Green Car Congress  
Go to GCC Discussions forum About GCC Contact  RSS Subscribe Twitter headlines

« Virent Energy Systems Receives $2-Million USDA-DOE Grant for Glycerol Conversion | Main | Report: Toyota May Use Prius as Basis for Line of Hybrids »

Print this post

Canadian Drivers Can Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 30-50%

2 November 2006

The Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) and Pollution Probe today released Driving Towards a Cleaner Environment—a Healthier Future, with recommendations that, if implemented, could cut motorists’ greenhouse gasses (GHGs) by 30 to almost 50%.

The report integrates the role of the motorist, the road and the vehicle into a plan for improving the environment and makes several recommendations to the federal government, including developing effective fuel efficiency standards by 2010; investing in roads and highways in order to reduce congestion and pollution; and supporting continued research and development of advanced automotive and fuel technologies.

On 16 October, CAA and Pollution Probe announced a partnership to address issues for consumers on climate change and clean air. This report is the first product of this partnership.

We will see an attitude shift among Canadians if our recommendations, which support our earlier Three-Point Eco-Mobility Plan, are implemented. The recommendations that we have in our report are sensible, because they take a balanced and realistic approach to mobility and the environment.

—Ken Ogilvie, Executive Director of Pollution Probe

Resources:

(A hat-tip to Bob!)

November 2, 2006 in Climate Change, Fuel Efficiency, Infrastructure, Policy | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef00d834c593d153ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Canadian Drivers Can Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 30-50%:

Comments

The report seems to be screwing with my machine, but I'll go out on a limb and label it an industry fraud, or green-washing. The premise of the statement, "Investing in roads and highways in order to reduce congestion and pollution", is debatable. More roads has always meant more congestion and more pollution. And just what is meant by an "effective fuel efficiency standard"? A standard that doesn't disrupt profit margins or the current situation in modern cities of a car-dominated transportation monopoly? I think this report is all about greed and senseless destruction to accommodate more cars and derived profits. CorpoRATism at its worst.

Politics really does make strange bed-fellows. Pollution Probe and CAA. CAA is an advocacy group specifically for cars. This report reflects this strange mix. It's an odd mixture of green policy and black top politics. Their answer to traffic congestion is to build more and bigger highwasys. They did talk about alternate transportation but pretty much ignored urban planning and the root causes of our driving habits.

I skimmed this 32 page Candidan report, Wells, you did not go out on a limb here - this is written at a 5th grade FOX news level, with plenty of pictures, I'm sure the epa has a brochure like this in the works, too.

Looks like a presentation piece. Two words, car pool. That is how you will cut 30-50% off of annual GHG emissions. A 7 seat 16mpg SUV with 5 aboard gets 80mpg per person. That is roughly around what a good B or C car would get with 2 or 3 on board, respectively. A 25mpg C car, with 4 aboard, gets 100 mpg/person.
_We have the connectivity and capability (cell networks, servers, software development capability, social networking, etc.), but we need investment, infrastructure (automated high density garages, bike lanes, mass transit, car pool/bus lanes, etc, integrated), and social/cultural change and acceptance, to get it off the ground.

Rotating car pooling was very common (and fuel efficient) during the ONE car per family period but would NOT work today with more cars than family members.

Better + more mass transportation systems + 200 mpg PHEVs could have a better chance of success.

Most of congestion on Canadian highways are due to choking points, not lack of highways. Improving infrastructure around such points is sensible way to decrease congestion and reduce fuel consumption and pollution. But it certainly will not “get people out of their cars”.

Just like down here, we all need to give up the gasoline V8 habit.

Andrey:

You may be both right and wrong.

More perimeter roads can reduce thru-city traffic and many 'choking points'. Buenos Aires has three sets and it helps to reduce the down town traffic. Montreal has almost no ring roads and traffic on the thru-city highway is very often impossible, it is a 50 Km traffic jam.

As you said, it is difficult to 'get people out of their cars'. One way is with comfortable, fast, low cost suburban trains, subways and buses. Another approach is with a variable surcharge to drive in certain parts of the cities, like in London, England.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2013 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group