Canada wants to join the 35mpg by 2020 club
Now that the energy bill and its attendant fuel economy standards has been passed here in the U.S., it looks like the Canadian government wants to officially adopt the same standards. Canada has never actually had fuel efficiency standards of its own but in 2007 committed to implementing one. Since the Canadian auto market is so intertwined with the U.S. but the sales volumes are only about one tenth of America's, car-makers have traditionally just taken vehicles designed for U.S. regulations, switched the speedometers and odometers to km and sold them north of the border. Because of higher gas taxes, the sales mix in Canada has typically skewed more toward the smaller, more-efficient vehicles anyway so any move add fuel economy standards there looks more like a government posturing before an election than a real effort to improve efficiency. The fleet average for cars and trucks in Canada was 27.3mpg (U.S.) in 2006 but Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon announced at the Montreal Auto Show that the government would establish standards that meet or exceed the U.S. 35mpg by 2020 level. [Source: CTV]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Denis Lang 12:13PM (4/10/2008)
Only about 15% of the energy from the fuel put in to the tank gets used to move the car down the road or run useful accessories, such as air conditioning. The rest of the energy is lost to engine and driveline inefficiencies and idling.
Reply
Eric Dewhirst 4:59PM (1/19/2008)
Wow 35mpg by 2020!
Is it just me or are we setting the bar so low we would have trouble tripping on it?
Does anyone else think this is not enough? I love cars and I want to drive them until the day I die. However I would also like to see them become way more efficient and this target just seems too low.
What do others think?
Cheers - Eric
http://www.pickuppal.com
Reply
Benjamin Jones 5:10PM (1/19/2008)
Well, thumbsup for canada, I guess, but I wish they would set the bar a little higher. I've always seen canada as being a bit smarter than the US in terms of vehicle and fuel consumption choices, so it would be nice to have out neighbor beating us to the punch and prodding us along, but what can you do, eh?
Mehbe ABG's canadian readers should all call their elected representatives and complain for better mileage, :)
http://ecomodder.com
Reply
armmat 5:46PM (1/19/2008)
Eric,
I agree with you that the bar is set too low..it's a pathetic cop-out and what's going to happen is that as various technologies are developed, the efficiency of IC engine development will go down IMO or at the very least just stay the same.
For the fleet to get 35MPG across the board means cars will probably be getting around 45-50MPG byu then...which is really pathetic IMO.
Reply
Dave 7:40PM (1/19/2008)
If EEStor (or a similar high density battery technology) is successful, gasoline mpg will be nearly irrelevant by 2020.
Otherwise, however, a 35 mpg AVERAGE isn't easy unless cars (and Trucks) get much smaller/lighter/more aerodynamic.
Reply
GoodCheer 10:24PM (1/19/2008)
"The fleet average for cars and trucks in Canada was 27.3mpg (U.S.) in 2006"
I wonder which EPA driving cycle is used for this fleet average. I'm sure regular readers are tired of me pointing out that the US CAFE average is calculated using the 1975 EPA driving cycle, and the 35 mpg in CAFE will translate to about 26 mpg on the 2008 driving cycle.
I'm not quite sure of the conversion to the 1985-2007 driving cycle, but it's clearly somewhere between 26 and 35. That means that (unless I'm wrong) Canada already comes VERY close to the new standard.
Reply
MARK SMYTH 10:51PM (1/19/2008)
The smaller the car the more chance of injury or death to the driver and passengers. Very soon, the insurance costs will outweigh any fuel savings. Just in the past week, north of Toronto, there was a 3 vehicle accident with the only one who survived in a full size GM pickup. the other 2 cars were both much smaller and did not have full frames. Wake up people, run your cars on propane at 55 cents a liter and have cleaner air becuase LPG is 18% hydogen. You can drive a bigger safer car and still save on fuel and emissions when burning propane which i have used for 26 years in Toronto.
Reply
gsolman6 11:35PM (1/19/2008)
"The smaller the car the more chance of injury or death to the driver and passengers. Very soon, the insurance costs will outweigh any fuel savings. Just in the past week, north of Toronto, there was a 3 vehicle accident with the only one who survived in a full size GM pickup. the other 2 cars were both much smaller and did not have full frames. Wake up people, run your cars on propane at 55 cents a liter and have cleaner air becuase LPG is 18% hydogen. You can drive a bigger safer car and still save on fuel and emissions when burning propane which i have used for 26 years in Toronto."
If small cars are such a hazard how do you explain the fact that many European countries have lower fatality rates than the U.S.? Automobile magazine recently reported that the death rate in Germany was 3.1/billion KMs while the rate in the U.S. was 5.0/billion KMs.
Part of the reason for the higher rates in the U.S. can no doubt be attributed to the fact that we have so many oversized, overweight vehicles with not in the much of safety equipment populating the roads with smaller vehicles which in themselves are relatively safe, e.g VW Golf. Case in point is the Chevy Blazer SUV which is notorious for having the highest fatality rate of any vehicle according to the IIHS.
Reply
tankd0g 11:42PM (1/19/2008)
CAFE is a bone headed idea and a wate of government money. Canada already has high gas taxes, the rest takes care of itself.
Reply
tankd0g 11:42PM (1/19/2008)
"Just in the past week, north of Toronto, there was a 3 vehicle accident with the only one who survived in a full size GM pickup. the other 2 cars were both much smaller and did not have full frames. "
Just this past week 7 high school boys were killed in ONE full size van in New Brunswick. What's your point?
Reply
tankd0g 11:42PM (1/19/2008)
Canadian already buy as many Civics as F-150s, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
Reply
Dad 11:42AM (1/20/2008)
"looks more like a government posturing before an election than a real effort to improve efficiency"
Going from 27 to 35 is more than "posturing".
Reply