Forget diesel gate. This week’s revelations about some of the most popular electric vehicles in Australia falling well short of their advertised ranges when used in the real world makes Volkswagen’s emissions cheating scheme seem silly.

And there’s a reason I mentioned the Volkswagen scandal where they were caught using two mode software to artificially improve their lab tested emissions because I think there’s reason to believe that at least some electric vehicle manufacturers may well be doing something similar to cheat on their range tests. The numbers they are advertising are, as far as we know, genuine numbers from, as best as we can tell, correctly performed lab tests. So, how then do you explain the enormous discrepancy in the real world? Is there something wrong with the test or is there some trickery going on? And has the Australian Automobile Association accidentally uncovered the electric car version of Diesel gate?

The Australian Automobile Association tested the real world range of a bunch of EVs, and you’ll be shocked to learn that the manufacturers may not have been completely honest with consumers when making their range claims. The worst by far was the BYD at3 falling more than 100 km short of the advertised range. But before you dismiss this as a cheap Chinese car phenomenon, the BYD at03 was certainly the worst. But it wasn’t alone. With Tesla, Kia, and smart cars all having their cars tested and all falling short by varying degrees.

But anyone who’s been paying attention to EVs already knew that their advertised range and their actual real world range are not the same thing. So it’s really no surprise. But that’s not what this story is actually about because there’s three different stories here. Yes. Firstly, there is the fact that EVs in Australia are being sold with claims that they failed to deliver on. But there’s also the media response to that revelation, which when you contrast it to the way they reacted to Volkswagen’s emissions cheating scandal 10 years ago, well, there’s a story in and of itself. And then there’s the third story, the regulator and government reaction.

Now, I’ll cover what happened to Volkswagen 10 years ago in a moment, but I’m just going to preface it by saying that in the end, cheating on their emissions tests cost Volkswagen 33 billion US in penalties and settlements globally. It caused arrests for some of their executives and criminal convictions for the company in multiple different countries. That was the government and regulator reaction to cheating on an emissions test. But if you’re waiting for the media or the regulators to hold electric vehicle manufacturers accountable in the same way as they punished Volkswagen, maybe don’t hold your breath.

My name’s Topher Field. This is the Topher project and I help busy people like you to make sense of the nonsense that surrounds us. Now, I am 100% viewer supported. So, if you’d like to become a sponsor or an advertiser, please let me know. But so far, no one has been game. But you can help me to keep the Topher project going by buying me a copy via the button at topherfield.net.

And I have some best-selling books on the very important and very relevant topic of civil disobedience in the modern age, as well as my DVD and a range of merch, including t-shirts, long sleeve tees, and hoodies in a range of different designs, some serious, some funny, all of them conversation starters. And everything you buy will help me to keep the Topher project going so I can keep bringing you stories like this one. And you’ll find it all at goodpeoplebreaklaws.com.

There it is. Let’s go through an interview from the ABC to see how these results from these EV range tests are being presented by the Automobile Association of Australia and by our taxpayer funded broadcaster the ABC.

[From video]

So what did you find then when you compared how far manufacturers claimed their car could travel on a single charge and how far they actually got?

Well, the Australian Automobile Association test is based on European standards. It’s well received and well understood as a repeatable test uh around the Geelong area in Victoria. Uh and we know from those tests that there is quite a significant variation in vehicle range uh for a single battery charge. But we also know that you know can it’s not necessarily overstated by a lot. So the smart number three for example was within 5% of the range. Impressive. [End video]

Wait.. Within 5% of the advertised range is considered impressive according to the Automobile Association of Australia? Imagine you buy a bottle of milk and there’s a big air gap at the top and you measure it and instead of being 2L of milk, it’s only 1.9. Is that also very impressive because they’re within 5% of what they advertised? Or forget milk. That’s too cheap to really care about. What if you bought a house and you found out that the floor area and the ceiling height were all 5% less than advertised and the industry body came back to you and said, “Well, actually, that’s pretty impressive.” No, it’s misleading consumers is what it is.

Now, I want to be clear here. In my personal opinion, I don’t think these EV manufacturers are technically lying to consumers.

But I do, in my personal opinion, think that they are knowingly misleading consumers. What’s the difference? Well, they are required to put their vehicles through what’s called the WLTP or there’s also some other efficiency or energy consumption tests used around the world. Essentially, these are just glorified and more varied dynamometer tests that in the case of the WLTP or the worldwide harmonized light vehicle test procedure, it runs for 30 minutes. It covers 23.3 virtual kilometers and it determines what the range of a vehicle is according to the test and then the vehicle manufacturers are required to publish those results for the public to see.

So when they say that according to the test this is the result. I don’t think they’re lying. They did the test. They got that number and they advertised that number. But that’s where we have to come back to Volkswagen and the 2015 diesel gate scandal. Because by the logic that I just presented, Volkswagen weren’t technically lying either. Their cars did the test. They got that result and they advertised that result. The thing was that the mode that the car was in during the test was special and it wasn’t representative at all of what would be expected in the real world. It wasn’t lying in my opinion, but it was deceptive.

Again, this is all just in my opinion and given the size of the discrepancies between the advertised range and the actual range, especially for the BYD car, I think it’s valid to ask the question, is someone playing games again with the tests? Now, deceptive advertising is a potentially criminal offense in Australia. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 creates our Australian Consumer Law and false or misleading representations about the characteristics, quality or quantity of goods is prohibited in section 29 of the Australian Consumer Law and it can carry penalties of up to $50 million and criminal convictions.

So given these known discrepancies between the claimed range of these EVs and the actual real world range, my first question is are we sure that none of the manufacturers are using a two mode technique to game the WLTP the way that VW gamed emissions tests? If they were, how would we know? Surely we would discover their fraud by discovering that the real world range of the cars is significantly less than the tested range by I don’t know let’s say 8% as it is in the case of Kia and Tesla or maybe that’s not enough to signal that there’s any games being played but what about 23% as in the case of BYD?

And if 23% discrepancy between the test result and the real world result isn’t enough to trigger some questions then what is?

Does it have to be 50% before we ask ourselves whether perhaps not everything is entirely above board? But my second question is if this test is being done correctly and it’s just such a poor representation of the real world results, doesn’t it then become misleading in its own right? Let’s say the manufacturers are all above board and let’s say no one’s done anything at all to gain the system. These were the results. The fact that the system allows and indeed requires the advertising of false or misleading claims is itself a breach of the Australian consumer law, the regulations that these manufacturers are following are potentially in breach of Australia’s own consumer protection laws because it’s causing these vehicle manufacturers to engage in what I believe is deceptive conduct.

Now, before you come at me for being a libertarian and advocating for consumer law, actually I’m not. I’m pointing out that yet again, government-run consumer protection is failing dismally. And in this case, it not only makes it easier for deception, but arguably it requires corporations to engage in deceptive behavior towards consumers. And speaking of deception, let’s go back to this ABC interview.

[From video]

What was the worst gap that you had?

Well, BYD certainly uh at 23% uh is significantly over. And if you compare that to the stated range, so stated a range is about 580 km. Uh and in the real world testing, that equates to about 369. So if you’re operating that vehicle quite clearly, uh that’s a significant difference. But this isn’t about naming or shaming particular brands. It’s not trying to call anyone out. It’s actually here to help the consumer uh make choices. We know from Australian Automobile Association research that about 60% of potential EV buyers uh are hesitating about purchasing their first EV ‘cuz they have range anxiety. They’re concerned that the vehicle won’t get as far as what the manufacturer says that it will. [End video]

Yeah. And they’re right. It’s been proven now. It’s beyond doubt that Australia’s most popular EVs do not go as far as the manufacturers say that they will. This isn’t an anxiety anymore. This is a reality.

[From video]

So, the Australian Automobile Association is giving consumers the tools they need uh to make informed choices. [End video]

Yep. Informed choices. Like, I’ll keep my 2017 diesel gate era Volkswagen diesel Pat. Thank you very much. Thank you for helping me to make this informed choice. This isn’t the only example of media and industry bodies taking a wet lettuce approach to EVs and EV scandals. The NRMA did come out and say it’s up to manufacturers to make sure that they’re putting in batteries that deliver what they promised. Can you imagine taking the same approach to Volkswagen’s emissions scandal? Oh well, it’s up to the manufacturers to deliver on their emissions claims.

Now, to be fair, the NRMA did also say the obvious truth. Significant differences between the advertised and the actual range or fuel consumption of vehicles has the potential to mislead buyers. Side note, it doesn’t have the potential, it is misleading buyers. Back to the quote, and are not acceptable and it’s obviously not good enough. And they’re correct and credit to the NRMA for coming out pretty strongly on this issue.

But even so, where are the regulators? Where are they? Well, they’re actually the cause of this. It’s their system, their tests that this car manufacturer are complying with. They do the tests. They publish the results in accordance with the advertising standards and in accordance with consumer law. And hey, presto, job done. I think they’re being deceptive, but they’re complying with the regulations.

Now, Australia fined Volkswagen $125 million for Diesel gate.

And they ended up forking out closer to a quarter of a billion in Australia when you add in the compensation that Volkswagen had to pay out as well. And hey, it was great for me. I mean, I bought a 2-year-old diesel Volkswagen Pat in 2019, right at the height of all of the media frenzy. And I got this thing for a steal ‘cuz no one wanted a diesel Volkswagen. And it’s been a great car. Now, yes, admittedly, it advertised that it would get 4.9 L per 100 km, and it’s actually delivered 5.6 L per 100 km, but that still makes it the most efficient car I’ve ever owned, and we’ve done nearly a quarter of a million km in it in the years since we bought it, and I have absolutely no plans to sell it.

But whilst Diesel gate might have given me a bargain basement very efficient car, it cost Volkswagen $33 billion US worldwide and gave them criminal prosecutions in the USA, Canada, France, South Korea, and Germany. And ultimately, they plead guilty to dozens of criminal offenses worldwide. That’s what happens when you cheat and use two modes on an emissions test and mislead consumers about NOx and CO2. The question now is what happens when you mislead consumers about energy efficiency and range in an EV?

Well, I guess we’re about to find out. And my guess is absolutely nothing happens. I’ll wait and watch with interest to see if the government regulators and consumer watchdogs decide to do something about this, but I won’t hold my breath. And as I’m waiting, I’ll certainly never be forgetting that the government regulators and watchdogs and consumer protection legislation are the very things that enabled and indeed arguably required this deceptive conduct in the first place.

My name is Topher Field. This is the Topher project and I help busy people like you to make sense of the nonsense and to keep up with the world as it changes around us. I am 100% viewer supported. So, please help me to keep the Topher project going by buying me a copy via the button at topherfield.net and check out my books, DVDs, and merch from goodpeoplebreakbadlaws.com.

Thank you so much for watching to the end. The algorithm loves you and so do I. Please comment below what you think is going to happen next to these EV manufacturers, if anything, and whether there’s even going to be an investigation to see if any of these EV manufacturers are in fact faking their efficiency claims or using two modes.

And once you’ve left a comment, please also like, share, subscribe to help me reach 100,000 subscribers on YouTube. I’m getting pretty close now.

And as always, think free.