Canada to follow Obama on vehicle-emission reductions
 

Canada's government intends to largely fall in line with the tough automobile-emission standards U.S. President Barack Obama introduced Tuesday, rules that would add $600 U.S. to the cost of producing a U.S. car and improve fuel efficiency by an average five per year starting in 2012.

Implications for the Canadian industry are unclear, but one analyst said it would be "near impossible" for Canada to achieve what Obama has outlined.

Obama said the new national standards mark a "historic agreement" designed to break the U.S. dependence on foreign oil and kick-start the transition to a clean-energy economy.

Automakers in U.S. must meet average efficiency standards of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016, four years sooner than planned under the former Republican administration under George W. Bush. Further, it is expected to generate reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions by 900 million tonnes through 2016, according to White House officials.

Canadian Environment Minister Jim Prentice said Ottawa would ensure regulations here closely mimic what Obama proposes.

"We will work together to ensure we have a single, dominant North American standard for carbon emissions and fuel economy," Prentice told reporters in Calgary. "The automotive industry in North America is deeply integrated. Therefore it doesn't profit any of us, either as consumers or manufacturers, to have competing standards."

Prentice said he would adjust current environmental legislation to ensure it is aligned with the new U.S. fuel economy standards. He added that the Canadian standards will be expressed using a different metric — grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer, instead of miles per gallon as in the United States — but will nevertheless be aligned with Washington's rules by amending environmental regulations on an annual basis.

Environmental groups say Canada's stable of cars is already more fuel efficient than in the United States, as Canadian households prefer smaller cars with less horsepower.

Representatives for Canadian-based auto makers said they endorsed Prentice's decision.

"It is a good thing because it provides us with the clarity and precision in terms of making the design changes and investments that we need," said Mark Nantais, president of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association.

One unknown is whether all the provinces will sign on to Prentice's plan. Three provinces — Quebec, Manitoba and British Columbia — had previously indicated they intend to move with their own fuel-efficiency rules. The environment is a shared jurisdiction between the federal and provincial governments.

The head of the Quebec government's climate change policy said the province reserves the right to bring its own regulations should Ottawa not follow through to harmonize rules with Washington.

"I think this is a good step with both federal governments moving to a level we have said we should move toward," Marcel Gaucher said in an interview. "But it is too early to say if we will stop or delay our own set of regulations."

B.C. Environment Minister Barry Penner said his province would wait for a "clear signal" from Ottawa on adopting U.S. rules before it drops its pursuit of separate regulations. Meanwhile, Manitoba's energy minister said he welcomed what Washington and Ottawa were saying. "We are happy there is going to be a real standard in real time, and we're happy to be part of a bigger picture," said Jim Rondeau.

Industry observers cautioned that the impact of Tuesday's announcement remains unknown, as a number of details need to be settled.

"The overall cost to the automakers is certain to rise, and the exact implications for consumers have not yet been established," said Aaron Bragman, an analyst with IHS Global Insight.

Dennis DesRosiers, head of DesRosiers Automotive Consultants, said the new standard Obama proposed is "near impossible" to meet, noting it took a quarter-century for Canada's fleet of cars to improve fuel efficiency by one litre per 100 kilometres, even with several technological advancements.
http://www.vancouversun.com/Cars/Can...192/story.html

i hope they can do it... it'll be nice to not pay so much $$ for gas...
but then.. companies will just raise price on oil...

but then.. it'll be nice that we're nice to the environment :D

You couldn't believe the outcry and "OMG THE SKY IS FALLING, COMMUNISM" ranting about this on another forum I'm on. Somehow most of them thought it meant ALL cars have to get 35mpg+ as well.

*sigh*

fuk, it'll be streets filled with ugly ass priuses... noooooo

I hope it doesn't influence bullshit programs like Aircare to stick around. :mad:

The really stupid thing is that I'm sure they could increase fuel economy by 30% across the board SIMPLY by making a much shorter top gear in cars. Do you REALLY need a constant 3000rpm on the highway? NO.

Let's face it. The bottom 1 or 2 gears of most cars are also pretty much useless unless you're the kind of driver that likes supporting tire companies. Automakers should change their ratios for a) more spread, and b) lower RPMs across the board.

A simple, quick, and EFFECTIVE solution.

This policy is dead on arrival. Considering the development life cycle of a normal vehicle is 4 - 8 yrs, and breakthrough reductions in fuel efficiency are non-existent right now, it is unrealistic to expect 5 mpg / yr reductions.

900 million tonnes of gas, I wonder how does it look like

Sounds great on paper, but say you take a road trip with a full vehicle plus luggage. Good luck starting on a hill.

I think the automakers can do it...

yea a lot of people thought it meant ALL cars.. not average... whatever.. lol
it shoudln't be that bad for automakers because they're probably already on the urge of doing something...

or toyota... they'll simply make a hybrid of every car available.. lol done...

There are plenty of ways of increasing fuel mileage on existing engines, even without having to fully develop something new. Changing fuel maps, adapting cylinder deactivation, and adjusting gear ratios are all relatively cheap and easy fixes. Compacts and sub-/sub-sub-compacts should have very little problems reaching that goal within a few years. It's the larger vehicles that may have an issue obtaining that sort of average. What I'm curious to know is what sort of changes were outlined for larger vehicles (full sized trucks and SUV's).

The only realistic way to achieve it will be what has been done in Europe: Diesel.

You're going to see 50-60% of cars sold diesel after 2016.