If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
And the Canadian and American governments are pretending that saving
$200 a year in fuel will make up for it. Automakers facing carbon tax in 2011 under tough new standards By Mike De Souza, Canwest News ServiceApril 1, 2010 1:02 PM Traffic on Trans-Canada Highway at Admirals Road/ Mackenzie Avenue intersection for Budget reaction in Victoria, B.C. on Feb. 19, 2008. Traffic on Trans-Canada Highway at Admirals Road/ Mackenzie Avenue intersection for Budget reaction in Victoria, B.C. on Feb. 19, 2008. Photograph by: Darren Stone, Victoria Times Colonist OTTAWA — Automobile manufacturers could face a carbon tax on new vehicles in the 2011 model year if they fail to meet new standards to reduce tailpipe emissions that were announced on Thursday by Environment Minister Jim Prentice. The declaration confirms that the government still plans to move ahead with a draft plan unveiled in December to impose tougher tailpipe standards on cars, matching new proposed regulations in the United States. "Since last May, we've been working with the United States to put in place tough North American standards for regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new vehicles," Prentice said at an Ottawa car dealership. "We are pleased to be taking this step to further harmonize our climate change action with the Obama administration — a step that will protect our environment and ensure a level playing field for the automotive industry." Environment Canada estimated in December that the standards would result in a 20 per cent reduction in emissions compared to the 2007 model year. It now estimates the standards would result in about a 25 per cent reduction in emissions for the 2016 fleet of new vehicles when compared with the 2008 model year. "The proposed standards would require substantial environmental improvements from new vehicles and would put Canadian GHG emission standards at par with U.S. national standards and, by 2016, with the California standards," Environment Canada said in December. While companies would be forced to comply with the new standards for average emissions of their fleet between 2012 and 2016, they will be allowed to purchase credits or pay a carbon tax to the government to offset emissions at a rate of $20 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions for the 2011 model year. The standards are based on vehicle size to encourage manufacturers to make existing vehicles more efficient as opposed to changing the makeup of their fleet to produce smaller vehicles. The regulations include a credit system to provide "flexibility" in compliance if they exceed targets, or want to trade credits between companies. The regulations also propose incentives to give double credits for companies that introduce advanced technologies, including electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles which run on hydrogen. Prentice has criticized the Quebec government for introducing its own regulations this year to crack down on tailpipe standards, describing it as a "folly." But Quebec Environment Minister Line Beauchamp indicated on Thursday that her government intended to stick with its plan if the joint Canadian and U.S. standards fall short of meeting the California standards. California has also decided to sign an equivalency agreement with the U.S. government that delays the pace of its originally proposed standards by one year. Meantime, Quebec has said that its regulations also include fewer loopholes and more stringent reporting requirements for industry than what the Harper government has proposed. The Harper government said it will adopt its new regulations by this summer, following a two-month public consultation period. Prentice's announcement comes one day after the government cancelled an incentive program for home renovations to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions. The program was also previously cancelled by the government in 2006 but restored under a new name, one year later following public criticism. With files from Kevin Dougherty (Montreal Gazette) and Marianne White (Canwest News Service). |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
"New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars"
"The rules will cost consumers an estimated $434 extra per vehicle in the 2012 model year and $926 per vehicle by 2016, the government said. But the heads of the Transportation Department and Environmental Protection Agency said car owners would save more than $3,000 over the lives of their vehicles through better gas mileage." New Mileage Rules: Pay More for Cars, Less at Pump More miles on less fuel: Gov't efficiency standards will mean higher car prices, fuel savings The Associated Press By KEN THOMAS Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON April 1, 2010 (AP) http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10257074 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:51:45 -0700 (PDT), "$27 TRILLION to pay for
Kyoto" > wrote: >And the Canadian and American governments are pretending that saving >$200 a year in fuel will make up for it. > >Automakers facing carbon tax in 2011 under tough new standards > > >By Mike De Souza, Canwest News ServiceApril 1, 2010 1:02 PM > > >Traffic on Trans-Canada Highway at Admirals Road/ Mackenzie Avenue >intersection for Budget reaction in Victoria, B.C. on Feb. 19, 2008. > >Traffic on Trans-Canada Highway at Admirals Road/ Mackenzie Avenue >intersection for Budget reaction in Victoria, B.C. on Feb. 19, 2008. >Photograph by: Darren Stone, Victoria Times Colonist > >OTTAWA — Automobile manufacturers could face a carbon tax on new >vehicles in the 2011 model year if they fail to meet new standards to >reduce tailpipe emissions that were announced on Thursday by >Environment Minister Jim Prentice. > >The declaration confirms that the government still plans to move ahead >with a draft plan unveiled in December to impose tougher tailpipe >standards on cars, matching new proposed regulations in the United >States. > >"Since last May, we've been working with the United States to put in >place tough North American standards for regulating greenhouse gas >emissions from new vehicles," Prentice said at an Ottawa car >dealership. "We are pleased to be taking this step to further >harmonize our climate change action with the Obama administration — a >step that will protect our environment and ensure a level playing >field for the automotive industry." > >Environment Canada estimated in December that the standards would >result in a 20 per cent reduction in emissions compared to the 2007 >model year. It now estimates the standards would result in about a 25 >per cent reduction in emissions for the 2016 fleet of new vehicles >when compared with the 2008 model year. > >"The proposed standards would require substantial environmental >improvements from new vehicles and would put Canadian GHG emission >standards at par with U.S. national standards and, by 2016, with the >California standards," Environment Canada said in December. > >While companies would be forced to comply with the new standards for >average emissions of their fleet between 2012 and 2016, they will be >allowed to purchase credits or pay a carbon tax to the government to >offset emissions at a rate of $20 per tonne of carbon dioxide >equivalent emissions for the 2011 model year. > >The standards are based on vehicle size to encourage manufacturers to >make existing vehicles more efficient as opposed to changing the >makeup of their fleet to produce smaller vehicles. > >The regulations include a credit system to provide "flexibility" in >compliance if they exceed targets, or want to trade credits between >companies. The regulations also propose incentives to give double >credits for companies that introduce advanced technologies, including >electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cell >vehicles which run on hydrogen. > >Prentice has criticized the Quebec government for introducing its own >regulations this year to crack down on tailpipe standards, describing >it as a "folly." > >But Quebec Environment Minister Line Beauchamp indicated on Thursday >that her government intended to stick with its plan if the joint >Canadian and U.S. standards fall short of meeting the California >standards. California has also decided to sign an equivalency >agreement with the U.S. government that delays the pace of its >originally proposed standards by one year. > >Meantime, Quebec has said that its regulations also include fewer >loopholes and more stringent reporting requirements for industry than >what the Harper government has proposed. > >The Harper government said it will adopt its new regulations by this >summer, following a two-month public consultation period. Prentice's >announcement comes one day after the government cancelled an incentive >program for home renovations to improve energy efficiency and reduce >emissions. > >The program was also previously cancelled by the government in 2006 >but restored under a new name, one year later following public >criticism. > >With files from Kevin Dougherty (Montreal Gazette) and Marianne White >(Canwest News Service). > Governments LIE and dupe the people into believing they will get more than they put in. There is NO free lunch. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
Translation: The people who are going to get hurt the most are the very
people that democrats say they care most about, those who are poor and those who are on the lower end of the wage scale. "$27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto" > wrote in message ... And the Canadian and American governments are pretending that saving $200 a year in fuel will make up for it. Automakers facing carbon tax in 2011 under tough new standards By Mike De Souza, Canwest News ServiceApril 1, 2010 1:02 PM Traffic on Trans-Canada Highway at Admirals Road/ Mackenzie Avenue intersection for Budget reaction in Victoria, B.C. on Feb. 19, 2008. Traffic on Trans-Canada Highway at Admirals Road/ Mackenzie Avenue intersection for Budget reaction in Victoria, B.C. on Feb. 19, 2008. Photograph by: Darren Stone, Victoria Times Colonist OTTAWA — Automobile manufacturers could face a carbon tax on new vehicles in the 2011 model year if they fail to meet new standards to reduce tailpipe emissions that were announced on Thursday by Environment Minister Jim Prentice. The declaration confirms that the government still plans to move ahead with a draft plan unveiled in December to impose tougher tailpipe standards on cars, matching new proposed regulations in the United States. "Since last May, we've been working with the United States to put in place tough North American standards for regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new vehicles," Prentice said at an Ottawa car dealership. "We are pleased to be taking this step to further harmonize our climate change action with the Obama administration — a step that will protect our environment and ensure a level playing field for the automotive industry." Environment Canada estimated in December that the standards would result in a 20 per cent reduction in emissions compared to the 2007 model year. It now estimates the standards would result in about a 25 per cent reduction in emissions for the 2016 fleet of new vehicles when compared with the 2008 model year. "The proposed standards would require substantial environmental improvements from new vehicles and would put Canadian GHG emission standards at par with U.S. national standards and, by 2016, with the California standards," Environment Canada said in December. While companies would be forced to comply with the new standards for average emissions of their fleet between 2012 and 2016, they will be allowed to purchase credits or pay a carbon tax to the government to offset emissions at a rate of $20 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions for the 2011 model year. The standards are based on vehicle size to encourage manufacturers to make existing vehicles more efficient as opposed to changing the makeup of their fleet to produce smaller vehicles. The regulations include a credit system to provide "flexibility" in compliance if they exceed targets, or want to trade credits between companies. The regulations also propose incentives to give double credits for companies that introduce advanced technologies, including electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles which run on hydrogen. Prentice has criticized the Quebec government for introducing its own regulations this year to crack down on tailpipe standards, describing it as a "folly." But Quebec Environment Minister Line Beauchamp indicated on Thursday that her government intended to stick with its plan if the joint Canadian and U.S. standards fall short of meeting the California standards. California has also decided to sign an equivalency agreement with the U.S. government that delays the pace of its originally proposed standards by one year. Meantime, Quebec has said that its regulations also include fewer loopholes and more stringent reporting requirements for industry than what the Harper government has proposed. The Harper government said it will adopt its new regulations by this summer, following a two-month public consultation period. Prentice's announcement comes one day after the government cancelled an incentive program for home renovations to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions. The program was also previously cancelled by the government in 2006 but restored under a new name, one year later following public criticism. With files from Kevin Dougherty (Montreal Gazette) and Marianne White (Canwest News Service). |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
On Apr 1, 8:00*pm, "Jerry Okamura" > wrote:
> Translation: *The people who are going to get hurt the most are the very > people that democrats say they care most about, those who are poor and those > who are on the lower end of the wage scale. > But, if th Democrats increase taxes to the top 5% income, and also reduce the 800 billion dollars military budget by 70%, they could give some money back to those families with an anual income of 50K or less. VV |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
The article does not mention anything about $5000-$10,000 increase in cost for cars. Google does not show anything either on the subject of this post, other than a publication on carbon credits http://www.carboncreditcapital.com/r...%20English.pdf So it's petty clear that you pulled that number out of your hat (or a less appropriate place). Others already showed the source of the article, which shows that the actual number is $434 extra per vehicle in the 2012 model year and $926 per vehicle by 2016, and car owners would save more than $3,000 over the lives of their vehicles through better gas mileage. Rob |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Rob Dekker" > wrote:
> The article does not mention anything about $5000-$10,000 increase in cost > for cars. > Google does not show anything either on the subject of this post, other than > a publication on carbon creditshttp://www.carboncreditcapital.com/resources/Climate%20Change%20Intro... > > So it's petty clear that *you pulled that number out of your hat (or a less > appropriate place). > > Others already showed the source of the article, which shows that the actual > number is $434 extra per vehicle in the 2012 model year and $926 per vehicle > by 2016, and car owners would save more than $3,000 over the lives of their > vehicles through better gas mileage. > > Rob Seat belts were supposed to cost us thousands of dollars too. But they were cheaper than air bags. My first car was a bloody '58 Ford. No padded dashboard. No lap belts. I'm sure that the manufacturers said that such things would drive the cost of an automobile out of range in those days. If buddy want's a cheap car, there are **** pits made in India for nothing. Windshield wipers are optional http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxWq9bKRmc0 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
On Apr 1, 7:43*pm, Joe > wrote:
> "New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars" > > "The rules will cost consumers an estimated $434 extra per vehicle in > the 2012 model year and $926 per vehicle by 2016, the government said. > But the heads of the Transportation Department and Environmental > Protection Agency said car owners would save more than $3,000 over the > lives of their vehicles through better gas mileage." > > New Mileage Rules: Pay More for Cars, Less at Pump > More miles on less fuel: Gov't efficiency standards will mean higher > car prices, fuel savings > The Associated Press > By KEN THOMAS Associated Press Writer > WASHINGTON April 1, 2010 (AP) > > http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10257074 You're a complete asshole. You know nothing about advanced, modern day auto racing tech, and the notion that the emission idea will cost so much is clearly bull****, pulled out of some bloggers **** stained rear end. What are the credentials of the person who wrote that ****? Where is the evidence? If you're that gullible, you are a proven fool. And so are those who you use as "credit" ****. It's morons like you who are still upset that NASCAR is planning a move to fuel injection. As if it's some fancy new technology, when they've been running carburetors since day one. You're the same ass hat who claims that BHP is reduced by using Ethanol, or Methanol. Distort, distort, distort. Face it Rich, all you know about an automobile is sitting your fat ass in the seat, and turning the key. Stupid ****ing hillbillies. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
On 2010-04-02, Harold Gleason > wrote:
> I'm sure that the manufacturers said that such things would drive the > cost of an automobile out of range in those days. No. They said they wouldn't sell and the reason was because ford (and others) tried to sell seat belts and other safety items as options. People wouldn't buy them back then. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars
On Apr 1, 8:00*pm, "Jerry Okamura" > wrote:
> Translation: *The people who are going to get hurt the most are the very > people that democrats say they care most about, those who are poor and those > who are on the lower end of the wage scale. Translation, Jerry accepts the bull ****, and pretends to care. It's all political to Jerry O. Now! If this came from the mouth of Bush, McCain or Palin. Jerry wouldn't be involved in this discussion. Jerry is loyal. Where is the evidence? Not some right wing crap. Hell, even $24 Trillion's cite said no such thing as New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for car He made it up, you moron. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Korea Trade Pact: No Easy Ride for Detroit | MoPar Man | Chrysler | 0 | November 19th 08 11:47 PM |
GM: Emission law may hamper muscle cars | Paddy's Pig | Auto Photos | 1 | December 20th 07 07:46 PM |
Compressed Air powered, zero emission cars - for $6.5K each | RH | Technology | 255 | October 20th 06 06:07 PM |
Compressed Air Powered, zero emission cars | Rodan | Technology | 1 | October 12th 06 11:48 PM |