Similar level to "improve housing availability by freezing housing standards". Hurts the same people it purports to help.

Are they going to call the cheaper fuel 'Guzzoline'?

"Omg, fuel cost is skyrocketing"

"We could promote elec-"

"Quick! Allow cars to run on bunker fuels!"

Is Australia trying a mad-max speedrun?

For fucks sake.

I fucking hate all our politicians

They're going back to the standard we had in December last year. It's not a dramatic downgrade, just more sulfur iirc.

Yeah but also nah.

The relaxed standards will cause more emissions and may reduce longevity of a vehicle.

The question is how much of each will occur, which I think is unknowable?

That doesn't seem like a big deal in the short term.

That does make it sound better, but that change was already a more than a decade overdue

Here's the part most Australians don't know. For years, our petrol would have been illegal in almost every country we'd consider a peer. Europe hit 10ppm sulphur limits back in 2009. The United States, Japan, South Korea, Canada, China, even India all got there before us.

Global consultancy Stratas Advisors ranked Australia's fuel quality 85th in the world. We sat between Argentina and Tanzania. A 2017 Commonwealth review put us 70th globally and dead last among the 35 OECD countries.

And what are we going back to?

Air pollution causes approximately 5,000 premature deaths in Australia each year. Vehicle emissions account for a significant chunk of that figure. Research from the University of Melbourne and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare linked dirty fuel directly to heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, and asthma. Emerging studies suggest connections to Alzheimer's, dementia, and ADHD.

The annual health cost? Around $17.8 billion, with another $4.5 billion in welfare losses and lost productivity. That exceeds the national burden of obesity.

The International Council on Clean Transportation estimated that proper fuel standards could reduce premature deaths from vehicle emissions by up to 75 per cent. For years, Australian policymakers had that research sitting on their desks.

This one was a right move. Fuel price is in everything. Keeping it under control is right thing.

You think promoting electric anything will make any difference now?

We need to open more fuel refineries here again. Like it or not, petrol and diesel aren’t going away in our lifetime. There is simply no replacement for them across the board.

We do know - none. These new emission laws only came in a few months ago, so we’re just going back to what we were 4 months ago.

If the new laws weren't going to reduce emissions, why were they introduced?

More so we know it doesn’t impact longevity of cars. Emissions have only been lowered for a few months, going back for a while won’t hurt if it helps people afford petrol.

Amazing.

How about putting pressure on the usa and israel and stopping collaborating woth them in this war of agression

You disagree?

No, I agree with you. We are in agreement regarding the least interesting thing anyone ever agreed on.

I replied to the upstream comment without realising that we're just going back to the rules we had 3 months ago.

Again, for clarity, there is no disagreement here.

Diseasal

I strongly disagree as there are alternatives to further torching our world further. This is another short-sighted solution to a problem that inevitably effects us, and we are going all in.

The winners are not us, as much as it may seem

We'll all be riding shiny and chrome

Witness

Define your lifetime. Average car lifespan is ~15 years. There will be a hugely significant reduction in internal combustion engines across the span of 15-20 years.

Does this mean acid rain is back on the menu?

Reduction yes, but not hugely significant. Our infrastructure can’t handle it, nor is it feasible for our transportation industry.

There are a lot of niches where electric vehicles are completely inappropriate.
Despite the inefficiencies of ICE, petrol is still has the best power:weight of all mainstream and niche power sources.

Diesel still has the best Power:$ ratio, despite the current price increases.

There is still a national network that can support ICE vehicles while a network to support EVs is still being rolled out and is also still depended on Diesel Generators.

Don’t get me wrong; EVs are perfect for short trips in developed areas, and a lot of country towns have one or two EV chargers for tourists from the big smoke, but for a lot of Australians, EVs are not even a pipe dream.

The answer is not for everyone to replace their Gas Guzzlers with Spark Guzzlers.
The answer is better Public Infrastructure so humanity can be less dependant on any for if inefficient private transport.

The most efficient Hybrid is still a Diesel Locomotive and the most efficient EV is still an Electric suburban train.

Didn't say every one gets electric cars. The worst damage will come from mining and industry. We seem to be having different convos.

The dependency issue which we are knee-jerking at, is one created through years of inaction, which clearly won't change.

Ignoring things until they become a problem is not good leadership

Greens wouldn't have. That being said thank fucking god it's not the liberals in charge I don't even want to imagine what shit fuck mess we'd be in if they were in government during this Iran war.

What alternatives? Please give an example?

I doubt you are messaging in any good faith, but which aspect does that open ended question point to? I'm not going to give the history of the world as I know it!

My point is, we have not been good stewards of our environment and we knee jerk towards the most destructive path at all times. Find some evidence to the contrary and we will discuss.

Nothing "knee-jerk" in it; it's just pragmatic. The economy needs to run, and a strong economy is required to achieve any meaningful progress. The main problem is that many of "green" green lack knowledge (or pretend to lack knowledge) of the real world. They do tremendous damage to real "green" projects by advocating for "pipe dreams" instead of projects that could achieve something. Look at the anti-nuclear position of the "Green" party as an example (they should be pro-nuclear if they genuinely care about the environment). All their proposals are just hand-waving, which is unachievable and has no link to reality. And when you ask them, "What are the alternatives? Is there a real plan?" all you get are accusations or another "pipe dream"