Banning polluting trucks?

Roderick Smith

‘It’s not radical’: Push to ban old polluting trucks from capital cities. Matt O'Sullivan August 28, 2022
Highly polluting diesel trucks older than 20 years would be banned from Sydney and Melbourne within several years under a proposal by an independent think tank to slash toxic emissions and spur the uptake of electric vehicles.
Grattan Institute, in a report released late on Sunday, warns that exhaust-pipe pollutants from trucks kill more than 400 Australians annually and contribute to diseases including lung cancer, strokes and asthma.
About a fifth of the trucks and buses in Sydney and Melbourne are more than 20 years old.CREDIT:NICK MOIR
In a move that would emulate cities overseas, the think tank has called for “low-emission zones” to be set up in Sydney and Melbourne within the next three years, from which diesel trucks more than two decades old would be banned.
It cited data showing that about 20 per cent of the heavy vehicle fleet in both cities comprises highly polluting trucks and buses manufactured before 2003.
Grattan Institute transport and cities program director Marion Terrill said the country needed to act faster to limit the harm that trucks cause to people’s health and the environment.
“People think low-emission zones are a big deal, but it is really a very well accepted policy overseas, and it shouldn’t be seen as radical,” she said.
The Grattan Institute recommends offering financial support to help the owners of old trucks switch to cleaner vehicles.CREDIT:PETER BRAIG
European cities, including London, Barcelona and Madrid, have more than 250 low-emissions zones that ban highly polluting trucks. In Asia, they have been introduced in Tokyo and Beijing.
The NSW government sidestepped questions about whether it would consider banning old trucks from Sydney, instead highlighting its commitment to net-zero emissions by 2050 and work on electric vehicle charging infrastructure and a hydrogen refuelling network.
The Grattan report shows that 14 per cent of the country’s truck fleet was built before 1996, and emits 60 times the particulate matter of a new heavy vehicle, and eight times the poisonous nitrogen oxides. It recommends offering financial support to help the owners of old trucks switch to cleaner trucks.
NSW Greens transport spokeswoman Abigail Boyd said the large number of pre-2003 diesel trucks on the road meant there may be no choice but to ban them.
“But any ban must come with a support package for those individual truck owners who would otherwise suffer hardship,” she said. “This isn’t about harming the trucking industry, it’s about providing guidance for future investment decisions.”
In a sign of the challenge, Transport Minister David Elliott told a budget estimates hearing on Friday that there was “no way in the world” the government would meet an aspirational target set by his predecessor Andrew Constance to electrify the state’s fleet of 8000 buses by 2030.
At present, the state has about 100 electric buses, and a further 200 are due next year.
NSW Labor roads spokesman John Graham said that if his party wins government he wants to encourage new jobs in businesses which convert large trucks to electric vehicles.
“We know that old diesel trucks have a huge impact on our state’s air quality. This is an issue we can’t avoid,” he said.
He did not comment on whether pre-2003 trucks should be banned from Sydney.
The Grattan report also warns Australia’s pollution standards for trucks are a decade behind major global markets, and that the country needs to catch up to the international pollution standard from 2024.
Under the so-called “Euro” standards, a move from Euro-V to Euro-VI requires trucks to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by 80 per cent, and to halve particulate matter. Canada and the US tightened their pollution standards to Euro-VI in 2010, Japan in 2011, and the UK and Europe in 2014.
However, Australia is one of only six G20 countries that has not adopted – or committed to adopting – Euro-VI pollution standards. The federal government has been considering whether to introduce Euro-VI standards in 2027.
Australian Trucking Association, an industry body, said it believed the federal government should mandate Euro-VI standards for new truck models from early 2024 and for new trucks generally the following year.
NSW Regional Roads Minister Sam Farraway said emission standards were determined federally and would need a national approach to ensure vehicles registered around Australia met legislative considerations.
A Victorian government spokesperson said it had cut truck trips by 28,000 each year from the state’s roads under an incentive program to move more freight onto rail and reduce road damage, road incidents and heavy vehicle emissions.
Grattan Institute also urged the federal government to impose binding sales targets for zero-emissions trucks, starting at 2 per cent in 2024 and progressively increasing to cover most new sales by 2040. It argued this would help Australia meet its target of net-zero emissions by 2050.
Federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Catherine King was approached for comment.
RELATED ARTICLE Power transfer: Why ute-loving Aussies are finally demanding electric cars
< www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/it-s-not-rad...20220825-p5bcnj.html >
* Good idea but I’m in the trucking business. The supply situation is critical, we are waiting months for new trucks to arrive. Perhaps a little research before releasing the thought bubble And perhaps removing the obstacles to rail freight
* While I am not in favour of smoky trucks, what is the energy cost of replacing them if they are still in good working order? I know that about half of the energy consumed by a car over it's life is in the manufacture.
* This seems entirely reasonable. An alternative market-based approach to getting these vehicles off the road sooner, without the need to introduce a support package would be to slug them with registration costs commensurate with the public health impacts of their polluting vehicles. Do this for all petrol vehicles and we'll start to see drivers abandoning the most polluting quickly. You can start this with only accounting for the cost of the health impacts, but then expand to include the costs of the climate impacts soon after.
* When the air in London is cleaner that Sydney's and their buses and taxis are electric you know we're stuck in the polluting past. Anyone who lives near a busy road has the chore of cleaning black, greasy diesel pollution from doors and windows. That's what's going in our lungs. It's way past time for action on this.
* quite right too ... diesel particulates-- known cause of lung cancer ... get rid of them
* More emphasis on the old diesel buses need that need to be replaced as well. Way overdue.
* Not only airpolution but NOISE. I'm sure they would not pass a noise test.
* Ban diesel SUVs. They emit more fumes that effect me than any truck I've been behind!
* “But any ban must come with a support package for those individual truck owners who would otherwise suffer hardship,” Do we have support packages available for people harmed by their polluting trucks? Or do they get a free ride to damage the environment and people's health as they see fit because of "the free market"?
* We do have support packages for those harmed by them. It’s Medicare and the Public Health system. By targeting money at decreasing barriers to getting these high pollution truck off the roads, we will see less health care costs as a result. There will be a long lag time, but spending now will be an investment in our collective future health.
* How about taking this further and banning diesel powered trains? They spew forth huge amounts of toxic emissions all along railway corridors. Goods trains are of particular concern, particularly given the fact they are so poorly maintained.
* Of more concern is that Trans National use old diesels from the US that are banned even there. Modern Diesels from Europe are far superior.
* This is just incorrect. Railways are three to four times more fuel efficient than trucks. That means moving freight by rail instead of truck lowers greenhouse gas emissions by up to 75%, on average. Trucks, coal burning power-stations and animal farming are among the very worst greenhouse gas polluters around.
* Get them off the road now. Theses old trucks have been fully depreciated or amortised by the owners so their only value is in stalling the need to buy a new truck. There is no need for taxpayers to pay a cent. All heavy trucks are bought for businesses/companies all can be written off as legitimate business cost .... along with the dirty diesel they use.
If the risk averse government doesn't want an outright ban .... introduce a rapid rising scale of registration and road use fees.
The only legitimate hold up now is the long waiting time for new vehicles.
Oh any how about building some heavy duty freight rail infrastructure? Not a sexy as a billion dollar stadium but way more useful.
* Old diesel buses and trucks only make their way into regional Australia and interstate. Ban them nationally and only have a five year window.
* We have all been stuck behind these dirty polluting trucks at some point and they should be banned altogether all over Australia, not just capital cities, over the next 5 years with financial help to convert to electric, or with incentives for younger trucks.
* Long distance haulage trucks are generally better due to a lower age fleet thanks in part to the use of the vehicle depreciation tax deduction scheme has meant these trucks are Euro-6 compliant. But out our way in the regions its the general commercial fleet of diesel trucks, light 4WDs, goods vans that aren't being turned over under the vehicle depreciation tax deduction scheme plus all the older diesel family SUVs, utes and vans that are all pre-Euro 5 are the ones that really get up everyone's noses here. A Federal/NSW state government initiative getting these clunkers off the road and into scrap yards should go hand in hand with proposed federal changes for vehicle emission standards. Its been talked about for years but nothing seems to have come from it;
< www.drive.com.au/news/government-conside...cash-for-cars-scheme >
* The fact is that successive government have placed the commercial interests of the transport sector over public health.
* And run down Public Health.
* Sounds like a great scheme . How to get a new truck . Go and buy a really old one and the Government will pay you to upgrade to a new one . Yet another scheme not thought out
* No that's a good plan. Try to buy a new truck now its like years ,not months, years of waiting. The transport industry has issues and new fit for purpose trucks that are affordable, if you can get one, is on the top of the list.
* The grant would not enable them to buy a new truck, just a less old one. This increases the rate of turnover of the entire fleet by increasing the value of 2nd/3rd hand trucks (less than 20 years old) which feeds all the way up the chain to the large operators who can afford to buy new ones.
* All stinking, polluting vehicles should be banned from our roads including those operated by the various governments. I don't understand why people haven't collectively complained about buses spewing noise and diesel all over pedestrians. Why is Australia so far behind other countries that are addressing this issue. Are our road worthy requirements strong enough?
* So many of the state government's own buses are some of the worst offenders. For decades, (ever since the removal of the original tram network in fact) we have had to put up with monstrously loud and polluting buses clogging up our streets and totally destroying the ambience of so many streets.
* the wonderful original tram network , I used to catch to school and elsewhere . what a shame .
* aren't most government buses run on CNG ? much less pollutants than any diesel bus .
* Great idea and how about annual exhaust testing of all pre 2003 ICE vehicles especially diesel cars and 4wd as well.
* Hardly a brave decision when the average age of a truck is less than 10 years.
* 25% of the fleet were made before 2003.
* Excellent idea
* 20 year old trucks are a safety hazard as well as a pollution hazard.
* So are 20+ year old Toyota FJ40s which abound on rural roads, belching smoke.
* Sound from an environmental view point whilst policy that again hits the ordinary people whilst advantaging those with wealth - who can of course afford newer trucks.
* Many people can't afford new lungs.
* And stuff regional populations I guess, because all this will result in is transport & Freight companies extending the life of their old trucks to offset the cost of new Trucks. The new Trucks will be used inside major metro zones, the old ones outside of it across the state. So sick of City - centric policies.
* Highly unlikely. Truck companies run new trucks in regional areas because of thevlower risk of a breakdown in a remote location. This will just bring cities up to yhe same standard.
* Shame we haven't got the smarts to re-invest in rail freight transport based on modern container systems through country areas directed to outer suburban transfer hubs and then transferred to the new electric city-trucks, preferably not oversized. As well as environmental benefits there's the bonus of savings on road maintenance, and of lives lost where trucks are involved in road fatalities.
* Same old story, because vested interests own our politicians.
* You make a good point. However, recently the state government approved even larger trucks to take containers to Port Botany. Anyone who is a regular driver in that area would have had to negotiate road space with these enormous vehicles, that are effectively road trains (f the sort once associated with outback roads).
* “Transport Minister David Elliott told a budget estimates hearing on Friday that there was “no way in the world” the government would meet an aspirational target set by his predecessor Andrew Constance to electrify the state’s fleet of 8000 buses by 2030” 2030 is still 8 years away. Sounds like a failure of planning more than anything else. Shenzhen converted its entire fleet of 16,000 buses to electric in 5 years (with 90% of that done in the final two years), and two-thirds of those (i.e. over 10,000) were built by BYD. Shenzhen also has 22,000 electric taxis.
* Spent 3 billion on the light rail to Kensington instead of transitioning our bus fleet. Maybe 3 billion wouldn't be sufficient. Gone are the days when it was the governments job to provide services. What they need to do is raise the price of motoring but not in the interests of privatized etolls.
* Great idea. Like most other great ideas, it will be politically inconvenient for a host of reasons and dropped like a hot potato.
* About time.
* good. time to make some brave decisions.
* These toxic dinosaurs should have been banned years ago. Many of them can be converted to electric. There is no longer any excuse for burning dirty fuel.
* What about the rest of Australia's capital cities besides Sydney and Melbourne? Don't they matter?
* I think you forget that these major cities grew up around ports. These ports are now surrounded by densely populated urban areas through which thousands of truck movements occur per day. And they tend to use older trucks on these short port routes as there’s less impact from a breakdown as help is close by. Plus the amount paid per movement in and out of the ports is quite low compared to longer haul regional or interstate trips. So the economics right now encourage the use of old trucks on their last legs around the ports. Thus policy is required to change the economics in favour of newer and less pollution trucks. Ie to encourage the capital expenditure.

Ban old trucks from big cities to save lives: Grattan. Gus McCubbing Aug 28, 2022
Old trucks should be banned from Sydney and Melbourne as part of a comprehensive plan to reduce Australians' exposure to deadly air pollution, says a prominent think tank.
Exhaust pollutants from trucks kill more than 400 Australians and contribute to lung cancer, strokes, heart disease, asthma, pneumonia and type two diabetes, analysis by the Grattan Institute shows.
The Grattan Institute has called for trucks built before 2003 to be slowly forced off the road to avoid the deadly impacts of pollution.
There are almost 15,000 highly polluting trucks and buses manufactured before 2003 in Sydney and nearly 17,000 highly polluting heavy vehicles in Melbourne, a report entitled
The Grattan truck plan: practical policies for cleaner freight, found.
Taken together, the figures are equivalent to about 20 per cent of the heavy vehicle fleet in country's two largest cities.
The report calls for pre-2003 diesel trucks to be banned in Sydney and Melbourne from 2025, to keep the most-polluting trucks away from the most number of people.
"The work that trucks do is crucial for our economy and way of life, but we must do more to limit the harm they cause to our health and environment," report lead author and Grattan Institute transport and cities program director Marion Terrill said.
Old trucks are much more polluting than new trucks, according to the report.
Some 14 per cent of the Australian fleet is pre-1996, and these trucks emit 60 times the particulate matter of a new truck, and eight times the poisonous nitrogen oxides.
Hundreds of cities around the world have imposed bans on dirty trucks, including London, Tokyo, Beijing, Barcelona and Madrid.
But even the new trucks coming into Australia were not as clean as they should be, Ms Terrill said. She argued the country's pollution standard for trucks was a decade behind major global markets and that Australia should catch up by 2024.
Ms Terrill also called on the federal government to rescind "pointless regulations", such as the requirement that trucks in Australia be 2 per cent narrower than the global standard, which she argued limited the range of less-polluting trucks available.
Meanwhile, trucks contributed 4 per cent of Australia's carbon emissions, the report said.
Ms Terrill called on the federal government to impose binding sales targets for zero-emissions trucks, starting at 2 per cent in 2024 and gradually increasing to cover most new sales by 2040, to help Australia meet its target of net zero emissions by 2050.
She has urged the government to ensure new diesel trucks emit less carbon, by imposing standards on engines and tyres, and ratcheting up those standards each year.
"Trucks make our lives better in so many ways. They deliver parcels to our door, groceries to the supermarket, tools to the hardware store, building equipment to our construction sites, and medical supplies to our hospitals," Ms Terrill said.
"But this report shows why and how Australia should do more to limit the damage they leave behind."
< www.afr.com/politics/victoria-s-suburban...port-20220818-p5bavl ">< www.afr.com/companies/transport/ban-old-...tute-20220826-p5bd18 >

Why didn't they persevere with these?

I will bet that not one of those idiots have ever been a passenger in a truck, let alone have a licence to drive one.
Question 1. Where will we get all the electricity to power them? (don't say from not-yet built wind turbines, solar collectors or atomic power stations) be realistic.
Question 2. How long do you think it would take before all country roads in Australia have charging stations?

We should all make rules for subjects we know nothing about, for instance, needlework (all those dangerous needles) or brain surgery (all those sharp scalpels, saws, and other blades) We should start by decreeing that operators of both those occupations must wear lace up safety boots and hard hats.
What about space explorers? What if there really are little green men on Mars?

grandad wrote:

Why didn't they persevere with these?

Wot? a trackless train? I've never seen one but I have been a passenger on a trolley-bus.

Apparently in the USA in the thirties the car manufactures kept buying shares in the tram companies until they got control and then closed them down so more people would have to buy cars to get around.........

grandad wrote:

Apparently in the USA in the thirties the car manufactures kept buying shares in the tram companies until they got control and then closed them down so more people would have to buy cars to get around.........

I have read a book on that subject and was collection of companies including GM and Standard oil that would bid on public transport tenders in American cities and then replaced the electric trolley buses and infrastructure and replaced them with petrol and oil burning buses.

Terry

I remember how much my old man hated the trams .......if you were behind a tram when it stopped ,the car driver had to stop so people could get off,and wait until the tram started off again...........steam used to shoot out of his ears ,he would get so worked up......the tram conductor could see all the cars caught behind,and would take his time ringing the bell to start off....Coming down the long hill from Holland Park ,the trams would hit over 60 mph ,and race the cars ...the coppers pinched the old man for racing the tram ,and he was furious for months after.

Roderick Smith

Mon.29.8.22 Melbourne 'Herald Sun'. Old trucks. IAN ROYALL.
DIESEL-BELCHING old trucks should be banned from Sydney and Melbourne by 2025 to help reduce exposure to deadly air pollution, a Grattan Institute report has said.
Australia had to act on its old fleet so pre-2003 diesel trucks should be off city roads, even if it meant a buyback scheme, the institute said.
This would follow other major cities, including London, Tokyo, Beijing, Barcelona and Madrid in imposing such bans.
“Dirty old trucks and people shouldn’t mix,” report author Marion Terrill told Herald Sun.
Ms Terrill, the institute’s transport and cities program director, said trucks did crucial work for the economy.
“But we must do more to limit the harm they cause to our health and environment,” Ms Terrill said.
The impact on the transport industry would be real, Ms Terrill said.
“We’re very conscious that people do have businesses that depend on them. It is tricky.
“So what we were thinking is you could have a system where truck owners who can (do so) make an offer for how much they’d be willing to accept for their trucks.
“Some would be willing to scrap their truck, and the government can then essentially buy pollution reduction at the lowest cost.”
The Grattan report said exhaust pollutants from trucks indirectly killed more than 400 Australians every year, and caused or contributed to lung cancer, stroke, heart dis- ease, pneumonia, asthma and type-2 diabetes.
“I do recognise there are costs for operators, but there are costs for the community, essentially putting toxic pollutants into the air that have a particularly bad effect on children, elderly people and vulnerable people,” Ms Terrill said.
“So it’s not visible to us, but as a community we are paying for this by just allowing it to go on,” she said.
One in seven trucks in the Australian fleet was pre—1996, the report said.
These trucks emitted 60 times the particulates of new trucks, and eight times the poisonous nitrogen oxides.
Ms Terrill said that even new trucks coming into Australia were not as clean as they could be because national pollution standards were 10 years behind other global markets.
“Trucks make our lives better in so many ways; they deliver parcels to our doors, groceries to the supermarket, tools to the hardware store, building equipment to construction sites, and medical supplies to hospitals,” she said.
“But this report shows why and how Australia should do more to limit the damage they leave behind.”
Victorians can report smoky vehicles to Environment Protection Authority.

The BCC has taken all its CNG busses off the road after a series of gas tank explosions while filling........they have been replaced with new diesel busses ,and there is a rumour that BCC has bought some electric busses ,but they only run for 2 hours on easy routes ,and on steep hilly ones ,only run for a few minutes on a charge .

All this Banning of old trucks, only makes sense if the replacement new truck is hatched by a chook or just appears, with no mining or refining or other polluting inputs, a far better option would be to rework or rebuild the old trucks polluting components, lifting the quality of the fuel would be a good start. A lot of this crap is driven by the wish of all and sundry wanting to be able to plug in and see where you been and how quick you got there.