Australia will introduce a bill to parliament this week containing its first-ever vehicle emissions rule, a huge step forward for the country. But the rules make the same mistakes that have caused ballooning vehicle sizes in the US over the last decades.
Australia doesn’t have its own fuel efficiency standards, making it one of only two advanced countries without such a rule, alongside Russia. Australia has seen some state-level efforts to expand EVs, some better than others, but the federal government has been somewhat hands-off in this respect until now.
As a result, the average new car in Australia consumes 6.9L/100km, compared to 4.2L in the US and 3.5L in Europe. Automakers often bring their dirtiest cars to Australia, and don’t offer better and cleaner electric models in the country.
The new emissions rules intend to change that, and to increase availability of EV options for the country.
The rules will cut new vehicle emissions by more than half by 2029 and will save Australians $95 billion in fuel costs by 2050. This will result in 321 million fewer tons of carbon emissions in Australia by 2050.
While both of these numbers are a lot less than the US’ new EPA rules, the US also has 13x as many people as Australia.
The numbers are also lower than they would have been in the original proposal, which would have cut 369 million tons of carbon emissions. But that proposal was watered down by automaker lobbying (which we’ve seen a lot of recently), primarily through exceptions added for huge SUVs.
Thankfully, the EPA’s new rules – which the Albanese government modeled its rules after, including the softening of them after EPA finalized a softer version of its own rules last week – have actually acknowledged this mistake, and say that they will “narrow the numerical stringency difference between the car and truck curves” over time in order to reduce this favor given to huge vehicles. The Albanese government’s rules, however, do not seem to include a similar realization.
The Australia rule classifies several large SUVs as “light commercial vehicles,” despite that they are typically used for non-commercial purposes. These include the Toyota LandCruiser, Ford Everest, Isuzu MUX, Nissan Patrol and Mitsubishi Pajero Sport – all mid- or full-size SUVs.
Commercial vehicles get a higher emissions limit than passenger cars – 210g/km in 2025 and 110g/km in 2029, instead of 141g/km and 58g/km respectively for passenger cars. Higher limits would make sense for vehicles that are doing commercial work, like last-mile delivery, but picking the kids up from footy practice isn’t really a “commercial” task.
Further, the commercial vehicle limits were raised compared to the original plan. They were originally going to be 199 and 81 grams, instead of 210 and 110. This watering-down echoes similar recent developments in both US and EU regulatory schemes.
These changes were pushed for by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries, Australia’s primary automaker lobbyist. Tesla and Polestar used to be members of FCAI, but bothquit due to the misinformation that FCAI spread in the process of lobbying against these emissions standards.
However, Toyota does seem reasonably satisfied with the compromised rules – though characterized it as “a very big challenge” and called the numbers “ambitious” (which recalls what the US’ main auto lobbyist said about the EPA’s new rules – calling them “a stretch goal”).
Other automakers had a similar take, including Tesla, whose head of policy in Australia, Sam McLean, said the rules are a “moderate standard that takes Australia from being really last place in this transition to the middle of the pack.”
A bill containing the new auto emissions rules will be introduced in parliament this week. The bill is expected to pass over objections of the opposition, which has not seen the rules but said that it plans to vote against them.
Electrek’s Take
Like with the new EPA rules, we obviously think that a huge step forward in auto emissions is a positive step.
But, also like with the new EPA rules, we recognize that watering down these standards is an incredibly dumb idea. The EPA rules shouldn’t have been watered down, and following the US’ dumb decision is not a good move. Especially since Australia’s rule implements a large-car exception that the EPA’s own rules acknowledge was a devastatingly bad influence on US auto emissions, road safety, and general sprawl over the course of the last few decades.
Take it from someone in the US: don’t make the same mistakes we did. It won’t make your cities nicer, it won’t make your population healthier, and it won’t save you money.
And in general, there are no emissions schemes in the world currently that are ambitious enough to confront the climate crisis we find ourselves in. According to Climate Action Tracker, no countries have made commitments compatible with keeping global temperatures under +1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels, and only a scant few are rated as “almost sufficient.” Australia’s commitments are currently rated as “insufficient.” So it is apparent that there is still action to be had, and that Australia needs to do better.
The other threat is possible future Chinese dominance in the auto industry. While this is less of a threat in Australia’s case (it doesn’t have a domestic auto industry to speak of), the recent pattern of automakers lobbying governments for looser emissions rules will only harm those automakers, as weaker rules will lull them into a false sense of security that is not shared by the rapidly growing Chinese auto industry.
China is ramping EVs, and will fill gaps in consumer demand that are left by intransigent Western automakers who fall into their pathological compulsion of opposing any reasonable regulation just for the sake of opposing it. And while EU and USA may try to throw their weight around and oppose this shift (which I believe will be an impotent effort), Australia is not likely to, given its proximity to China, history as a large trading partner with the nation, and relatively smaller size and therefore ability to call the shots globally.
But, we must also celebrate progress wherever we can. Going from no commitment at all, to one that ramps as a pretty good rate before the end of this decade, is praiseworthy.
Rad Power expands Black Friday e-bike lineup and increases savings to new lows starting from $999
Rad Power Bikes has expanded its Black Friday Sale with additional offers while retaining the previous lineup of new lows and more. Among the bunch, we’re seeing the biggest price cut yet on the RadExpand 5 Plus Folding e-bike at $1,399 shipped. Coming down from the full $1,899 price tag that it has spent much of 2025 keeping to, we’ve mostly seen a mix of free bundle offers (without price cuts) and occasional discounts as low as $1,699. Now, for Black Friday, this newer model is getting a larger-than-ever $500 markdown to a new all-time low price. Head below to learn more about it and the expanded/increased Rad Power Black Friday savings.
The Rad Power RadExpand 5 Plus comes as the latest iteration of the brand’s space-saving, folding series, able to condense down to 29 inches high by 25 inches wide by 41 inches long to fit inside closets, car trunks, on RVs, and more. The 750W rear hub motor is paired with a 720Wh battery to carry you for up to 60+ miles with its five PAS levels activated at up to 20 MPH top speeds (supported by a torque sensor). Among its updated features, you’ll be getting a hydraulic suspension fork alongside hydraulic disc brakes for smoother rides and greater stopping power. There’s also the puncture-resistant tires, fenders to go over top of them, a rear cargo rack for added versatility, an LED headlight, a brake-activated taillight, a Shimano 7-speed derailleur, a color display with a USB-C port, and more.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
With the brand going through financial turmoil, now’s your chance to cash in on some of Rad Power’s deep clearance-meets-Black Friday savings.
20/28 MPH for up to 60+ miles w/ most advanced smart features
Anker’s eufy solar security cameras, smart locks, more get up to 50% Black Friday savings to new lows starting from $50
With Amazon’s Black Friday Week Sale in full momentum, Anker’s official eufy storefront is offering up to 50% discounts across its lineup of smart security devices, and the best rate yet on the SoloCam S220 Wireless Solar Security Camera that starts from $49.99 shipped, while its 4-camera package is a great get for multi-point coverage at $179.99 shipped. Normally going for $100 without any discounts, we’ve seen the cost get taken down as low as $60 previously in the year, with this holiday deal bringing even more savings to the mix by cutting the price in half. You’ll save $50 off the going rate for a 50% markdown on the single-cam package, while the 4-camera kit is seeing a 36% cut of $100 – dropping both options to new all-time lows.
Lectric XP4 Standard Folding Utility e-bikes with $326 bundle: $999 (Reg. $1,325)
Lectric XP Lite 2.0 Long-Range e-bikes with $449 bundles: $999 (Reg. $1,448)
Heybike Mars 2.0 Folding Fat-Tire e-bike with Black Friday gift: $999 (Reg. $1,499)
Heybike Ranger S Folding Fat-Tire e-bike with Black Friday gift: $999 (Reg. $1,499)
Best new Green Deals landing this week
The savings this week are also continuing to a collection of other markdowns. To the same tune as the offers above, these all help you take a more energy-conscious approach to your routine. Winter means you can lock in even better off-season price cuts on electric tools for the lawn while saving on EVs and tons of other gear.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Tesla’s poorly handled Powerwall 2 recall is now turning into a potential class action lawsuit over for leaving people with bricked batteries until Tesla replaces them.
We previously reported on Tesla recalling thousands of Powerwall 2 units built between 2020 and 2022 due to a fire risk. We noted several problems with it, as it took months between the recall in Australia and the US, despite the units being identical and affected by the same issue.
Now, some affected Powerwall owners are also taking issue with how Tesla is handling the recall.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Tesla’s ability to address issues via over-the-air (OTA) software updates is usually a massive advantage, but not everyone is happy with how Tesla is using its OTA capability in this case.
According to a new class action filing in the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, that “fix” has left owners with expensive wall decorations instead of backup power systems.
The lawsuit, Brown v. Tesla, Inc., was filed yesterday. It alleges that rather than providing swift replacements for the potentially dangerous hardware, Tesla used its software backdoor to effectively shut down customer installations.
From the complaint:
“Rather than immediately providing full refunds or prompt replacement with non-defective units, Tesla has remotely accessed affected Powerwall 2 systems and discharged or limited their battery charge to near-zero levels to reduce the risk of overheating.”
The result, according to the filing, is that many owners have been “deprived of the core functions for which they purchased Powerwall 2, including backup power and energy storage.”
Imagine paying upwards of $8,000 for peace of mind during a grid outage, only to find out Tesla remotely drained your backup battery to 0% because it might otherwise catch fire.
The lawsuit further alleges that the actual physical replacement process is dragging out. The complaint argues that the replacement process “has been slow, burdensome, and incomplete,” leading to “lengthy periods” where consumers have partially or fully disabled units.
The core legal argument here is about merchantability. The plaintiffs argue that a home energy storage system that must be remotely “bricked” to prevent it from burning down a house is clearly “not fit for its ordinary purpose as a safe and reliable residential battery.”
Tesla has not yet commented on the suit or provided a timeline for when all affected customers will receive physical replacements.
Electrek’s Take
Ever since the first recall in Australia came out, I knew this thing would snowball into something much bigger.
In the Australian recall, Tesla noted that it was “considering compensating people” for revenue lost or higher utility bills due to Powerwalls being down for an extended period.
It looks like this class action lawsuit is trying to ensure that Tesla is not just considering it but actually does the right thing and compensates owners.
Tesla has up to 10,000 Powerwalls to replace in the US alone. We understand that this is a tremendously difficult task and it will take some time, but that’s not the fault of the customers and Tesla needs to own up to it.
Leaving customers in limbo with a dead battery on the wall, especially as we head into winter storm season in many parts of the US, is a massive customer service failure. Tesla needs to accelerate the replacement program and prioritize these recall replacements over new sales immediately.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The latest hybrid telehandler from New Holland packs a range-extending combustion engine to boost its battery power during longer shifts – but it doesn’t run on gas or diesel. Instead, this farm-friendly machine is built to run on METHANE.
Manure digester, via Ag Marketing Resource Center.
CASE and New Holland (collectively, CNH) understands its customers’ desire to put that biogas to good use. They also understand that nothing is quite as efficient as battery-electric power, though; but big farms have weird duty cycles: 4-6 hour shifts most of the year, then critical, un-skippable, non-negotiable round-the-clock running during harvest.
“With this prototype, New Holland shows its continuous commitment to the ‘Clean Energy Leader‘ strategy, building on our leadership in alternative fuel machines,” says Marco Gerbi, New Holland T4 and T5 tractor, loader and telehandler product management. “Our aim is to help our customers boost farm productivity and profitability by broadening our range of alternative fuel machines that do not compromise efficiency or productivity yet help to minimize agriculture’s carbon footprint.”
Primarily driven by a 70 kWh lithium-ion battery, the telehandler uses a methane-fueled version of Fiat Powertrain’s four-cylinder F28 engine as a range-extending backup whenever jobs demand more uptime. On the energy stored in the battery alone, New Holland says the machine can handle a full day’s worth of typical farm work — roughly a “350-day duty cycle,” and it can recharge from the grid, a biogas generator, or even rooftop (barntop?) solar.
It’s still just a prototype, but New Holland claims the hybrid setup cuts fuel use by up to 70% compared to a conventional diesel telehandler while delivering 30% better performance and uptime for its operators.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.