of RPM given this is at the vehicles maximum twisting force that the engine generates.

                    Towing anything remotely similar in an EV will have the battery do 3 things:
                    1.) Run super hot (not good)
                    2.) Drain battery super fast (not good)
                    3.) Go back to recharge station and burn more coal to re-charge (no good)

                    • Euphemistic on 25/07/2022 - 10:59

                      @frostman:

                      My whole thread was referring to towing and pulling power of EVs (and Hybrids) compared to single ICE engines

                      No, you started with the simple premise that hybrids are ‘gutless’

                      What do you mean 20NM isnt going to make a massive difference? In what context isn't it going to make a difference; Going to Aldi to buy your rice-cakes or towing a Trailer and JetSki up a boat ramp?

                      I never said anything about it not making a difference. Its 10% different, real world that isn’t going to break the bank.

                      Torque is ALWAYS measured at the high ranges of RPM given this is at the vehicles maximum twisting force that the engine generates.

                      No it’s not. Torque is measured across the whole rev range and plotted in a curve. It is generally quoted at its peak because ‘bigger number is better’. Not all engines have a peak at high revs. Now I can’t think of the exact example but there’s a turbo diesel engine that give a near flat torque CURVE from around 1500rpm right through to near redline. That’s the sort of torque you want.

                      As for peak being at 4000-5000 rpm I’d guess that most camrys would rarely get revved that high unless it’s a p plater showing off. But then the torque curve is probably giving similar torque between hybrid and non at lower revs. Stating a peak that is higher at a rarely used rev point is not a good comparison.

                      Anyway, you do you and struggle up a hill or boat ramp in your Camry because it’s got 20Nm less torque.

                      • frostman on 25/07/2022 - 12:08
                        -1

                        @Euphemistic:

                        I never said anything about it not making a difference. Its 10% different, real world that isn’t going to break the bank.

                        Sorry that's not for you to decide for the rest of the population that; a usable 20NM is pretty much 'useless' for Corolla Hybrid vs Corolla Petrol.

                        Now I can’t think of the exact example but there’s a turbo diesel engine that give a near flat torque CURVE from around 1500rpm right through to near redline

                        That's right, because they're turbo diesels and meant to be for pulling power at low RPMS, contrary to Petrol Injections where maximum torque is achieved at the higher RPMs.

                        Anyway, you do you and struggle up a hill or boat ramp in your Camry because it’s got 20Nm less torque.

                        Nope, I have a V6 3.5L with 350Nm..doesnt struggle at all uphill…but happy both of us to go uphill like the Macquarie Pass (if you live in NSW) with a full car and let me know if you need your Tesla S to be towed half-way

                        My advice is you stick around downvoting my factual comments, because that's the only leverage you have at this stage.

              • Drakesy on 22/07/2022 - 22:18
                +1

                @Euphemistic: Ditto
                Strange Cherry picking going on

    • Hackney on 26/07/2022 - 15:25

      ‘Gutless’ Hybrids?? You really are full of it!

  • 91rs on 20/07/2022 - 10:30
    +1

    Just wait until summer when all these EV cars can't be charged due to grid load (already an issue in CA), or just software disabled from charging until its your time to charge, like countries that use rego plate numbers (odds and evens) to say you can only drive on X days that are for even number rego's or odd number regos to reduce pollution & congestion.

    I anticipate the swarms of people saying oh but the grid will be upgraded and ready etc .. thats BS when has anything built in Australia been "ready" or above ready to deal with high volumes of anything. Investment and future-proofing services does not happen here due to the cost, they try made do with the struggling infrastructure and patch fix it when they can as there is more money in that.
    Look at train networks, power grids, gas and fuel reserves \ supply, NBN! and if it does happen? don't think you won't be overpaying for the privilege.

    • JuryWheel on 20/07/2022 - 11:16

      Wont this be fixed by everyone who owns an electric car having a large array of solar panels?

      • 91rs on 20/07/2022 - 17:02

        No, not quite. Looking at solar for the house now and the output is high but looking to have it fully charge an EV or run specific circuits needs a whole lot of panels, or a battery to store it in (more batteries, more money) to then charge it when it's back at home overnight.

        • Eeples on 20/07/2022 - 22:17

          Or, perhaps homes can use old EV batteries for storage.

      • Binchicken22 on 20/07/2022 - 20:44

        No… Think about the time most people get home from work and will want to charge their cars.

        It's going to come down to the charging systems being "smart" and only allowing a certain number to charge at one time (maybe unless you are willing to pay a premium to skip the que or something). It's not an insurmountable problem, but it is a problem.

        • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 21:03

          They should be putting a lot of charge points in workplace carparks. That will mean most cars will get a decent charge during the sunshine hours and largely only need a top-up when they get home.

          Combine that with smart chargers and vehicle to grid at home and they should be able to control the load well enough to spread it out.

          • Binchicken22 on 21/07/2022 - 15:26

            @Euphemistic: Yeah maybe, though I doubt a lot of employers are going to want to foot the bill for vehicle chargers, yeah the big multinationals will do it as a dot point on their "net zero" ambitions but the majority of businesses are small business.

    • dtoovey on 20/07/2022 - 11:46

      Can you imagine working from home during COVID * without * the NBN? Save our arses big time, yet no one gave it any credit. We'd still all be on ADSL2+

      • 91rs on 20/07/2022 - 17:03

        Plenty are still on ADSL2+ and had to get hotspot devices!

        • idonotknowwhy on 21/07/2022 - 23:18
          +1

          Yeah, a shame the LNP came in and (profanity) up the FTTP rollout :(

    • Vote for Pedro on 20/07/2022 - 13:11
      +1

      So we should just stop innovating and progressing? Is this really the attitude? Is this really the best we can do?

      • 91rs on 20/07/2022 - 17:07

        Don't think anyone's saying that, its more that we're being oversold certain lies or mistruths on solar, batteries, EVs etc.
        The tech will progress as we've already seen, we need to see a big improvement in battery tech and also the recycling of (or individual cell replacement to salvage a whole battery) before we can even pretend to call it green as its as dirty or dirtier than anything else we're doing right now for power.

        • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 17:11

          its more that we're being oversold certain lies or mistruths on solar, batteries, EVs etc.

          And while that’s happening we are being undersold on what fossil fuels are doing for us.

        • Vote for Pedro on 20/07/2022 - 17:52

          Good point. Let’s keep burning oil and coal instead until solar and ev is perfect.

    • Mr Bob Dobalina on 24/07/2022 - 08:25

      Why only in summer? In winter everyone is cranking their heaters - doesn't that use a lot of power as well?

    • frostman on 27/07/2022 - 20:31

      Look at train networks, power grids, gas and fuel reserves \ supply, NBN! and if it does happen? don't think you won't be overpaying for the privilege.

      Australia is behind the (advanced) world by about 50 years..we're on par with Somalia at present.

      3G, 4G and 5G came late in the piece.
      NBN was in progress for 10 years
      Average Internet speed in Australia still peaks at 50MB/s (laughable), some Providers sell 20MB/s connections (be amazed)
      Clothing and Fashion we're about 2 years behind USA and Europe
      Gaming = 0, we used to have the EB Games Expo, that died, and left with 0 gaming events
      Our power grid cannot cope today in QLD as it is (without EVs) we had suburbs going offline for few hours to cater for others, whilst the dumbass in charge is wandering about with her boyfriend
      Constant supply shortages of meat, seafood, produce, fuel, circulating
      Amazon came 12 years late compared to Europe, Canada, Japan and other countries.

  • baskinghobo on 20/07/2022 - 12:43
    +1

    Apparently it costs about 12-15k to replace a batttery on a Tesla. How are poor people supposed to commute without taking out a hefty loan to pay for one?

    • Vote for Pedro on 20/07/2022 - 13:12

      Singapore has the right attitude. Public transport investment is the answer. Unfortunately we’re addicted to toll roads

      • Hackney on 20/07/2022 - 13:47
        +1

        You cannot compare Singapore,it is a very small peninsula(which what it is.)

      • Drakesy on 20/07/2022 - 14:18

        *QLD,VIC and NSW are addicted to toll roads.

    • frostman on 20/07/2022 - 13:13

      Dont forget, the batteries arn't recyclable, even though they say there are.
      Google solar panel disaster, and you'll see thousands of e-waste solar panels having no where to go, end of life.

      • derrida derider on 04/08/2022 - 22:50

        Solar panels are made of silicon - literally sand. They're not recycled because they're not worth recycling. For exactly the same reason they are not much of an environmental problem to just chop up and put in landfill anyway, no matter what some Youtuber claims.

        Lithium batteries have nothing to do with that - they are very easily recycled into new batteries, just as the lead acid one in your car already is. And if you didn't recycle the lithium it STILL would be much less of an environmental problem to dispose of than that lead.

    • Drakesy on 20/07/2022 - 14:18

      Buy a cheaper electric car?

      Teslas aren't the only option.

      • baskinghobo on 20/07/2022 - 15:04

        Let's say a cheaper car has half the price to replace the battery at 6k. A lot of people still won't be able to afford that. So they decide to buy a cheap used electric vehicle for 3k but where the l are they going to find one with a decent battery!

        • Drakesy on 20/07/2022 - 15:18
          +1

          Over 10 years your battery will have lost 20% of its capacity
          You have the option to continue using it this way or
          Spending $6k, which at $600 servicing costs for an ice car per year would work out the same.
          Depreciation will naturally take this into account

          • baskinghobo on 21/07/2022 - 00:32

            @Drakesy: I think you have convinced me. Although you could argue poor people don't service there car until something goes wrong so I can still see many people being very resistant to this change.

            • Euphemistic on 21/07/2022 - 06:39
              +3

              @baskinghobo: Let’s be honest, poor people won’t be forced into buying a new EV in 2035. Given the average age of vehicles in Oz is over 10years they won’t be getting EVs until well after 2045.

          • baskinghobo on 21/07/2022 - 01:33

            @Drakesy: Also the 12-15k figure was in USD.

    • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 15:30
      +1

      Poor people can’t afford to replace an engine in a petrol car either. They just buy another at the end of its life and cross their fingers, just like they do now.

      But then battery technology is improving and rather than crapping out most of them will slowly fade away. Range will get shorter allowing people time to save up for a replacement (battery or vehicle).

      • nephilim on 20/07/2022 - 19:25

        Engine swapping has now just been replaced by engine upgrades, see all the Mustang places.
        Swapping a engine now is super complicated and often needs a engineering certificate if legitimate (not talking about P Plater/JDM people)

        I remember in early 2000s, people were putting VT engines in VR/VS, cost like 5k.

        • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 20:09

          And that’ll be replaced by battery or inverter upgrades and increasing current to the motor over time.

    • zombrex on 21/07/2022 - 20:35

      Poor will stay poor and get poorer which is just what they want, imagine the burden this places on young adults buying their first cars and working minimum wage jobs. No more buying a 5k clunker to start out. Meanwhile the rich laugh all the way to the bank and ship trash goods from China on oil-guzzling ships that create a gazillion times more emissions.
      Ben and Jerry's ships ice cream from America and pretend to be a woke environment-friendly company. It is all a charade.

      • Euphemistic on 21/07/2022 - 21:28

        People who buy $5k clunkers are going to be able to buy $5k clunkers for the foreseeable future. Eventually they’ll be able to buy cheap EVs, but it’s just not a viable proposition now. Although apparently it’s possible to get a reasonable condition import EV for around $15k.

        • derrida derider on 04/08/2022 - 22:54

          A 15 year old car in 2035 will be a 2020 model - very unlikely to be electric. Poor people will not be buying $5k EV clunkers for another ten years after that.

  • GordonD on 20/07/2022 - 14:09
    +1

    As someone pointed out, its very hard to make predictions, especially about the future.

    Australia doesn't build cars any longer. We will be subject to what is available, when, from who, and at what price. Our politicians making laws on this issue now are pointless, because we will have to buy what other people develop and produce.

    • Chiang on 21/07/2022 - 14:02

      2035 seems.to be a date many manufacturers and Euro nations have nominated.

      Looking forward to one day having a solar charged car and heating. Car and solar prices are falling and you will save around $4-5k in energy cost per annum. Pay off periods are getting shorter and shorter.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/07/2022 - 18:01

    I think charging would be quite a nightmare, especially for households with like 5 cars that just park them on the street or in their back yard

    • Euphemistic on 20/07/2022 - 18:39

      Those sort of households are going to have to learn to charge elsewhere or take it in turns. The average driver will probably only NEED a charge every 3-4 nights. It’s not a difficult thing to overcome. Sure, it’s nice to be able to fully charge every time you stop, by it’s not essential.

      • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2022 - 16:53
        +1

        Even if you assume a 250km range and that the average distance people drive per year goes back up to pre pandemic levels, people will only need to charge every 5-7 days on average.

        Batteries do last much longer if you don’t charge to 100% every night anyway. (Should be over 90% remaining max charge at 10-15 years if you keep it to 80% of max charge or less.)

        There’s some people who do drive quite a lot, but most people barely go anywhere.

        In the end for most people it’s going to seem weird that some people have to go somewhere specially to get fuel when they just charge up overnight or at work or while doing the shopping.

  • virhlpool on 20/07/2022 - 19:22

    I guess ACT is assuming that electric cars will be affordable by then (or rather there will be electric cars in really 'affordable' range). Hope they are proven right. Today I don't see any electric car in sub $20k category. not even a hatchback.

    • SBOB on 20/07/2022 - 19:26

      How many non electric new cars do you see in the sub $20k category?

      Drive away pricing, automatic gear box..
      There's like 2?
      The base model Kia Picanto and the base model MG G3.

      • virhlpool on 20/07/2022 - 19:31
        -2

        How about Holden Barina or Hyundai Getz or Hyundai i10 or Suzuki Alto or Honda Jazz? I am not updated if these models are still in market but I am pretty sure you can think of a few more.

        • SBOB on 21/07/2022 - 16:09

          I am pretty sure you can think of a few more.

          feel free to find any, as none of those models you listed exist or are under $20k.
          https://www.drive.com.au/news/cheapest-new-cars-australia-20…

          Automatic, under $20k.. There are two (3 if you count adding sat-nav to a MG G3 as a different model)

          you're living in a past dream world where sub $20k cars existed
          There hasn't been a Holden Barina since 2018 or a Hyundai Getz since 2011.

        • CocaKoala on 21/07/2022 - 16:11
          +2

          Don't forget the powerful Mitsubishi mirage and Nissan micra!

          • SBOB on 21/07/2022 - 16:35
            +1

            @CocaKoala: Hyundai excel….easily under $20k :/

  • sauce2k on 20/07/2022 - 19:33

    Man I’m all for it! Wouldn’t mind some big rebates on buying an EV car!

  • SuperMid on 20/07/2022 - 19:37
    +1

    Dam, and i was so looking forward to moving to the act!
    /Sarcasm

  • RocketSwitch on 20/07/2022 - 20:41
    +2

    Another conspiracy theory proved correct yet again!

  • GrueHunter on 20/07/2022 - 21:42

    In this post: the same people who would've claimed cars would never catch on because we have too much invested in blacksmiths and hay

  • YoungQuan on 21/07/2022 - 10:15
    -4

    Climate change is just a scheme to transfer wealth from the middle class to the elites…anyone who buys into that has been brainwashed. Just like the Covid scam for the past two years.

    • us3rnam3tak3n on 22/07/2022 - 14:39
      -1

      The irony of a conspiracy theorist calling main stream society brainwashed. Check your sources, climb out of the YouTube rabbit hole and observe that the earth isn't flat.

      • YoungQuan on 27/07/2022 - 11:34

        Shut up chump. Mainstream does not mean right. Mainstream Germans in WW2 thought it was ok to discriminate against and send Jews to ghettos and concentration camps. Mainstream Americans thought it was ok to treat blacks as second-class citizens up until the 1960s. Mainstream just means you can't think for yourself.

  • Brick Tamland on 21/07/2022 - 10:44

    Most reputable manufacturers wont be building new petrol/diesel cars by 2035 anyway. No one is going to build a petrol car just for Australia especially one that will need to meet ADRs. With or without petrol bans we are captive to what the rest of the market does.

  • chrisn26 on 21/07/2022 - 13:58

    In my opinion, 2035 is way too far away so this policy is just pandering. By 2035 the market will put pressure on people to EVs as it will be cheaper. I reckon the next decade will see EVs production scaling up and ICE production winding down.

    Based on some of the comments, I wouldn't be surprised if there will be people buying ICEs even if they were more expensive just to get listen/feel the silly noises.

    • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2022 - 16:57

      People still buy classic cars, there will still be people buying them in 2035. The question becomes by 2050/2060+, where do people get fuel for them?

      The first Tesla Roadster wasn’t even delivered until 2008, we’re almost closer to that than to 2035. Going to find it hard to believe almost everyone people that can afford a new car won’t want an electric one by then anyway, and that they won’t be cheaper than non electric cars due to their reduced complexity.

      But there will be plenty of second hand and special use combustion vehicles hanging around for decades for everyone else.

  • zombie hunter on 21/07/2022 - 15:06

    prices of houses will go up in struggletown (Queabeyan) so they move across to get their pretrol fix…..

    • derrida derider on 04/08/2022 - 22:58

      Why? The policy is no NEW ICE cars in 2035, not no ICE cars at all. Battlers and petrolheads will still be able to buy a 13 yr old clapped out 2022 model in the ACT then.

  • Shaddolf on 21/07/2022 - 21:24

    Aren't most European countries doing the same?

    So most companies probably won't even be making combustion engines. So not a big deal.

    • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2022 - 23:43

      They will be as soon as they run out of lithium and copper, never mind shortage of electricity to charge all that.

      • Shaddolf on 22/07/2022 - 07:55

        You don't think 13 years is enough time to improve the electricity situation? And develop new battery tech?

        • [Deactivated] on 22/07/2022 - 15:09

          There's wishful thinking and there's laws of physics and usually they don't agree.

          Is it possible to build enough nuclear power stations to generate enough cheap non subsidized electricity in 13 years? Yes.

          Do pollies plan to build them? Don't think so.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join