CTV News | Ottawa proposing new car efficiency standards

Canada -   

Ottawa proposing new car efficiency standards

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV News: David Akin with the promise to go green
CTV Newsnet: Jean Langlois, Sierra Club of Canada
Mike Duffy Live: Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon discusses the vehicle emission announcement

Font-size:      Share  Print  Comments(32)

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Thu. Jan. 17 2008 10:28 PM ET

Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon said Thursday the government is working towards a "made-in-Canada" solution to reduce the fuel consumption of new cars and light trucks by 2020.

On Thursday it announced that it will launch a consultation process that will help create new rules for fuel economy.

As promised last year, Cannon said Ottawa will begin in 2011 to regulate the fuel consumption of new vehicles. The aim is to at least match U.S. standards by 2020.

"By 2020, the average new vehicle sold in Canada will have a fuel consumption better than some of today's hybrid cars, and produce fewer GHG emissions, than approximately 93 per cent of all vehicle entries listed in the 2008 Fuel Consumption Guide," said Cannon.

In 2006, the combined new vehicle fleet (car and light trucks) average fuel consumption was approximately 8.6 litres per 100 km in Canada.

"The U.S. Congress has recently set an ambitious target of 35 miles per gallon, or 6.7 litres per 100 kilometres, for the average fuel economy of new vehicles sold in 2020," said Cannon.

"Now, we welcome the U.S. goal but are committed to developing a made-in-Canada standard that achieves, at minimum, that target benchmarked against a stringent dominant North American standard."

On Friday, speaking to CTV's Canada AM, Cannon added that the provincial premiers have "an important role" to play in developing a national fuel economy standard for vehicles, and the environment is a "shared responsibility" between the federal and provincial governments.

Cannon also said he intends to write to the premiers to ask them to help determine the fuel economy standard, which he says will be a first in Canada.

The new U.S. regulation is called the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard but it has been challenged by more stringent proposals out of California.

"For Canada to adopt the CAFE standard, which President Bush supports, means taking the slow lane in addressing climate change," Pierre Sadik of the David Suzuki Foundation told The Globe and Mail. "The California standard means getting to a solution much faster."

Several premiers agree. Quebec's Jean Charest and B.C.'s Gordon Campbell have said they want to move towards the tougher California standard.

"We want to achieve the best standard and reduce as much greenhouse gas as we can in as economically viable way as possible," Campbell said.

"Why we're going to the lowest common denominator is beyond me."

Manitoba has also said it wants to shadow California. But some carmakers say Ottawa's plan may be too ambitious.

"It's not going to be a cakewalk," said James Miller, Senior Vice President of Honda Canada.

"We think the goal that the minister is looking for, if it's 35 miles per gallon and harmonized, is going to be a struggle for all of the manufacturers."

Cannon, speaking at the Montreal International Auto Show, said the government will consult with the automotive industry and environmental experts about ways to improve new car efficiency standards.

George Iny of the Automobile Protection Association said Ottawa's move is a step in the right direction.

"It's very ambitious. The average car in 2020 would be as fuel-efficient as the very best vehicles today," said Iny.

"Our government recognizes that the transportation sector is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions in Canada, accounting for 25 per cent of all Canada's GHG emissions," said Cannon.

"That's why we are taking action now to make sure that, into the future, we have the most environmentally responsible cars and trucks on Canadian roads."

With files from The Canadian Press and a report by CTV's David Akin

Comments are now closed for this story

JP
said

Why wait 12 years? 2015 is very realistic.


Conrad Piche
said

It's hard to be a leader when you are always following!


Sean Calder
said

Fortunately, the Federal Government has already given the ZENN the okay to go in Canada. An Electric car with zero emissions, made in Quebec. It's now up to the Provincial Governments to pass the necessary legislation allowing the cars to be sold in their province. As far as I know, only B.C. has done so.


Fool
said

Why don't they start using Litres per kilometres. As a young Canadian, miles and gallons make no sense to me.


Alain Renaud
said

If you want to achieve the 35 mpg goal, you should ask for 45 mpg. The federal government should have the test done on actual pavement with actual drivers. I presently own a 03 Accord they claime it makes 44 mpg but actually only makes 32. And yes I do know that it depends on the driver, and I also made the test. The best I got was 34 mpg.


Brook
said

I agree. I think that it's great that they are putting efficiency standards on vehicles but I also think that 2020 is a little late. If we want to save the earth we need to act sooner. Not wait ten years. 2015 would be realistic.


David from NS
said

I don't care if we followed the US into this idea, it is a good thing! A very positive step. Now lets see if the North American car makers can step up to the plate.


PBW
said

The fuel efficiency standards must apply to all vehicles sold to the general public for personal transportation purposes, from the smallest to the largest.

For years the Big Three - and others - got round fuel efficiency standards by building vehicles on a truck base, which was exempt. All that did was help them avoid doing the R&D necessary for efficient engines.

As far as I am concerned, I shall not buy from the big three until they really produce efficient engines and vehicles.


Nick T
said

Why only 35 miles a gallon? why not 50? By 2020 that could be achieved... talk about dragging your ***... Make HIGHER standards in a shorter time-frame.


Adrian in Calgary
said

Dontcha just love it when politicians pronounce radical, world changing legislation that requires absolutely no effort until long after they're out of office, and produces no tangible benefit until after they've retired?

Perhaps tomorrow they'll announce legislation to have gravity reduced by 2050 in order to reduce energy demands?


larry
said

The Conservatives are usually bashed for not caring about the economy, however, by this announcement they are doing more than the previous government(s) over the last 15 years. The Suzuki foundation would never be happy with them anyway, no matter what they did.

I'm not sure the implications of going faster ie: we do have a huge automotive employee base in Canada and so we want the cars made here to meet the mark as well. As well, new technology does take time.


Karen D
said

British Columbia is working on standards; they are going to make leaps and bounds but are by no means have a standard in place, it is coming, but these things take time. Ontario deserves kudos for this as well, they have signed the MOU with Cali. Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Quebec are trying to follow suit, and won’t be long. I agree the time frame for the federal government is a long way away, but they do have to allow time for the car manufacturers to make more efficient cars. If we do not do this, anyone wanting to buy a new car will be unable because they won’t be able to buy one in Canada.


msamour
said

There is a very efficient way to reduce the size of the engines without reducing performance. There was a test conducted with electric hub motors witihn the wheel wells with the energy supplied by a smaller diesel/gas generator. It makes the engine smaller, which has a potential to reduce GHGs.




Ron
said

Msamour, as a mechanical engineer, I assure you, you are wrong. There is only so much energy stored in fossil fuel, and extracting it is already done as efficiently as is currently possible while still using modern reciprocating engines. Storing that energy in a battery to drive electric motors does NOT increase that efficiency and if anything, it introduces more efficiency loss.

Hybrids skirt this problem by storing energy, from combustion during idling and braking cycles, in batteries. The energy is then used either at the wheel hub or in a power-traim mounted motor to provide or suplement propulsion.

Using a gas or diesel engine strictly in "generator mode", however, adds nothing.


R/H
said

"larry" If the truth be known, they (Car & Truck makers) have the technology right now. It's the oil companies that hold back new ideas to conserve gas! They could produce a vehicle capable of 50mpg right now if they really wanted and were allowed to!


jonathan
said

I don't understand why Canada along with the US are so far behind everyone else on this.

All cars in the European Union are sold with a CO2 rating with punitive taxation the more CO2 it emits.

As a result 80% of people buy high efficiency diesels.For example The latest generation BMW diesels (not for sale in Canada) can out perform the petrols in all aspects, but will give 43 mpg and around half the CO2 emissions of a petrol.

Even the latest Europe only mini cooper, gives around the same mileage as a Prius.

It seems these proposals are pretty feeble


tb
said

I discount the crazies who say the car companies and the oil companies have technology they are hiding. The facts are that there is no secret to fuel economy. It's small cars until there are technology breakthroughs for alternate hybrids technology/fuel sources. It's easy for any government to pronounce we will have these kinds of fuel economy in the future. They don't have to do anything. Yes the car companies could give you large vehicles today with that kind of fuel economy, you'd just have to pay about 4-6 times as much per vehicle. Ask yourself why Toyota full size trucks get less fuel economy than the industry leader in large pickup truck fuel economy GM? Toyota is supposed to be the most environmentally friendly of the auto makers. What gives? Truth be told...the announcement today will just have us doing two things...getting forced into buying micro cars, and making our domestic industry die off once again. Small cars for the most part are not made in North America. The government instead of legislating results should invest in developing the new technologies that will power vehicles of the future so we can take advantage of that sooner and help save energy and have a better world.


MHR from Ontario
said

This Harper government need to do more and also to legalize Canadian-made car such as ZENN to be sold in Canada. Also should attempt to lure car such as Twike to be sold in Canada. STOP FUNDING OUR TAX MONEY TO 3 BIG COMPANIES! I want to see my tax money going to Twike or Zenn.

jac
said

"Alain Renaud
If you want to achieve the 35 mpg goal, you should ask for 45 mpg. The federal government should have the test done on actual pavement with actual drivers. I presently own a 03 Accord they claime it makes 44 mpg but actually only makes 32. And yes I do know that it depends on the driver, and I also made the test. The best I got was 34 mpg."

My chevy gets 33 MPG highway. So I guess I don't understand why people think that the big three are not fuel efficient. My car also has 200 HP and 8 feet cargo space.

FYI the 5500 pound Silverado/Sierra are rated to 10L/100 km.

These trucks can also run on 85% ethanol, which is better than any combination of battery/gasoline.

If you want to come on here and talk about gas efficiency why not put it good use. Demand drive thru conveniences are shut down permanently. Have speed regulators installed in cars. How much green house emissions are being expelled by those commuters that drive 1000 km a week that cruise at 120-140km?

What they need to really focus on here heavy truck emissions. This is what runs are country and they are not even looking at alternatives to their fuel consumption??






Chris
said

Watch this proposal go by the wayside as soon as the economy starts to weaken and eastern auto manufacturers threaten to lay people off.

Even the federal Liberals (the poster childs of "trying" to solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions) realized they would lose too many votes.

In the end, the feds will decide that it is better to let Alberta (with only 29 seats in the house of commons) suffer economically and make all the sacrifices for GHG reduction that are wanted by the eastern folk.


Dave
said

Investing in technology to reduce CO2 emissions by re-inventing the automobile is a great plan whose time has arrived.
The problem is as long as the gas guzzling SUV's and muscle cars are still available there will still be the individuals who will buy these cars even though they pollute and waste fuel and resources.
The big shiny new car in the driveway is still a status symbol, and even if a 80 mpg four passenger vehicle was available tomorrow with a reasonable price tag there will still be the individuals who will insist on getting a model that guzzles gas and pollutes the air simple because it stands out and announces them as upper class or a cut above the nieghbours with thier compact green cars....
The solution is to totally phase out all the "Grande-Polluters" and make only compact "green" vehicles.
People such as myself who live in rural areas would also benefit from an expanded public transportation system so a car was not a vital link to the medical professionals and the shopping centres......
Unless we can find that genius who invented the 300mpg carburettor....you know....the one the oil companies assasinated back in the fifties.....


L-P in Markham
said

All this talk of making cars more efficient is good but unrealistic the moment you need to carry more than one or 2 people on board (BTW, motorcycles should be deemed evergy savers since they burn 1/10 at the least of even the most efficient cars).

I am forced to drive a vehicle that burns 12-15 litres /100km because I have children. With Ontario's laws about car seats and boosters, I cannot fit my children(3) in a car. There is no room. so I have to have a van or an SUV. If I want to bring a long another adult with us (ie mother-in-law) then even my van gets cramped.

Let's get realistic about it people. Fuel efficient cars are cute, but are so small, I barely am able to sit in them on my own. Forget my family. Oh and I have to use it to commute since I can only afford 1 vehicle and Transit would end up costing me more per trip as well as taking 3 times longer to travel.

Like I said, let's get realistic. Get me a reciprocating engine that runs on hydrogen created by building new hydro-electric dams up north (so, we destroy a small part of the environment to save the bigger ones) and I will gladly get me one of those.


J-F (Ottawa)
said

I am a big sports car fan, I love V8 engines and high performance cars.

I've owned several such cars through the years and hope they continue to make them as they do now.

If they can find a way to keep the performance AND reduce emissions, it's a great plan.

Some people prefer a Honda Civic, others like Ford Mustangs, as long as consumers will have the "choice" and keep emissions to required standard, it's a win/win situation.


Ryan
said

The governments in both Canada and US are setting standards that will be met by the consumers choosing more fuel efficient vehicles as the price of gas goes up with lesser supply of oil. The government will have little to no effect on how the vehicles will be made. It is the consumer that will force the car companies to provide more fuel efficient vehicles. The government knows this and they are trying to make it look as though they are being pro-active in their "legislation". Especially with the domestic car industry hurting so much right now, they are not going to force the car companies into doing something they can't already do. Especially with the $1 billion pay out the car industry is looking for right now.

This looks more like a charade than anything. I bet tomorrow the auto industry will be screaming murder that they can't meet the targets that the gov't set. Then the average tax payer will feel better about taking $1 billion in their tax money to go towards an industry that was too slow to react to consumers demands. That $1 billion should go to other areas where the money is more warranted (ie health care, deficit, infrastructure, etc.)


Pat_Pending
said

Ron: sorry to nit pick, but you are wrong. Reciprocating internal combustion engines have an rpm "sweet spot" where they are most efficient. In most cases, when driven in ordinary traffic, particularly in the city, a car's engine revs at rpm's outside the "sweet spot". That's why city "mileage" is usually lower than highway "mileage". Hybrid cars (and diesel electric trains for that matter), are designed to ensure that the engine remains in the "sweet spot" in order to maximize efficiency. When coupled with things like regenerative braking, hybrid cars greatly increase (often by a factor of 2) the net efficiency of the vehicle, all else remaining the same.


Rob
said

This is all a bunch of fluff. There is no need to wait until 2020 and 35 mpg could have been done years ago. Oh wait, the less gas that we buy the less money the government gets. Ahh now it makes sense.


Karen D
said

Are you kidding me, let Alberta suffer economically. Get over it, Alberta has so much money and the rest of the country has not been doing well, I wish Alberta and the Western parts of the country would stop wining. You want it all, and continue to want everything else. This has nothing to do with Alberta or Ontario, it has to be about what is good for the environment.


CP
said

On top of the target fuel consumption they should also limit the engine size of cars. It is a known fact that high powered cars consume more fuel than low powered cars. Who need cars with 200 hp engines, only those who don't care about other people and the environment. Tax those vehicles to the hilt and put the proceeds to a green fund to pay for buses and trains. Increase their insurance and everytime they get into an accicent, increase their premiums even higher depending on how much damage they cause. In other words, make them pay for their "toys".

At the same time give more incentives to those with smaller engine cars by accelerating their insurance discounts.


FB
said

I wonder how many of the people who grip about emissions actually understand what it means to make it happen. I'm all for better fuel economy but I think that if people want better standard they should be willing to put in the work to make it happen


Jim McB
said

This is a no brainer, all it does is bring the city folk using the SUV to drive 5 blocks into the realm of reality. My cars have exceeded this standard for at least the last ten years. There is one truck in the family that we pool when we need heavy or large lift. We are even looking at that vehicle because it might be a lot cheaper to rent one when needed.

Cities don't represent the only people in this country, yet when an announcement is made, some creature emerges a concrete box get interviewed and the answer is always the same, it's not enough. Well rural folks and farmers keep enough trees to give them vitually no carbon footprint, so all this regulation is to cater for city folks. That is something you should always keep in mind.

My vehicle is a 2002, Japanese, and gets 36 mpg city and 45 mpg highway. It is a hatchback and can carry more than most North American sedans and will take 5 passengers in relative comfort. Surely we in this part of the world can build something competetive now, it just takes customer demand to make it happen!


Mike Anton
said

I am sick and tired of government's forcing the automakers to adhere to these Cafe standards. I know GM can't build the cars it really wants to build because these regulations. Cafe standards were supposed to reduce consumption of gas when first introduced in the 70's. They have had the opposite effect.


steve I. C.
said

The made in Canada solution that is based on the Bush sponsored Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard?

How high Mr Bush? Yes Sir!


Share with your social Network:

 

Advertisement

Contest

User Tools

About the tools

Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz