CANADA - US FUEL EFFICIENCY AGREEMENT

[smartzuuk]

CANADA AND UNITED STATES AGREE TO

WORK TOGETHER TO IMPROVE VEHICLE

FUEL EFFICIENCY

TUCSON, ARIZONA, APRIL 26, 2007

-- The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, and United States Secretary of Transportation, Mary E. Peters, today announced that the two countries have signed a Memorandum of Cooperation aimed at improving motor vehicle fuel efficiency. The Memorandum of Cooperation will help the Government of Canada in its efforts to develop motor vehicle fuel efficiency regulations.

"Regulating vehicle fuel efficiency is an important element of Canada's environmental agenda aimed at protecting the health of Canadians and the environment," said Minister Cannon. "Our government intends to work towards establishing an environmentally ambitious North American regulatory standard for cars and light trucks."

"Increasing fuel economy standards through sound science is the most effective way to reduce fuel consumption, preserve vehicle safety and support the development of the kind of technology needed to make our automobiles as efficient as possible," said Secretary Peters. "Today's announcement puts both our countries on a track to developing the kind of standards we need to secure our energy independence while protecting the economy, the environment and vehicle safety."

The Memorandum of Cooperation provides opportunities for the two governments to meet periodically to share respective strategies and regulatory practices governing motor vehicle fuel efficiency; exchange research, modeling and analysis related to fuel efficiency standards; and exchange information on motor vehicle fuel efficiency developments and initiatives within the two countries.

The Memorandum of Cooperation specifically refers to exchanging information on:

the assessment of technological changes to improve the fuel efficiency of vehicles;

potential options for fuel economy standards;

assessment of auto industry impacts of proposed standards;

developments related to potential credit trading systems; and

experiences relating to the use of economic instruments and sharing of work plans.

The Memorandum of Cooperation will allow the two countries to benefit from their knowledge and experience in the area of motor vehicle fuel efficiency.

source

[rdij]

I'm not confident that this is a good deal for Canada - The US government (current administration): had a hand in eliminating the General Motors electric car; it sued California over it's tougher standards adopted in the mid-90's that have now been rescinded; is supporting hydrogen fuel cells (way behind on delivering). The Pres says we have a huge oil reserve in the Alaska wildnerness then turns around and says we are adicted to foreign oil. Duh! - who has perpetuated that? I hope Canada has some strong political leaders who can stand their ground on what makes sense.

[yellow bumble bee]

Strong polical leaders. What a laugh!!! Laughing so hard I can't type.ByeRoy

[smartzuuk]

AT LEAST THEY ARE MARGINALLY STRONGER THAN THE LIBERAL THIEVES OF YESTERYEAR. I WILL NOT FORGET. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THEY WILL GET DO MORE FOR KYOTO THAN THE LIBERALS EVER WILL OR EVER COULD. THE LIBERALS HAD THEIR CHANCE, THEY CAN ROT IN HELL FOR ALL I CARE.

[smart142]

WHOA!! That's kind of harsh.

I dont think the new ''conservatives'', or whatever they're called will be any better than the old liberals(who at least signed the Kyoto).

Check out this article in the globe...oil sands

It looks like the oil sand industry wants to triple it's production even though it is becoming one of the leading emitters of green house gases. In 2003 it was 25 megatonnes and predicted to rise to 94 megatonnes by 2012 if the industry is allowed to do ''business as usual''.

And the conservatives brilliant plan- wait till 2012, or was that 2050?? Not too enlightened imo.

It would seem that all politicians are in it for the short term gain.

Can anyone give any perspective of how big a megatonne is?

[ValgardForkbeard]

Can anyone give any perspective of how big a megatonne is?

A cubic yard of sand is about 1 ton, so a cube of sand 300 feet on a side would be 1 megaton (an american football field cubed). Sand and carbon don't weigh the same, but probably close enough for an off the cuff answer. Sorry Duck, but the imperial measure is a carryover from work in the construction industry many years ago :-)MG

[MikeT]

I would love to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting. "Mmmm, pickups are good". "Yep, rural people need them to haul their stuff around."Exactly what do they think they have direct control over?I think the bureaucrats at ATVP have done more for fuel efficiency than ANY Canadian or US government!

[smartzuuk]

Good call Mike. I am certainly not impressed by the fact that the Conservatives took an extra year to get on with it in respect to eco-issues.All I can say is that at least we have some action as opposed to no action. Incandescent bulbs are toast, which is good. The previous government's 'One Tonne Challenge' was all about softly ecncouraging people to make changes, and really, it didn't do much more than raise the issue. I suppose it did it's job. Now we need action.So... will this new cooperation mean anything at the end of the day?Or is it more PR?Will we see increased fuel economy standards finally after what, 20 years?

[bilgladstone]

AT LEAST THEY ARE MARGINALLY STRONGER THAN THE LIBERAL THIEVES OF YESTERYEAR. I WILL NOT FORGET. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THEY WILL GET DO MORE FOR KYOTO THAN THE LIBERALS EVER WILL OR EVER COULD. THE LIBERALS HAD THEIR CHANCE, THEY CAN ROT IN HELL FOR ALL I CARE.

Yes, but how do you really feel about it? C'mon... don't be shy.

[bilgladstone]

Will we see increased fuel economy standards finally after what, 20 years?

At least 30 years, Keith. I was part of a National project, "Eneraction", aligned with what was then Energy, Mines and Resources, in 1976!

B:sun:

[smartzuuk]

Do you think we will see some standards imposed, and see the numbers climb?You know, no matter who is in power, the people don't really want any change, IMO. I think most people are happy being bumps on the log.

[bilgladstone]

Do you think we will see some standards imposed, and see the numbers climb?

You know, no matter who is in power, the people don't really want any change, IMO. I think most people are happy being bumps on the log.

I fear we won't see broad and meaningful change in North America within any reasonable time.

However, polls in Canada appear to indicate that a large majority of us - well over 60% IIRC - are willing to sacrifice for environmental stability. A carbon tax, GHG penalities, a short-term inflationary blip, control of goods like banning incandescent bulbs, etc.

<skeptic mode on>

On the other hand, our "first past the post" electoral system pretty much guarantees that this public willingness will never translate into action. IMO, there can be no radical change [and that is what we need!] - without electoral reform.

B:sun:

..........All you can do is what you can do...

[100MPGUS]

So... will this new cooperation mean anything at the end of the day?Or is it more PR?

If they let the CDI come to the US from CA, then they are real. Other wise, its more BS. The CDI gets more then any hybrid (sometimes better then TWO hybrids)and can run on biodiesel.

[spinner]

I had to get on my soap box for a moment with a rant against car enthusiam, seeing as that is one of the biggest and most needless contributions to our global environment problem, but it was for a different topic.

Link