Results 1 to 43 of 43

Thread: SUV sales continue to soar - 70% of Canaidan sales now light trucks

  1. #1

    Default SUV sales continue to soar - 70% of Canaidan sales now light trucks

    I'm not really surprised, world consumption of gasoline is increasing, not decreasing, despite all the electric car / green talk.

    That’s certainly not the case with gas-loving SUVs. DesRosiers Automotive Consultants last week reported that light truck sales — which include SUVs as well as pickups — accounted for a record 70 per cent of total sales in Canada during October. Nearly 1.2 million light trucks have been sold so far this year, a 10 per cent increase from 2016.

    Dennis DesRosiers expects light truck sales could still increase in Canada even though oil prices are rising, along with gas prices.

    “There will be something that will alter the market dynamics at some point, but it looks like it still has some upside,” he said. “I think next year there is a very high probability of light truck sales hitting 70 per cent on a regular basis.”

    At the same time, passenger car sales have been declining, with sales off eight per cent in October, according to DesRosiers, while light truck sales increased by nearly 14 per cent.

    “I don’t think anyone saw how much of a tidal wave this shift has been. It’s been quick, and it’s been dramatic,” said Michelle Krebs, a senior analyst with Autotrader.com. “This is not just a trend. This is a total shift in the market, and it isn’t just in Canada and the U.S. It’s in China, it’s in Western Europe, it’s everywhere.”
    http://business.financialpost.com/tr...ng-of-the-road

    I expect if you took Quebec out (where they like "chick" cars, like the Honda S2000), and B.C. where all the environmentalists live, or just looked at Alberta, the number would be even higher, I would guess at 85% or more of new auto purchases.

    I have an Explorer, which I really like, but I'm thinking a bit about the new Aluminum Expeditions.
    Last edited by moahunter; 08-11-2017 at 03:27 PM.

  2. #2
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,686

    Default

    (where they like "chick" cars, like the Honda S2000)

    Adorable you are.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  3. #3

  4. #4

    Default

    I'll buy a subcompact again when I get the impression that many drivers here on the road are not getting their Drivers Licences from Cereal box tops..

    Until then its big beefy SUV's.

    One recent year 24% of "accidents" in Edmonton involved stationary objects. Tells you everything you need to know right there.

    Hey, when are they going to institute distracted driver cameras and start handing out violations. Its the most dangerous thing out there.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  5. #5

    Default



    Interesting to see comparisons.

    http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/fcr-rcf/public/index-e.cfm
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  6. #6
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,500

    Default

    You know you're living in Alberta if you are deemed a girly car driver for not tooling around in either a RAM-sized truck or an oversized SUV. Scrubbing the red from people's necks will take a while, no doubt.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    I'm not really surprised, world consumption of gasoline is increasing, not decreasing, despite all the electric car / green talk.
    My "gas guzzling SUV" is better on gas than any of the cars I've ever owned. So take a hike with your BS.

    For the record, it's a Santa Fe Sport. A whopping MASSIVE 2.0L engine. It's all but assured that my next vehicle - be it car, SUV, whatever - will be at least a hybrid if not entirely electric.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  8. #8
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    The statistics are being distorted by calling all SUVs, even compact crossovers, "light trucks". Consumer preferences haven't changed that much when you consider that a crossover is really just a jacked up station wagon with AWD.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    The statistics are being distorted by calling all SUVs, even compact crossovers, "light trucks". Consumer preferences haven't changed that much when you consider that a crossover is really just a jacked up station wagon with AWD.
    And those really small CUV's like the CX-3 and such are compacts or sub-compacts that ride a whopping 4" higher and have slightly higher rooflines. moa makes is sound like everyone's driving a Suburban or something.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    The statistics are being distorted by calling all SUVs, even compact crossovers, "light trucks". Consumer preferences haven't changed that much when you consider that a crossover is really just a jacked up station wagon with AWD.
    Understood - but everyone is upsizing to the "SUV", or "Crossover", equivalent. So someone who might have purchased a Corolla that gets 34MPG today, instead gets a Toyota CH-R which gets 29MPG. Its upgrading across the board - sedans are basically disappearing except a few niche buyers.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    And those really small CUV's like the CX-3 and such are compacts or sub-compacts that ride a whopping 4" higher and have slightly higher rooflines. moa makes is sound like everyone's driving a Suburban or something.
    All it takes is a few minor tweaks & you can make what's obviously a passenger vehicle into what qualifies as a light truck & bypass the American gas guzzler tax. It's not as cut & dried in Canada with the green levy, but it definitely has a huge impact on the makeup of the North American market.

    Heck, the PT Cruiser was a "light truck" to the EPA & was cancelled once the loopholes that made it a viable part of their lineup were closed.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  12. #12
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    ^ Yes, the current US fuel economy standards are very poorly designed, allowing passenger vehicles to be called "trucks" just because they are jacked up, and then applying much looser standards to "trucks" than to "cars". I'm hoping Trump will kill them so his successor can start over with something better. Fuel consumption standards should be based only on the capabilities of the vehicle (passenger seating positions, payload capacity, towing capacity), not on its physical dimentions.

  13. #13

    Default

    ^ Even that's not ideal, since most of those 6 & 7 seaters spend most of their time with just one or two on board, just like a smart car. And most of pickup trucks spend most of their time with nothing more than a few sandbags in the bed.
    There can only be one.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^ Even that's not ideal, since most of those 6 & 7 seaters spend most of their time with just one or two on board, just like a smart car. And most of pickup trucks spend most of their time with nothing more than a few sandbags in the bed.
    Honda designed the new Ridgeline to meet the needs of 95% of pickup owners. The RAM crowd thinks they're wimpy, but the reality is that the significant majority never utilize the payload or haul capacities of their pickups, ever. It's form over function. Driving pickups is mostly a fashion statement.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  15. #15

    Default

    While we're here.

    One reason I drive an SUV. Hyundai Santa Fe is I need enough towing jam to haul our Tent Trailer. The 6 I have has plenty horsepower for that. Barely uses any extra gas mileage while towing. I love that tent trailers don't weigh much and don't have appreciable wind drag and handle well, properly hitched..

    I'm in the market for a new SUV soon enough. Would like one that guzzles a bit less gas but can still haul in the range of 1-2K lbs. Any recommendations out there. Also for dealerships that might do me a favor on throw in trailer package or any that have that off the lot?

    I like Hyundai, Kia, but would go any direction as long as normal raised cab SUV. I like to see in front and back easy. Don't like the lower to the pavement models.
    Last edited by Replacement; 09-11-2017 at 02:30 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  16. #16

    Default

    Can you wait 2 years? Half of the world's automakers are rolling out hybrid/EV everything. I expect when I'm done with my Santa Fe I'll have lots of hybrid SUV options, though I might look at a wagon/hatch with roof rack this time around.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^ Even that's not ideal, since most of those 6 & 7 seaters spend most of their time with just one or two on board, just like a smart car. And most of pickup trucks spend most of their time with nothing more than a few sandbags in the bed.
    Honda designed the new Ridgeline to meet the needs of 95% of pickup owners. The RAM crowd thinks they're wimpy, but the reality is that the significant majority never utilize the payload or haul capacities of their pickups, ever. It's form over function. Driving pickups is mostly a fashion statement.
    The Ridgeline gets 22mpg combined. The Ford F150 gets 22mpg combined. In AWD the Ridgeline is marginally better (1 MPG). So why compromise? They are essentially the same, but you get a bigger more capable vehicle for the same fuel economy / money with the F150. From a logical perspective, its the Ridgeline that is the fashion statement ("I'm not one of those truck dickheads so I drive a smaller vehicle, even though it isn't any better for the environment").

    The improvements come in part thanks to standard auto stop/start technology and a new 10-speed automatic that comes with most models. At its most efficient, the gas-powered F-150 achieves an impressive 20/26/22 mpg city/highway/combined.

    If you recall, a naturally aspirated 3.3-liter V-6 replaced the base 3.5-liter engine for the 2017 model year. The new engine produces 290 hp and 265 lb-ft of torque, an increase of 8 hp and 12 lb-ft. Models powering just the rear wheels receive a boost of 2 mpg in combined fuel economy, hitting 19/25/22 mpg. Four-wheel-drive models are rated 18/23/20 mpg, up 1 mpg combined from the 2017 model
    http://www.motortrend.com/news/2018-...bers-revealed/

    According to the feds, the front-wheel-drive Ridgeline will achieve 19 mpg city, 26 mpg highway and 22 mpg combined. Move up to all-wheel drive, and you only lose 1 mpg in each of the categories, for a rating of 18 city, 25 highway and 21 combined.
    https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/2...-size-pickups/

    As to hybrids, I had a Hybrid Lexus 400h, I liked it a lot. But it didn't really get any better fuel economy than my Explorer (especially not in highway driving which I do quite a bit of, and not in winter when the performance of the battery would drop). The extra weight of the battery makes the benefit fuel economy wise marginal - I did like the extra "pep" the electric motor gave though.
    Last edited by moahunter; 09-11-2017 at 04:22 PM.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Can you wait 2 years? Half of the world's automakers are rolling out hybrid/EV everything. I expect when I'm done with my Santa Fe I'll have lots of hybrid SUV options, though I might look at a wagon/hatch with roof rack this time around.
    As long as the engine or transaxle doesn't crap out I'm in no hurry. I love the Santa Fe line. Always have. Is Hyundai going with those hybrid platforms as well? Haven't been on a lot in quite awhile.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  19. #19

    Default

    The Sonata is already available as a plug-in hybrid, iirc.

    (Not sure if it's available here in Alberta, but it's in some US states)
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  20. #20

    Default

    Hyundai also has the Ioniq, which comes in Hybrid, PHEV, and EV flavours. Over on the Kia lot, they have the small Niro CUV hybrid.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^ Even that's not ideal, since most of those 6 & 7 seaters spend most of their time with just one or two on board, just like a smart car. And most of pickup trucks spend most of their time with nothing more than a few sandbags in the bed.
    Honda designed the new Ridgeline to meet the needs of 95% of pickup owners. The RAM crowd thinks they're wimpy, but the reality is that the significant majority never utilize the payload or haul capacities of their pickups, ever. It's form over function. Driving pickups is mostly a fashion statement.
    A fashion stmt? Not in my experience. Anyone that I’ve known have used their pickups for hauling stuff, towing, etc.

    I used my Ford Excursion (an F250 with a cap) a number of times this year and each time hauling stuff.

  22. #22

    Default

    Unless it's a second or third vehicle a truck that gets used for hauling a couple times a month will basically be massively oversized and doing a job a smartcard could do.

    I've had 2,000lb loads in my semi-retired minivan several times this fall but that doesn't mean I need a truck.
    There can only be one.

  23. #23

    Default

    I really don't haul anything and I find the older I get the bigger a vehicle I like.
    Comfort over speed is my new motto.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^ Even that's not ideal, since most of those 6 & 7 seaters spend most of their time with just one or two on board, just like a smart car. And most of pickup trucks spend most of their time with nothing more than a few sandbags in the bed.
    Honda designed the new Ridgeline to meet the needs of 95% of pickup owners. The RAM crowd thinks they're wimpy, but the reality is that the significant majority never utilize the payload or haul capacities of their pickups, ever. It's form over function. Driving pickups is mostly a fashion statement.
    A fashion stmt? Not in my experience. Anyone that I’ve known have used their pickups for hauling stuff, towing, etc.

    I used my Ford Excursion (an F250 with a cap) a number of times this year and each time hauling stuff.
    I'll take Honda's research before spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a vehicle design and launch over your anecdotal experience.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  25. #25

    Default

    There is a reason the F150 is the top auto sold in Canada - if you get over the fact that its not a girly truck, its incredibly practical, and it actually gets fuel economy ratings as or better than most mini-vans and SUV's. The RAM, and Chevy Trucks also get good fuel economy, at the end of the day, a V6 is a V6, is a V6, while weight has some impact, they consume similar amounts of fuel. Ford, GM and Dodge pump a ton of money into R&D for their Trucks. That's why you see technology like Aluminum being used - an F150 (which has been called the billion dollar bet with respect to the Aluminum chassis) has way more technology than a Ridgeline, because its a more important vehicle to Ford than the Ridgeline is to Honda.
    Last edited by moahunter; 10-11-2017 at 12:37 PM.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^ Even that's not ideal, since most of those 6 & 7 seaters spend most of their time with just one or two on board, just like a smart car. And most of pickup trucks spend most of their time with nothing more than a few sandbags in the bed.
    Honda designed the new Ridgeline to meet the needs of 95% of pickup owners. The RAM crowd thinks they're wimpy, but the reality is that the significant majority never utilize the payload or haul capacities of their pickups, ever. It's form over function. Driving pickups is mostly a fashion statement.
    A fashion stmt? Not in my experience. Anyone that I’ve known have used their pickups for hauling stuff, towing, etc.

    I used my Ford Excursion (an F250 with a cap) a number of times this year and each time hauling stuff.
    I'll take Honda's research before spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a vehicle design and launch over your anecdotal experience.
    Honda’s research says they are a fashion statement? Where?

    Yes, most of the time they are being used to commute. That doesn’t mean people buy them as a “fashion statement”.

    Do you have air conditioning? Leather seats? A trunk? Two rows of seats? What percent of the time do people use a lot of the weight adding and otherwise wasteful features in their vehicles?

    Go camping and you’ll see all kinds of people towing 5th wheels. They aren’t jetting it around the world but are towing a trailer for which they need a pick up.

    2017 Honda Ridgeline Touring Test Drive Review - Wheaton Honda: New & Used Honda Dealer In Edmonton

    “They just need some of the utility those trucks offer, but for 95% of the time, are just commuting with these big, inefficient and uncomfortable beasts. And so its Ridgeline was their way of saying “Hey, it’s OK to be one of those who don’t need all the brawn of regular trucks” – and they got a lot of it right. Unfortunately the styling department didn’t do as well in the first go-around.”

    https://www.wheatonhonda.com/2017/01...-drive-review/

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Unless it's a second or third vehicle a truck that gets used for hauling a couple times a month will basically be massively oversized and doing a job a smartcard could do.

    I've had 2,000lb loads in my semi-retired minivan several times this fall but that doesn't mean I need a truck.
    I guess we should all park our vehicles, unless they are Smart cars and take the bus, call a taxi, ride a motorcycle or bike, etc. 95% of our travel is always commuting. We can rent 4 seaters, sedans, trucks etc as needed.

    If you’re exceeding the GVWR of your vehicle, aren’t you potentially breaking the law and endangering innocent people?

    We had a Honda Minivan. Incredible load capacity by volume that must have far exceeded my Excursion’s volume. Couldn’t safety tow much more than our 10’ tent trailer. 95% of the time we drove it with 1/3-1/2 or less the passenger capacity. It even ended up photographed downtown in an anti-SUV Edmonton Journal article.

    However I recently hauled a couple loads in the truck that included 12’ 6x6s, 4x6s, and 24 12’ 2x6s. Two trips, a couple thousand dollars worth of PT wood. The purpose was to build supports out at our cabin under our bridge over the creek. Why? To save the bridge and avoid having to blast the beaver dam and shoot or trap the beavers. So I burned a few extra litres of gas and used up some trees, to save some rodents. Am I anti-environment for having a truck?
    Last edited by KC; 10-11-2017 at 12:56 PM.

  28. #28

    Default

    I actually don't know what the law is for GVWR. I wasn't unsafe since the vehicle brakes can handle more than GVWR if I had a utility trailer, and I don't think I broke 50 on any of those trips.

    There was a time not long ago when people were far more likely to rent or borrow a truck if the needed one only rarely, and would buy a camper based on the vehicle they already owned, not buy a big truck just to haul the biggest 5th wheel. And I would say that the way we did things then was better.

    I tow a tent trailer, because my minivans can handle it. I'm actually looking to downsize and we travel with 5 kids.
    There can only be one.

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I actually don't know what the law is for GVWR. I wasn't unsafe since the vehicle brakes can handle more than GVWR if I had a utility trailer, and I don't think I broke 50 on any of those trips.

    There was a time not long ago when people were far more likely to rent or borrow a truck if the needed one only rarely, and would buy a camper based on the vehicle they already owned, not buy a big truck just to haul the biggest 5th wheel. And I would say that the way we did things then was better.

    I tow a tent trailer, because my minivans can handle it. I'm actually looking to downsize and we travel with 5 kids.
    We tented for almost 20 years (Celica, Mazda 626, etc). However had a Chev suburban that I only used on tenting trip - once and only once! Pure hell driving it around. Trucks then and even still now are crappy things to drive. Minivans also. Should have their speeds limited to 110.

    In the 90s bought an Toyota 4Runner SUV and took it to Alaska and it was **** as well. Much rather have taken a sporty car. The dealer replaced the rear springs under warranty when we got back. It couldn’t handle the roads. A total pig of a vehicle too. A minivan would have been a better camping vehicle except they can’t go off basic roads.
    Last edited by KC; 10-11-2017 at 01:24 PM.

  30. #30
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II
    and we travel with 5 kids


    Thanks for the contact migraine.

  31. #31
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Go camping and you’ll see all kinds of people towing 5th wheels. They aren’t jetting it around the world but are towing a trailer for which they need a pick up.
    And every time I see that I wonder why they are spending all of that money on a big trailer, a big vehicle to haul it, gas to run it, and often an expensive (and small) RV campsite with hookups, instead of driving a car and booking a hotel. If you like camping, get a tent or a tent trailer. If you don't like camping, why pretend that you do?

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Go camping and you’ll see all kinds of people towing 5th wheels. They aren’t jetting it around the world but are towing a trailer for which they need a pick up.
    And every time I see that I wonder why they are spending all of that money on a big trailer, a big vehicle to haul it, gas to run it, and often an expensive (and small) RV campsite with hookups, instead of driving a car and booking a hotel. If you like camping, get a tent or a tent trailer. If you don't like camping, why pretend that you do?
    Just ask any couple with a trailer. They’ve probably all tented as well.

  33. #33
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Go camping and you’ll see all kinds of people towing 5th wheels. They aren’t jetting it around the world but are towing a trailer for which they need a pick up.
    And every time I see that I wonder why they are spending all of that money on a big trailer, a big vehicle to haul it, gas to run it, and often an expensive (and small) RV campsite with hookups, instead of driving a car and booking a hotel. If you like camping, get a tent or a tent trailer. If you don't like camping, why pretend that you do?
    I've got a big group of friends that go camping at Whistlers in Jasper a couple times a year. It's a mix of single guys like myself who are in small tents, to families with 2-3 kids and big 5th wheels. I can totally understand why the families have trailers, although it does seem like some of them are a bit overkill. It can be a nightmare with young kids (or dogs) sleeping in tents. One couple with 2 boys has one of those R-Pod trailers, and that seems like a nice middle ground, although it might be a bit limiting once their boys get older (they're 3+5 right now). But even for the people in the big 5th wheels, staying in a hotel just isn't the same thing. The kids can't run around and play outside all day, you can't have a campfire at night, and so on.

    I just like the fact that I can show up with no food and mooch off all the families with their built in BBQ's and pizza ovens etc. And when it's pouring rain I certainly don't complain about their gigantic pull out awnings.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 10-11-2017 at 03:42 PM.

  34. #34

    Default

    Ad always: nothing’s simple


    How toxic is your car exhaust? - BBC News

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/...ur_car_exhaust


    “The moment of truth arrives in the form of an Excel document. Nick Molden is on the phone to talk me through it.
    “Both cars have stats that are directly comparable with each other and our wider data set,” he begins. “Hopefully it's an interesting result.”

    “Go on, then,” I think. It’s taken a long time to get this far, and the suspense is killing me.

    First I must scroll horizontally across a document listing fuel efficiency, CO2 emissions, NOx and carbon monoxide emissions.

    There are no values for the particulates here - those results have not come back yet, he says.

    NOx is the big one. And there is a clear winner: the diesel.

    Although diesels are castigated for being the big offenders as regards NOx, it’s not that simple.

    ...”

    For diesel cars it’s 45.0mpg. A side-effect of this is that they produce less CO2, so there was some logic in Gordon Brown’s measures to promote the sale of diesels.“...


    And here it gets interesting. In fact it gets downright controversial.

    Nick clears his throat.

    ...”




    Last edited by KC; 10-11-2017 at 03:48 PM.

  35. #35

    Default

    On my high horse as an an infrequent flier, I think people should stop some of their wasteful foreign trips and vacations. Possibly 95% of it could be done by phone and looking at photos on the internet... ;/)


    Air travel and climate change - David Suzuki Foundation
    September 2017

    Excerpt:
    “Although aviation is a relatively small industry, it has a disproportionately large impact on the climate system. It accounts for four to nine per cent of the total climate change impact of human activity.
    But at a time when we urgently need to reduce our impact, greenhouse gas emissions from aviation continue to grow. For example, since 1990, CO2 emissions from international aviation have increased 83 per cent. The aviation industry is expanding rapidly in part due to regulatory and taxing policies that do not reflect the true environmental costs of flying. “Cheap” fares may turn out to be costly in terms of climate change.

    How do greenhouse gas emissions from flying compare with emissions from other forms of transport, like driving?

    Compared to other modes of transport, such as driving or taking the train, travelling by air has a greater climate impact per passenger kilometre, even over longer distances (see graph below). It’s also the mode of freight transport that produces the most emissions. “

    https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can...limate-change/

  36. #36

    Default

    That would explain Mr. Suzuki's unwillingness to fly across the world giving speeches.
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  37. #37
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    ^^^ You missed the most important part of that long and rambling article:
    So why are diesels managing to pass strict limits in the lab while producing high levels of emissions on the road?

    It’s all down to the New European Driving Cycle - the laboratory process in place in Europe since 1997 - says Anup Bandivadekar, passenger vehicles director at the International Council on Clean Transportation.

    This puts cars through a test involving steady acceleration, constant speed driving and steady deceleration. It bears no relation to how people actually drive, Bandivadekar says.

    This narrow focus has made it easy to game the system, he says.
    More poorly thought out regulations.

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^^^ You missed the most important part of that long and rambling article:
    So why are diesels managing to pass strict limits in the lab while producing high levels of emissions on the road?

    It’s all down to the New European Driving Cycle - the laboratory process in place in Europe since 1997 - says Anup Bandivadekar, passenger vehicles director at the International Council on Clean Transportation.

    This puts cars through a test involving steady acceleration, constant speed driving and steady deceleration. It bears no relation to how people actually drive, Bandivadekar says.

    This narrow focus has made it easy to game the system, he says.
    More poorly thought out regulations.
    Nope, didn’t miss it. Can’t quote the whole article for total clarity. In fact this quote is also very important:

    “Five of my dad's Skodas would produce less NOx than this version of the Qashqai.”



    Another article:

    Fact Check: are diesel cars really more polluting than petrol cars?

    Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London

    Diesel cars have recently become subject to considerable negative publicity thanks to the amount of toxic emissions they produce. Some governments are planning to discourage their use or even ban them from urban areas altogether. Yet some diesel car owners have reacted angrily, arguing they bought the vehicles because they were supposedly the environmentally friendly option.

    Diesel was promoted as a more environmentally friendly fuel as part of the EU’s response to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO₂). Diesel engines are “lean-burn”, meaning they use less fuel and more air to get the same performance as a petrol engine.

    So, while diesel fuel contains slightly more carbon (2.68kg CO₂/litre) than petrol (2.31kg CO₂/litre), overall CO₂ emissions of a diesel car tend to be lower. In use, on average, this equates to around 200g CO₂/km for petrol and 120g CO₂/km for diesel.

    But even when governments were promoting diesel cars, we knew ...”


    http://theconversation.com/fact-chec...rol-cars-76241
    bolding mine
    Last edited by KC; 10-11-2017 at 05:27 PM.

  39. #39

    Default

    Factor of 6 +

    Evolving climate math of flying vs. driving » Yale Climate Connections

    Thus, the total plane-related “radiative forcing” – a measure of the varying influences on climate change – goes way beyond just carbon dioxide spewed from engines. Aviation emissions have strong and immediate effects. Indeed, a 2010 study from researchers at the University of Oslo’s International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis found that “short-lived climate factors” make a decisive difference in terms of mode comparisons:

    Air travel results in a lower temperature change per passenger-kilometer than car travel on the long run; the integrated radiative forcing of air travel is on short- to medium time horizons much higher than for car travel. Per passenger-hour traveled however, aviation’s climate impact is a factor 6 to 47 higher than the impact from car travel.
    https://www.yaleclimateconnections.o...ng-vs-driving/
    Bolding mine

  40. #40

    Default

    “fashion statement”

    Why Automakers Keep Beating Government Standards - Scientific American

    “DeCicco thinks that automakers may be designing more pickup trucks to be heavier, so that they fall above that 8,500 pound limit. “There are a lot of cars on the road that people are using, like the Ford F-250 Super Duty, that are fashion statements,” says DeCicco. “I would suspect that if you really counted the whole population of personal vehicles … fuel economy may have started to go back down.” DeCicco notes that he can’t confirm this, because the EPA doesn’t release those numbers, but he has monitored the industry for decades. “I know that the sales of those vehicles have been doing great,” he explains. ...”

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ent-standards/
    Bolding is mine

  41. #41
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    ^ More bad standards. Why should there be a cutoff between "work" and "personal" vehicles? Anything that gets used on public roads should meet the same standards. Even if there was a good reason for the cutoff, basing it on empty vehicle weight instead of payload and towing capacity is inviting gaming of the system.

    Basing fuel efficiency standards on vehicle capability rather than size would be a start. That would need to be combined with measures that penalize people who buy larger vehicles than they really need. Higher fuel taxes, increased registration charges for larger vehicles, increased insurance premiums for larger vehicles (and corresponding savings for smaller vehicles).

  42. #42

    Default

    Either way it's artificial.

    Ditch fuel economy standards completely and increase the carbon tax by an order of magnitude and with no exceptions*, "revenue neutral" by handing it all back per-capita as a beginner gauranteed annual income.

    *Yes I know some sectors operate in global markets wheresuch a tax would be counterproductive, and send production elsewhere. But this is already pie-in-sky, so imagine it applies globally, or something.
    There can only be one.

  43. #43

    Default

    Hey, maybe a carbon tax.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •