Tata Motors hits 10 lakh commercial vehicle milestone at Lucknow plant
Electric vehicles: what to know if you’re considering an EV
Most EV drivers charge at home a few times a week. Fast chargers are used on longer trips. Zaptech/Unsplash
Hussein Dia, Swinburne University of Technology Soaring petrol prices are once again making many Australians think seriously about switching to an electric vehicle.
As politicians warn Australians not to resort to panic buying, finding constructive ways to reduce your petrol costs and cut carbon emissions has become increasingly appealing.
The strikes on Iran have seen prices of Brent crude – the global oil benchmark – trade around US$104 (A$150) per barrel, up from roughly US$68 (A$96) a few weeks earlier. There is no clear end in sight for the current crisis.
The good news is buying and owning an electric car is becoming much easier as more models arrive in Australia and charging networks expand. But there are still a few things worth considering before making the switch.
What should you look for when choosing an EV?
Choosing an electric vehicle is not very different from choosing any other car. Size, price and safety features still matter.
But there are a few additional things worth checking.
The first is driving range, which is how far the vehicle can travel on a full battery. Most new EVs sold in Australia offer between 300 and 500 kilometres of range, which is more than enough for typical daily driving.
It is also worth looking at charging capability. Some vehicles can accept faster charging speeds than others, meaning they can recharge more quickly when using high-power public chargers. This can make a difference on long trips.
Finally, check the battery warranty. Most manufacturers offer warranties of eight years or around 160,000km, providing reassurance about long-term battery performance.
For most buyers, the key is simply choosing a vehicle that suits their everyday driving needs.
Check how much you drive
An important question to ask when choosing an electric vehicle is: how far do you usually drive each day?
Most Australians drive far less than they think. Car passenger kilometres per person have reduced from a peak of 13,184 in 2004 to 10,238 in 2024–25.
That’s roughly 28km per day, meaning many drivers could go several days between charges with today’s EVs. Most new models now sold in Australia have a real-world driving range of 300–500km on a full battery.
In practice, many EV owners simply plug their car in at home overnight once or twice a week.
Most EV drivers charge at home a few times a week. Fast chargers are used on longer trips. Zaptech/UnsplashDo you need to install a charger at home?
Many people assume installing a home charger is essential, but that is not always the case.
Electric vehicles can be charged from a standard household power point. This is the slowest method, but it can still add 10–15km of range per hour of charging. At that rate, a 12-hour overnight charge could give you up to 180km.
Many owners choose to install a dedicated wall charger instead. These typically cost A$1,000–2,000 plus installation. These charge much faster, allowing most vehicles to fully recharge overnight.
Fast chargers are useful, but usually not for everyday charging. Public fast chargers are designed mainly for longer trips.
These high-power chargers can add 150–300km of driving range per hour, depending on the vehicle and type of charger.
They are very convenient for highway travel but usually cost more than charging at home. Public fast charging can range from around 50 to 70 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is still cheaper than petrol, but the savings are smaller than charging at home.
Many EV owners only use public chargers occasionally, not every day.
How much should you charge the battery?
Another common question is whether EV batteries should always be charged to 100%.
For everyday driving, many manufacturers recommend keeping the battery between 20% and 80% most of the time. This helps maximise long-term battery health.
A fully charged battery is generally under more stress. However, charging to 100% shortly before a long trip is fine. Modern EV battery management systems are designed to protect the battery automatically.
In practice, drivers quickly develop simple routines, often charging overnight a few times per week.
How much could you save on fuel?
One of the main reasons drivers consider switching to an EV is the potential saving on running costs.
Electric cars are typically cheaper to run because electricity costs less than petrol and electric motors are far more energy efficient than combustion engines.
Home charging is also the cheapest way to run an EV. Electricity for overnight charging typically costs 20–30c per kilowatt-hour, which can translate to around $3–5 per 100km of driving.
By comparison, fuel-efficient petrol cars typically consume 6–8 litres per 100km and cost $14–18 to drive that distance at current fuel prices.
That difference can add up quickly over a year. Online tools, such as our public EV payback calculator, allow drivers to compare different vehicles and test how savings change depending on electricity prices, fuel costs and driving distance.
What if you live in an apartment or unit?
Charging can be more complicated for people living in apartments or units, but options are expanding quickly.
Many new residential developments now include shared EV charging infrastructure in car parks. Some apartment owners are also installing chargers in their individual parking spaces where building rules allow it.
Workplace charging is another growing option. Many employers are beginning to install chargers for staff vehicles, allowing drivers to top up their battery during the day.
Public charging networks are expanding across Australian cities. While these chargers typically cost more than home electricity, they provide an important option for drivers without dedicated parking or charging access at home.
As EV adoption increases, improving charging access for apartment residents is becoming a major focus for building managers and policymakers.
Where next?
The decision to switch to an electric vehicle has never been more straightforward. Ranges are longer, models are more affordable, charging networks are expanding and running costs are lower than ever.
As petrol prices remind Australians of their exposure to global oil markets, the case for making the switch gets stronger.
For most drivers, the question is no longer whether an EV could work for them – it is simply a matter of when.![]()
Hussein Dia, Professor of Transport Technology and Sustainability, Swinburne University of Technology
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Australia’s roads are full of giant cars, and everyone pays the price. What can be done?
Milad Haghani, The University of Melbourne
You may have noticed — there’s a car-size inflation on Australian roads that some have nicknamed car “mobesity”.
Most SUVs and utes from a decade or two ago look small next to today’s models.
As we head for a fifth consecutive year of rising road deaths and what could be the worst year for pedestrian fatalities in nearly two decades, it’s time to look more closely at what this means.
We already know bigger cars cause greater impacts in collisions.
But what’s less discussed is whether driving one also changes how we drive – if larger vehicles make us feel safer inside them, do they also make us take more risks behind the wheel?
What’s driving this trend?
Four in five new cars sold in Australia are SUVs or utes – more than double the share of 20 years ago.
This isn’t purely consumer-driven.
With no domestic car manufacturing, Australia imports vehicles shaped by global production trends, many of which trickle down from United States policies that reward larger vehicles.
Two subtle US policy features explain why.
First, the “SUV loophole”: under US law, most SUVs are classified as light trucks, meaning they’re subject to less stringent fuel-efficiency and crash-safety standards than passenger cars.
Second, under US fuel economy rules, fuel-efficiency targets are adjusted based on the size of the vehicle’s “footprint” — the area between its wheels. In practice, this means larger vehicles are allowed to consume more fuel while still meeting the target.
Together, these rules have encouraged American manufacturers to build and sell heavier SUVs and utes.
Large vehicles can deliver significantly higher profit margins than small cars.
These trends have resulted in more bigger cars being driven on Australian roads.
The combination of high car ownership, years without fuel efficiency rules, and the luxury-car-tax exemption that many utes qualify for has made Australia a highly lucrative market for large, high-emission models.
Marketing has played a significant role too: in 2023, car makers invested about A$125 million in SUV and 4×4 advertising in Australia – a 29% increase from the previous year.
The dangers of bigger vehicles
There’s a physical mismatch between large and small vehicles that usually transfers the danger from the occupants of the bigger car to everyone else.
While the risks of being hit by a large SUV or ute might seem self-evident, the question is how much greater those risks are.
Research provides a clear answer.
Car-to-car collisions:
Collisions between large SUVs and smaller cars show occupants of a smaller vehicle face about 30% higher risk of dying or sustaining serious injury.
A 500kg increase in vehicle weight is linked to a 70% higher fatality risk for occupants of the lighter car.
For every fatal accident avoided inside a large vehicle, there are around 4.3 additional deaths among other road users.
Car-to-pedestrian and cyclist collisions:
Pedestrians struck by SUVs are about 25% more likely to sustain serious injuries and 40–45% more likely to die than those hit by smaller cars.
For children, the outcomes are far worse: they are up to eight times more likely to die when hit by an SUV than by a small car.
Each 10cm increase in front-end height raises the fatality risk for pedestrians by roughly 20%.
Tall and blunt fronts (vertical or nearly upright front design) are associated with more than a 40% increase in pedestrian death when compared with low and sloped front ends.
These differences help explain why US pedestrian deaths — once on a steady decline — have climbed back to their highest level since the early 1980s.
This is while most countries have reduced pedestrian fatalities.
Bigger cars, more risk-taking?
Evidence from multiple countries suggests driving larger vehicles may lead to more confident or risk-prone behaviour:
India: SUV owners recorded 20–25% higher risk-taking scores than sedan or hatchback drivers
Israel: an analysis of 1.5 million speeding citations found drivers received about a quarter more speeding tickets when vehicle mass was 10% heavier
Austria: roadside observations of 48,000 vehicles showed SUV drivers more frequently drove without seatbelts, used phones and ran red lights. Women SUV drivers showed violation rates similar to men, breaking the usual pattern of higher female caution in traffic studies
New Zealand: field data found SUV drivers 1.5 times more likely to drive one-handed, a behaviour linked to lower perceived risk and reduced vigilance
Germany: large-car drivers reported higher rates of traffic violations and risky driving.
Policy can make a difference
Taxes and size-dependant registration fees could potentially offset some of the extra costs of heavier vehicles on roads surfaces, congestion and emissions, or regulate demand.
Two measures would make a tangible difference:
Licence testing by vehicle class
Many drivers obtain their licence in a small sedan but can legally drive a two-tonne ute the next day. Yet, larger vehicles demand different manoeuvring skills, longer braking distances and greater spatial awareness.
Requiring a practical test in a vehicle of comparable size to what the driver intends to drive (or a streamlined license upgrade for an experienced driver when upsizing) would acknowledge that added responsibility.
The reform would also carry a symbolic message: driving a heavier vehicle comes with greater responsibility.
Penalties scaled to impact potential
A ute or SUV travelling 10kmh over the limit carries greater kinetic energy and longer stopping distance than a small sedan.
A tiered approach – where fines or demerit points scale with vehicle mass – would better reflect the disproportionate risk that bigger cars pose.
If Australia is serious about reducing road trauma, these are the kinds of targeted, evidence-based adjustments that should be considered.![]()
Milad Haghani, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow in Urban Risk and Resilience, The University of Melbourne
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Hyundai Motor aims to develop India into a ‘strategic export hub’
Mercedes-Benz Club of Sri Lanka sets new world record with 640-car gathering



India becomes 1st market outside US to start local production of Mercedes-Maybach GLS
Nissan to invest $17.6 bn in EV development over next 5 years
Ola Electric faces tough year as market share drops over 50 pc in 2025
Autonomous Montreal Metro Completed with Massive Cost Savings–Sets Example for Canada


Maruti Suzuki's green push, unveils concept FUTURO-e
Maruti Suzuki's Jimny 5-door export from India surpasses 1 lakh units milestone
New Rule Requires US Airlines to Give Automatic Refunds for Canceled or Delayed Flights and Late Baggage
By Hanson LuVE Commercial Vehicles to invest Rs 544 crore to boost manufacturing in India
These 4 aeroplane failures are more common than you think – and not as scary as they sound
“It is the closest all of us passengers ever want to come to a plane crash,” a Qantas flight QF1889’s passenger said after the plane suddenly descended about 20,000 feet on Monday September 22, and diverted back to Darwin.
The Embraer 190’s crew received a pressurisation warning, followed the procedures, and landed normally – but in the cabin, that rapid drop felt anything but normal.
The truth is, in-flight technical problems such as this one are part of flying. Pilots train extensively for them. Checklists contain detailed instructions on how to deal with each issue. Aircraft are built with layers of redundancy, and warning systems alert pilots to problems. It is because of these safety systems that the vast majority of flights that experience technical issues end with a safe arrival rather than tragic headlines.
Here are four scary-sounding failures you might hear about (or even experience) and how they are actually dealt with in the air.
1. Air-conditioning and pressurisation hiccups
What it is
At cruising altitudes (normally around 36,000 feet), aeroplane cabins are kept at a comfortable “cabin altitude” of 8,000 feet using air from the engines that is cooled through the air conditioner.
This artificial air pressure allows us to survive while the atmosphere outside the plane is highly hostile to human life, with temperatures around -55°C and no breathable air. However, if the system misbehaves or the cabin altitude starts to rise for whatever reason, crews treat it as a potential pressurisation problem and initiate the preventive procedures immediately.
What you might feel/see
A quick, controlled descent (it can feel dramatic), ears popping, and sometimes oxygen masks – these typically drop automatically only if the cabin altitude exceeds roughly 14,000 feet. Similar to QF1889, a rapid descent without masks being deployed is the most common outcome.
What pilots do
As soon as they notice a problem with the cabin pressurisation, the pilots put on their own oxygen masks, declare an emergency, and follow the emergency descent checklist, bringing the aircraft as quickly as possible to about 10,000 feet. This is usually followed by a diversion or return to the departure airport.
2. Most feared: engine failures
What it is
Twin-engine airliners are certified to fly safely on one engine. Yet, one-engine failures are treated seriously and thoroughly rehearsed in flight simulators at least annually.
Dual failures, however, are exceptionally rare. The 2009 “Miracle on the Hudson”, for example, was a once-in-a-generation bird strike event that led to both engines stopping. The plane safely landed on the Hudson River in New York with no casualties.
US Airways Flight 1549 after crashing into the Hudson River, January 15 2009. Wikimedia Commons, CC BYWhat you might feel/see
A loud bang, vibration, sparks coming out of the engine, smell of burning or a sudden quietening. This may result in a turn-back and an emergency services welcome. Recent headlines on engine failures – from a 737 in Sydney to a multiple bird-strike-related return in the United States ended with safe landings.
What pilots do
After being alerted by the warning system, pilots identify the affected engine and follow the checklist. The checklist typically requires them to shut down the problematic engine, descent to an appropriate altitude and divert if in cruise, or return to the departure airport if after takeoff.
Even when an engine failure damages other systems, crews are trained to manage cascades of warnings – as Qantas A380 flight QF32’s crew did in 2010, returning safely to Singapore.
3. Hydraulic trouble and flight controls
What it is
The many aeroplane flight controls move because of multiple hydraulic or electric systems. If one system misbehaves – for example the left wing aileron, which is used to turn the aircraft, won’t move – redundancy keeps the aeroplane flyable because the right wing aileron will still work.
Crews use specific checklists and adjust speeds, distances and landing configurations to ensure a safe return to the ground.
Ailerons are the hinged parts you can see at the end of the aeroplane wing. Stephan Hinni/UnsplashWhat you might feel/see
A longer hold while the crew troubleshoots, a return to the departure airport or a faster-than-normal landing. In July, a regional Qantas flight to Melbourne made an emergency landing at Mildura after a hydraulics issue.
What pilots do
After the warning system’s detection, pilots run through a checklist, decide on the landing configuration, request the longest suitable runway and emergency services just in case.
All these resources are available because lessons learned from extreme events – such as United 232’s 1989 loss of all hydraulic systems – were brought into the design of modern aeroplanes and training programs.
4. Landing gear and brake system drama
What it is
Airliners have retractable landing gears that remain inside a compartment for most of the flight. Those are the wheels that come out of the aeroplane belly before landing. Assembled in the wheels are the brakes. They aim to reduce the aircraft speed after touchdown, like in a car.
With so many moving parts, sometimes the landing gear doesn’t extend or retract properly, or the braking system loses some effectiveness, such as the loss of a hydraulic system.
What you might feel/see
A precautionary return, cabin preparation for potential forced landing, or “brace for impact” instruction from the cabin crew right before landing can happen.
While scary, these are preventive measures if something doesn’t go as planned. Earlier this year, a Qantas flight returned to Brisbane after experiencing a problem with its landing gear; passengers were told to keep “heads down” while the aircraft landed safely.
What pilots do
They’ll use long checklists and eventually contact maintenance engineers to troubleshoot the problem. There are also redundancies available to lower the landing gear and to deploy the brakes.
In extreme cases, they may be required to land at the longest runway available (in case of brake problems) or land on the belly (if the landing gear can’t be lowered).
The big picture
Most in-flight failures trigger a chain of defences aimed at keeping the flight safe. Checklists, extensive training and decades of expertise are backed by multiple redundancies and robust design. And these flights typically end like QF1889 did: safely on the ground, with passengers a little shaken.
A dramatic descent or an urgent landing doesn’t mean disaster. It usually means the safety system (aircraft + crew + checklist + training + redundancy) is doing exactly what it’s supposed to do.![]()
Guido Carim Junior, Senior Lecturer in Aviation, Griffith University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.