Lachie Fox

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@thomjallen Could well be cheaper than we estimate (or essentially ~$0). But better technology does tend to cost a bit more. And we tend to get vehicles from different places/factories than europe etc, so slightly more involved. But tough to know exactly how it plays out really.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

The article suggests that the $38b figure is calculated on the assumption that no-one - vehicle manufacturers or consumers - change their behaviour. Instead, manufacturers simply pay the penalty cost, and Australians continue to buy inefficient vehicles.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@GhostOfFrederic Seems unlikely. Plenty of the cheaper hybrids/EVs today are small light cars (think corolla). Targets are similar % reduction across the board - that will probably be harder to achieve for a ute than a pass car. No evidence overseas car prices have incr. 20% with standard.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

This is about a 1% increase to the sticker price; about a quarter of what it costs to add leather seats to a car! It is far short of the 25% price increase the FCAI is claiming. And even using this figure is misleading - it counts the costs, but not the benefits.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

And everyone benefits from lower emissions - which is the point of this policy to begin with.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

Consumers may pay 1% more for a car, but get a lot for their money in better tech + lower running costs. Gov estimates are that consumers will save $108 billion in fuel savings to 2050. I see no reason to dispute this - consumers will definitely be better off in the long term

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

In 2021, we published modelling of ambitious emissions standards: https://t.co/03aK6xxcDi We modelled similar, slightly more ambitious targets than what the government has proposed. Using conservative assumptions, we found the average new car may increase in price by about ~$500

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

$38b is a lot of money. About 1 million vehicles are sold each year in Aus; $38b over 5 million assumes that the average price of a car would go up by $7-8k, or ~20-25%. (the av new car is $40-50k).

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

Claims by the vehicle industry that the new vehicle emissions standard will cost $38b over five years are wrong, and disingenuous (https://t.co/VrKqOHqabq). A short thread:

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@KetanJ0 Sorry probably talking across purposes a bit. Obviously the government can't change how people choose to drive the cars. I mean that the intensity of new sales is capped within each category (as opposed to some claims it can be gamed). No easy way to 'cap' transport emission

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

We finally have a new vehicle fuel efficiency standard! It's better than expected - targets are on a trajectory to 0 by 2035, needed for net zero. But there's some confusion that it will make vehicles heavier. This is unlikely, and worth clearing up. A long-ish thread:

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@KetanJ0 An individual manufacturer could change their position on the curve over time by repeating this. But in doing so they would bring the average (reference) mass upwards; to which the headline target applies. This shifts the entire limit curve to the right. So there's little benefit

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@KetanJ0 Technically you don't really need break points. But they reflect a judgement that people don't 'need' exceptionally heavy vehicles; so if a manufacturer mainly sells very heavy cars, these cars must meet the same standards as other (slightly less) heavy vehicles.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@KetanJ0 This is based on the fact that emissions are capped under each limit curve (noting there are two curves). The average vehicle in each category must always meet the headline target for that category - else penalties will apply. The exception for this is shifting between categories

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

@theloneamigo Could well be true. There's more room to move (because more % can move across) - but agreed, this purely depends on how willing consumers are to buy more utes. Seems like most recent growth has been mainly pass -> SUV, not utes. So hopefully you're right!

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

Edit - seems as though the categories of passenger / light commercial place SUVs in the passenger category (contrary to above). So there may be more scope to shift between categories than I had thought. This is not great - perhaps gov could address in 2026 review.

[Lachie Fox @Lach_fox]

All in all; it would be surprising if manufacturers made vehicles heavier in response to targets. There may be some shifting between vehicle types (caused by the fact there are two standards); but there is limited scope for this, given SUVs/LCVs are already 75% of the fleet.