Government-funded fuel economy and EV range tests cause confusion, says automaker body
Automaker body questions the merit of AAA’s testing
The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) recently expanded its Commonwealth-funded Real-World Testing Program, which commenced in 2023, to include testing of the range and efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs). However, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) has questioned the merit of the AAA’s testing, citing concerns that it causes “unnecessary confusion” among consumers.
Consistent laboratory testing ensures reliability
FCAI chief executive Tony Weber stated, “All vehicles, including EVs, sold in Australia are tested under strict laboratory conditions set out in Australian Design Rule 81/02.” This consistent methodology ensures vehicles can be reliably compared, regardless of brand or model. Tests conducted outside the ADR process are influenced by many variables, including traffic, terrain, weather and driving style. No two drivers or journeys are the same.
Real-world testing vs laboratory testing
The FCAI argues that ADR 81/02 laboratory testing is already mandated by the federal government, so the funding of a real-world test program results in inconsistencies. The peak auto industry body and the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) appear to have found some common ground.
Unpredictable nature of driving needs
“All cars, including petrol and diesel cars, often present different results in the lab compared to real-world conditions,” said the EVC’s head of legal, policy and advocacy, Aman Gaur. “Laboratory testing occurs in controlled conditions while real-world driving throws in all sorts of variables such as traffic flows, hills, rough roads, weather, extra passenger or luggage weight, and the unique driving styles of motorists.”
Realistic WLTP electric range figures
The EVC noted that most EV manufacturers use more realistic WLTP electric range figures, instead of the NEDC standard that was phased out in Europe several years ago but still underpins the local ADR 81/02 figures.
Disappointing test results
In AAA testing, various models were found to return results well adrift of their lab-tested claims. For example, the BYD Atto 3 electric SUV was found to have 23 per cent less range than claimed and 21 per cent higher energy consumption. In previous testing, a raft of petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles were also found to exceed their advertised fuel economy and CO2 emissions claims.
Examples of disappointing test results
* The previous-generation BMW X3 was found to use 20 per cent more fuel and produce 23 per cent more CO2 than claimed. * The Chery Omoda 5 used 32 per cent more fuel and produced 26.8 per cent more CO2. * The MG 3 used 19 per cent more fuel and produced 13 per cent more CO2. * The Suzuki Swift used 31 per cent more fuel and produced 31 per cent more CO2. * The GWM Haval Jolion Hybrid was found to use 32 per cent more fuel and produce 31.5 per cent more CO2 than its claims.
The need for real-world testing
The AAA has said the need for real-world testing was first demonstrated by the Volkswagen emissions scandal (commonly referred to as Dieselgate), in which Volkswagen vehicles were found to use software to trick lab tests. The AAA claims real-world data is important during the cost-of-living crisis for households and fleets alike.
Real-world testing program
The AAA received $14 million in government funding for the Real-World Testing Program, which is conducted from a facility in Geelong and on public roads in and around the city. The program aims to provide accurate and reliable information about the real-world performance of vehicles.
AAA’s goals and objectives
The AAA’s goals and objectives include:
* Providing accurate and reliable information about the real-world performance of vehicles. * Supporting the development of more sustainable and environmentally-friendly vehicles. * Promoting responsible and informed consumer decision-making.
Conclusion
The debate surrounding government-funded fuel economy and EV range tests is ongoing. While the FCAI questions the merit of the AAA’s testing, the Electric Vehicle Council appears to have found some common ground. The need for real-world testing is clear, and the AAA’s program is an important step towards providing accurate and reliable information about the real-world performance of vehicles.