« Audi to Run Davos Fleet on GTL Fuel | Main | Researchers Say Horizontal Drilling Key to Tapping Unconventional Natural Gas Reservoirs in Pennsylvania; Could Boost Proven US Reserves by Trillions of Cubic Feet »
Canada Beginning Consultations on Fuel Consumption Regulations
17 January 2008
Canada’s Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Lawrence Cannon, announced that the government is beginning consultations with automotive, environmental and other stakeholders as part of the government’s commitment to implement national fuel consumption regulations for motor vehicles.
The Canadian government had earlier announced that it would begin regulating the fuel consumption of new cars and light trucks beginning with the 2011 model year. (Earlier post.)
We made a commitment to implement fuel consumption regulations for the 2011 model year that are benchmarked against a stringent, dominant North American standard, and we are keeping our word. 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. 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.
The United States Congress has set an ambitious target of 35 miles per gallon—or 6.7 litres/100 kilometers—for the average fuel economy of vehicles sold in 2020. We welcome the US goal, but are committed to developing made-in-Canada standards that achieve—at minimum—that same target in Canada. The consultations ahead will be key to delivering the standard. Put simply, this means that the government will regulate by the 2011 model year. 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.
—Minister Cannon
Over the past 30 years, Canada has had a voluntary policy for improvements in fuel consumption from cars and light trucks. In 2005, the vehicle suppliers signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to reduce GHG emissions from cars and light trucks by 5.3 million tonnes in 2010.
Despite some improvements in fuel consumption and emissions control technology brought by these voluntary policies, total fuel consumed and GHG emissions have risen substantially over the last two decades.
In 2006, the combined (car and light truck) new vehicle fleet average fuel consumption was approximately 8.6 L/100 km in Canada. This is equivalent to 27 miles per gallon.
The Canadian government will monitor closely the work of the US government, towards establishing an environmentally ambitious North American regulatory standard for cars and light-duty trucks.
A short issue brief has been developed to inform these consultations. All interested parties are encouraged to review the brief and submit their views in writing to Transport Canada no later than 15 March 2008.
Following consultations, the Government of Canada will publish draft regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part I. This will be followed by a 90-day comment and review period to provide a formal opportunity for Canadians to respond. The Government of Canada will then review the comments in order to develop final regulations. It is anticipated that these final regulations will be published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, by the end of 2008. The regulations will come into force for the 2011 model year.
Resources
A Better Canada — A Cleaner Environment: Development of Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption Regulations (Issue Brief)
January 17, 2008 in Canada, Fuel Efficiency, Policy | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22062/25222176
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Canada Beginning Consultations on Fuel Consumption Regulations:
Comments
It's just like our PM to follow Bush's lead. :(
Canada should follow the Californian model, it would get us to 36mpg in 2016 instead of 35mpg in 2020.
Posted by: ai_vin | Jan 17, 2008 11:14:23 AM
ai_win;
Agree...but our young PM may be around long after Mr. B is gone. He is not from Texas but from where most of our oil (and gas guzzlers) are. Can't imagine very strict Canadian fuel consumption regulations for the next few years unless it comes from the Provinces (like California did).
Quebec said that it will apply California regulations in 2008/09. We shall see, it may be just a bargaining position to get more Federal $$$.
Posted by: Harvey D | Jan 17, 2008 1:34:01 PM
If I was the PM I'd state Canada would follow either the Californian model or the European one, which ever was stricter. Once the US feds get it that we wouldn't be following their standards reguardless of what they do they'd be fighting to have us use an American standard, any American standard, even if it comes from California.
Posted by: ai_vin | Jan 17, 2008 2:41:38 PM
Harper just trying to look good. Truly a useless try. Most minority governments fall by now in Canada. Most believe the gov't will fall in 3-4 months. Right now comes the buying and finessing of votes. This is the same guy who when he came into power didn't believe in global warming or Kyoto and now he wants to paint himself as progressive. Ha. Would rather vote for Black, that ex-Chicago newspaper owner, who got indicted.
Posted by: aym | Jan 17, 2008 6:41:29 PM
From auss perspective Canada, despite its headline grabbing 65% reduction in greenhouse by 2050?, is otherwise seen ,like the previous Australian govt as one of the three recalcitrant first world "leaders". They lead the world in greenhouse per capita, and are a cozy bunch of B-m chums.
It is not suprising that Canada supports the Star federals in this instance.
we are still waiting for our feds to show their colours. By the way our greenhouse emissision standards are relativly non existant so any leadership direction will be grately appreciated.
Posted by: arnold | Jan 18, 2008 1:06:18 AM
re Black: .... and convicted.
Posted by: Neil | Jan 18, 2008 7:53:12 AM
The lastest official news is that Harper will follow B... plan to the letter or for as long as he is in office.
A political leader change, on both sides of the border in 2008, could make a difference. Harper may be further isolated in 2009 if he is still around unless he does a quick about turn.
Let's not forget that the current opposition did nothing (but talk) when they were in office (1989-2006). Will they do more the next time around?
Posted by: Harvey D | Jan 20, 2008 9:32:18 AM
Ah yes, the old "the Liberals did nothing" and "Canada's emissions went up 27% while they were in office" bit. One of Harper's favorite lines.
Let's get this straight; Harper's stated goal is for Canada to reduce its carbon emission INTENSITY. In other words our carbon emissions would go down only if our GNP doesn't go up.
Now while the Libs were in office Canada's emissions did go up 27% but our GNP went up 50% - we reduced our carbon emission INTENSITY by doing nothing. The Libs achieved Harper's goals by default and he's calling them a failure???
But why did the Libs do nothing to meet our obligations to Kyoto in the 12 years they were in office (93-06)? Well first of all Canada hadn't ratified Kyoto until 2002 and the agreement didn't come into force until 2005, (and before it did that why would the polluters want to reduce anything?) but by 2004 the Libs were a minority government who were facing Harper in opposition. He of course wouldn't let them do anything because he's from Alberta, where most of that 27% increase came from.
See how two-faced he is?
Posted by: ai_vin | Jan 20, 2008 12:25:47 PM
BTW-ICYW I have no love for the Liberals, they can all hang for all I care but I'd like to see them hung with the right rope.
Posted by: ai_vin | Jan 20, 2008 1:18:32 PM
ai_win:
It seems that winning (Federal) elections and reducing GHG are not yet compatible in Canada.
Per capita GHG varies a lot between Provinces (from about 12 to 37+ tonnes/year with an average approaching 25 tonnes) for a multitude of reasons. A 50% to 65% across the board reduction would be difficult for Provinces with only 12 tonnes/year per capita. Provinces with 37+ tonnes would also have problems because their high pollution level comes from Oil & Gas production which will be difficult to slow down. Clean up their act will take time.
Without a California to drive the campaign, Canada may be in for very high per capita GHG for many more decades. We may very well be facing a +50% instead of a -50% by 2030.
Posted by: Harvey D | Jan 21, 2008 2:23:42 PM
