National Fuel Quality Standards Regulation Impact Statement 1 ...

Summary
A NEPM for national fuel quality standards is not considered a viable option to ensure
that nationally consistent standards are in place in the required timeline for the
introduction of the new Australian Design Rules (ADRs) for motor vehicle emissions.
Following the NEPM path would significantly delay the process and provide no real
assurance that States would not provide exemptions in their legislation based on regional
environmental differences. This approach may produce an outcome which is inconsistent
with preceding Government policy decisions, and competition and trade will be restricted
if variation in standards occurs between jurisdictions.
4.5 WIDER USE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS (Option 5)
Alternative fuels provide an opportunity for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and
air pollutants by altering the mix of exhaust gases. The promotion of alternative fuels
may have environmental benefits, but a focus on the adoption of such fuel does not
address the current and future ADRs, which will remain highly dependent on petrol and
diesel fuel.
Furthermore, there is a finite, although increasing, capacity to run more of the fleet which
currently use petrol and diesel fuel on alternative fuels. The most significant options are
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and compressed natural gas (CNG).
LPG is already widely used in urban areas, particularly by high mileage vehicles such as
taxis, and its application to date is mainly in vehicle types normally configured for petrol
fuels. Recent testing on modern petrol-engined vehicles, and equivalent vehicles running
on LPG, concluded that the LPG-fuelled vehicles do not offer significant environmental
benefits over the petrol-engined vehicles (FORS, 1997). Recent work in the UK and
Europe indicates however, that heavy duty vehicles designed to run on LPG can have a
very good emissions performance compared to diesel (Le Cornu and Day, 1998).
Other evidence, such as the Australian Greenhouse Office’s (AGO) preliminary
alternative fuels life-cycle analysis indicates that LPG performs well in heavier vehicles
in respect of a number of greenhouse and other vehicular emissions.
CNG has very limited use at the moment, and its greatest potential would appear to be as
a diesel substitute in commercial vehicles operating out of a common refuelling point.
The use of CNG is becoming more common in urban bus fleets (in Perth, Adelaide,
Sydney and Brisbane for example). As a substitute for diesel fuel, it offers significant
benefits in reductions of PM emissions over diesel engines but, according to BTCE,
unless engine settings and emissions controls are adequate, NOx emissions +from CNG
fuelled vehicles may be higher (BTCE, 1994). In contrast, the AGO’s life-cycle analysis
found that CNG delivered a very good performance in respect of NOx provided vehicles
are adequately maintained and their performance monitored. However, the very limited
nature of the CNG vehicle refuelling network is a major barrier to wider adoption. The
bulkiness of CNG fuel tanks and high capital cost for conversions can also limit its
appeal to transport operators. These factors are being addressed through the
Commonwealth’s alternative fuels program.