Independent testing shows 75% of new vehicles sold in Australia consume significantly more fuel than their laboratory ratings claim, costing drivers hundreds of dollars annually and undermining the country's climate targets.
The Guardian reports the gap between lab ratings and real-world performance has widened as manufacturers game testing protocols, with some vehicles using up to 25% more fuel than advertised.
This is a consumer protection failure with climate implications. Australia has weaker fuel efficiency standards than Europe or the US, making it a dumping ground for inefficient vehicles.
The testing, conducted by independent automotive researchers, measured fuel consumption under real-world driving conditions – city traffic, highway speeds, air conditioning use, and actual load weights. The results diverged sharply from the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) ratings manufacturers use for marketing.
One popular SUV model advertised at 7.2 liters per 100km actually consumed 9.1 liters under typical conditions. For a driver covering 15,000km annually, that's an extra 285 liters of fuel – roughly $500 in additional costs at current petrol prices.
Mate, you're being sold one thing and getting another. And it's not just your wallet taking the hit – it's the atmosphere.
The problem stems from how fuel efficiency is tested. Laboratory protocols use controlled conditions – steady speeds, no acceleration, no climate control, minimal weight. Manufacturers optimize vehicles for these specific test cycles rather than real-world performance.
Europe recognized the problem and adopted the more realistic Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) in 2017. The US uses Environmental Protection Agency testing that, while imperfect, better reflects actual driving. Australia still relies on the outdated NEDC standard.
That makes Australia attractive for automakers looking to offload vehicles that can't meet stricter overseas standards. The country has become what critics call a "emissions dumping ground" – importing vehicles that wouldn't pass muster in other developed markets.
The consequences extend beyond individual fuel bills. Australia's transport sector accounts for approximately 18% of national emissions, and passenger vehicles are the largest component. Climate targets assume vehicles perform at their rated efficiency. If three-quarters are actually using more fuel, emissions projections are fantasy.
The government has promised fuel efficiency standards but implementation keeps getting delayed. Industry lobbying is intense – automakers argue stricter standards will increase vehicle prices and reduce consumer choice. They're right about prices, but wrong about the trade-off.
Consumers are already paying – in higher fuel costs, in exposure to volatile petrol prices, and in future climate impacts. Upfront vehicle costs might rise under tighter standards, but lifetime operating costs would fall.
The testing gap also affects electric vehicle economics. One reason EVs look expensive compared to petrol cars is that the comparison assumes petrol vehicles achieve their advertised efficiency. Adjust for real-world consumption, and EVs become more competitive sooner.
Australia sold approximately 1 million new vehicles in 2025, and three-quarters consuming more fuel than advertised means hundreds of thousands of drivers are getting ripped off annually. It's systematic, it's measurable, and it's allowed because regulators haven't updated testing standards.
Consumer protection law requires products to match advertising. If a appliance uses more electricity than its label claims, manufacturers face penalties. But vehicle fuel ratings get a pass because they're technically based on "laboratory testing" – even though everyone knows those tests don't reflect reality.
The Australian Automobile Association has called for urgent reform, including adoption of WLTP testing and mandatory real-world verification. Environmental groups want stronger fuel efficiency standards altogether, bringing Australia in line with international norms.
Until standards change, buyers should mentally add 15-20% to advertised fuel consumption figures when calculating operating costs. Better yet, pressure regulators to join the rest of the developed world and require honest testing.
You deserve to know what you're actually buying. And the climate can't afford phantom efficiency savings that exist only in marketing brochures.
