"Hybrid" Cars

[B. Max]

How is one going to pull a fith wheeler with a mini van. The pick up plants in this country could end up closing. Along with all the holiday trailer plants. If anything this little commie experiment will keep the older ones on the roads for many more years than they might have other wise been. This country could start looking like cuba.

Trucks (pick ups) are exempt.

I stand corrected again. Thankfully.

[geoffrey]

I honestly can't see how a government can justify giving someone $2000 to pollute when I ride my bike to work most of the time. Harper should be buying me a couple of bikes if he's giving someone $2000 to buy a Ford Escape SUV hybrid.

Funny thing. The Canadian government actually slaps a massive import duty on completely bicycles made outside of Canada... a bike tax. So we tax bikes, but give people breaks to buy SUV's with a Hybrid sticker.

Hmm.

[Wilber]

Funny thing. The Canadian government actually slaps a massive import duty on completely bicycles made outside of Canada... a bike tax. So we tax bikes, but give people breaks to buy SUV's with a Hybrid sticker.

Hmm.

If there are going to be incentives, they shouldn't be based on whether or it is a hybrid but actual mileage. A hybrid which gets 30 MPG is polluting just as much as any other vehicle that gets 30 MPG.

The bike tax is pure protectionism.

[August1991]

I honestly can't see how a government can justify giving someone $2000 to pollute when I ride my bike to work most of the time. Harper should be buying me a couple of bikes if he's giving someone $2000 to buy a Ford Escape SUV hybrid.

Exactly.

If the government is going to get into environmental policy, it should decide what is bad and tax it or put tradeable caps on it.

Subsidizing "alternative vehicles" is just a subsidy to a few people who want to be different, according to the way the government has decided. The government chooses policy by what's "cool".

[blueblood]

Funny thing. The Canadian government actually slaps a massive import duty on completely bicycles made outside of Canada... a bike tax. So we tax bikes, but give people breaks to buy SUV's with a Hybrid sticker.

Hmm.

If there are going to be incentives, they shouldn't be based on whether or it is a hybrid but actual mileage. A hybrid which gets 30 MPG is polluting just as much as any other vehicle that gets 30 MPG.

The bike tax is pure protectionism.

Why not take that incentive for purchasing hybrids and invest that into making bike paths throughout Canadian cities and launching a massive ad campaign, it would be a lot better for the environment.

[Wilber]

Why not take that incentive for purchasing hybrids and invest that into making bike paths throughout Canadian cities and launching a massive ad campaign, it would be a lot better for the environment.

Bike paths are great but not everyone lives in cities. A lot of people really do need vehicles. I don't have a problem with discouraging people from using unnecessarily inefficient vehicles and using that money to encourage the use of more efficient vehicles.

[blueblood]

Why not take that incentive for purchasing hybrids and invest that into making bike paths throughout Canadian cities and launching a massive ad campaign, it would be a lot better for the environment.

Bike paths are great but not everyone lives in cities. A lot of people really do need vehicles. I don't have a problem with discouraging people from using unnecessarily inefficient vehicles and using that money to encourage the use of more efficient vehicles.

Most people do live in cities though, do a lot of them really need vehicles? I on the other hand NEED a 3/4 ton, and am happy that I don't have to pay a tax if I want to buy a newer one.

[na85]

I live in a city and I need a vehicle. Public transit in London is horrible. There's no subway (we're not big enough, which is fine), the buses are unreliable and don't stick to a schedule, and the bus routes aren't efficient. It takes me half an hour to take the bus to my dentist, but only 5 or 10 minutes to drive there. Go figure :/

[Wilber]

Most people do live in cities though, do a lot of them really need vehicles? I on the other hand NEED a 3/4 ton, and am happy that I don't have to pay a tax if I want to buy a newer one.

The nearest bus stop to my house is nearly a mile away and they only run every half hour. I also need a HD pickup. If a 4K tax were to be applied to new ones, the old one would just have to stay on the road a lot longer.

[weaponeer]

Here's an idea... Instead of banning and taxing SUVs, why don't we build a better SUV. Why can't we build a Chev Trailblazer, Ford Excursion, Hummer that can tow 8000 ilb, has 300 hp, has torque and power but gets 1500 km's to a tank. Why can't we build a Corvette, Ford Mustang, BMW 700 series that can go fast, is fun to drive, yet gets 2000 kms a tank.

We build ships that do not have to be refuelled for 15 years, battery powered submarines can stay underwater for weeks. Why can't we build these vehicles. SUV's are great, why can't we build better ones.

[Charles Anthony]

SUV's are great, why can't we build better ones.

Who exactly do you mean by "we"?

If you are asking for a government subsidy, the answer is NO.

[weaponeer]

SUV's are great, why can't we build better ones.

Who exactly do you mean by "we"?

If you are asking for a government subsidy, the answer is NO.

We, I mean western countries/companies. GM, Ford etc...... Why can't they build better SUV's, all the enviro requirnments, plus the power and fun.

SUVs are not the prob, just make them better. As for subsidy, no way, they should sell themselves.

[geoffrey]

Why not take that incentive for purchasing hybrids and invest that into making bike paths throughout Canadian cities and launching a massive ad campaign, it would be a lot better for the environment.

Bike paths are great but not everyone lives in cities. A lot of people really do need vehicles. I don't have a problem with discouraging people from using unnecessarily inefficient vehicles and using that money to encourage the use of more efficient vehicles.

Just a note from the cycling community on bike paths... they are actually a death trap. Your statistically much more likely to be injured on a bike path then on a road. What we need to do is make cheap changes to our roads and traffic laws to make cycling safer, and then encourage it a little more through either a stick or carrot approach.

Bike paths have ridiculous speed limits of 15km/h and the such to accomodate the pedestrians with a death wish. It'd take me as long to get to work then if I was driving if I had to ride that slow. On my road bike, I can comfortably keep it around 35km an hour... a not too shabby one-ish hour commute in a city with a disgusting traffic conundrum.

Riding on the highways outside of Calgary and some of the routes within Calgary (I obviously don't ride on the super busy roads), I have noticed an absolute arrogance of drivers towards cyclists. I've had hot coffees tossed at me, honked, sworn at, just for riding on the road... not even being in anyone's way. I had a massive RV pass me within inches on the highway... a four lane divided highway with 6 foot shoulders and this guy had to drive on the shoulder. Like what the hell?

People are in such a hurry to race towards the next red light or traffic congestion. Makes no sense to me.

IMO, most people are not mentally competent enough to operate a vehicle.

If there is any reason to not bike commute, amongst all the disincentives the government provides, it's the attitude of other road users.

I hear lots of excuses for people not to ride to work. "Oh, I need my car during the day." Well congratulations. I can actually tell you that most people that say this don't need their car, they are just too lazy to walk down the street for lunch and instead drive 2 blocks. Another strategy. Leave your car at work when your not using it in evenings (you can bike to the corner store pretty easy). I do this occasionally.

In my European experience, I've noticed alot more people cycling. What are they doing that we're not. Is it just the gas prices? I'd like to think no.

[blueblood]

Why not take that incentive for purchasing hybrids and invest that into making bike paths throughout Canadian cities and launching a massive ad campaign, it would be a lot better for the environment.

Bike paths are great but not everyone lives in cities. A lot of people really do need vehicles. I don't have a problem with discouraging people from using unnecessarily inefficient vehicles and using that money to encourage the use of more efficient vehicles.

Just a note from the cycling community on bike paths... they are actually a death trap. Your statistically much more likely to be injured on a bike path then on a road. What we need to do is make cheap changes to our roads and traffic laws to make cycling safer, and then encourage it a little more through either a stick or carrot approach.

Bike paths have ridiculous speed limits of 15km/h and the such to accomodate the pedestrians with a death wish. It'd take me as long to get to work then if I was driving if I had to ride that slow. On my road bike, I can comfortably keep it around 35km an hour... a not too shabby one-ish hour commute in a city with a disgusting traffic conundrum.

Riding on the highways outside of Calgary and some of the routes within Calgary (I obviously don't ride on the super busy roads), I have noticed an absolute arrogance of drivers towards cyclists. I've had hot coffees tossed at me, honked, sworn at, just for riding on the road... not even being in anyone's way. I had a massive RV pass me within inches on the highway... a four lane divided highway with 6 foot shoulders and this guy had to drive on the shoulder. Like what the hell?

People are in such a hurry to race towards the next red light or traffic congestion. Makes no sense to me.

IMO, most people are not mentally competent enough to operate a vehicle.

If there is any reason to not bike commute, amongst all the disincentives the government provides, it's the attitude of other road users.

I hear lots of excuses for people not to ride to work. "Oh, I need my car during the day." Well congratulations. I can actually tell you that most people that say this don't need their car, they are just too lazy to walk down the street for lunch and instead drive 2 blocks. Another strategy. Leave your car at work when your not using it in evenings (you can bike to the corner store pretty easy). I do this occasionally.

In my European experience, I've noticed alot more people cycling. What are they doing that we're not. Is it just the gas prices? I'd like to think no.

I'm saying they need bike paths better because from personal experience having a guy on the highway is a bloody accident waiting to happen. I've driven in cities, it's hard enough with a 3/4 ton let alone having to deal with a biker going much slower than the flow of traffic. Have bike paths and keep pedestrians off of it, they can walk off the path. Seeing cyclists on the highway drives me nuts especially when trucking grain, an overloaded super B doesn't stop on dimes!! Bikes and cars don't mix, neither do bikes and pedestrians.

I think it's arrogant that a guy on a bike has a god given right to slow traffic to a crawl, just because he wants to ride his bike in traffic. Make bike paths and put a stop to this madness.

[Wilber]

Why can't we build a Chev Trailblazer, Ford Excursion, Hummer that can tow 8000 ilb, has 300 hp, has torque and power but gets 1500 km's to a tank. Why can't we build a Corvette, Ford Mustang, BMW 700 series that can go fast, is fun to drive, yet gets 2000 kms a tank.

You can if you have a big enough tank. I'm sure we are going to see big improvements but it takes a lot of energy to make a lot of weight go fast, wherever it comes from.

[na85]

Why can't we build a Chev Trailblazer, Ford Excursion, Hummer that can tow 8000 ilb, has 300 hp, has torque and power but gets 1500 km's to a tank. Why can't we build a Corvette, Ford Mustang, BMW 700 series that can go fast, is fun to drive, yet gets 2000 kms a tank.

You can if you have a big enough tank. I'm sure we are going to see big improvements but it takes a lot of energy to make a lot of weight go fast, wherever it comes from.

The companies could easily build such vehicles, it's just that they won't until their current products stop selling, and consumer polls tell them it's due to environmental/mileage concerns.

[B. Max]

delete.

[Wilber]

The companies could easily build such vehicles, it's just that they won't until their current products stop selling, and consumer polls tell them it's due to environmental/mileage concerns.

It won't be easy. It takes a lot of energy to accelerate 5000 lbs rapidly or tow 8000 lbs. That energy has to come from somewhere and be converted into work. It's physics that has to be overcome with technology and economics to produce something practical and affordable.

[Saturn]

We, I mean western countries/companies. GM, Ford etc...... Why can't they build better SUV's, all the enviro requirnments, plus the power and fun.

SUVs are not the prob, just make them better. As for subsidy, no way, they should sell themselves.

Because keeping the status quo is way cheaper and easier than making changes. The technology for much more efficient cares is already available (and there is a lot of room for improvement) but neither the consumer, nor the producers want to pay for it. Now some producers are smarter than others and realize that paying their engineers to build better cars pays more than paying an army of lawyers and PR firms to fight environmental standards but some (read American car manufacturers) are still having difficulty coming to terms with reality.

[Mad_Michael]

Subsidies are just meddling in the marketplace.

Wannabe Soviet Central Planners in western nations use 'subsidies'.

The primary purpose of such a subsidy is so that the politicians may take public credit for doing something.

The primary function of such subsidies is to give taxpayer money away with no material benefit to the taxpayer.

The primary character of subsidies is that they prevent/hinder/impede against market innovation and that they are always permanent and always increase over time.

Perhaps we might start by removing all the tax subsidies that are given to the polluting automotive corporations themselves.

[madmax]

Perhaps we might start by removing all the tax subsidies that are given to the polluting automotive corporations themselves.

I thought the last CPC budget gave subsidies to the polluting oil sands which provides the fumes for the car?

Sooner or later we are going to have vehicles that are powered without current level emmissions. While I am a big fan of the combustion engine, their are many different types of power available. I wonder how I would think if the electric cars of the early 1900s had been produced like Model T's. They were popular for a limited time, but there where thousands of them. Would we be complaining of all these bad batteries and what to do with them?

Is the Hybrid Car going to come with a tire that can self dispose of itself .

[rrabbit]

I have to laugh at all this trashing around over automobiles! It bears an uncanny resemblance to addicts who know the drug is running out. All this talk of "alternative fuels" is just like an alcoholic at the point of hunting through the aisles in the grocery store for the Lysol display because Liquor Store is closed.

Face up to it now. The energy intensive North American lifestyle is just not sustainable on a finite planet. The great age of the automobile is in its twilight. Don't be a drunk switching over to Lysol or aftershave!

[Wilber]

I have to laugh at all this trashing around over automobiles! It bears an uncanny resemblance to addicts who know the drug is running out. All this talk of "alternative fuels" is just like an alcoholic at the point of hunting through the aisles in the grocery store for the Lysol display because Liquor Store is closed.

Face up to it now. The energy intensive North American lifestyle is just not sustainable on a finite planet. The great age of the automobile is in its twilight. Don't be a drunk switching over to Lysol or aftershave!

That may be so but you better have some viable alternatives in mind before you laugh too hard because your standard of living is built on it.

[August1991]

Government regulations. You can always find a way to get an SUV through.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's department made a last-minute change to the budget that allows cars built at the General Motors plant next to his riding to qualify for federal climate-change incentives even though environmentalists say the cars are gas guzzlers.

Government officials privately confirmed that as recently as one week before last Monday's federal budget was finalized, the rebates for fuel-efficient cars did not include vehicles with engines capable of running on E85, a gasoline made up of 85 per cent ethanol.

The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Globe and Mail that the Finance Department, rather than departments with policy expertise in the area, added two E85 vehicles in the final days.

The two six-cylinder vehicles, the Chevrolet Impala and the Monte Carlo, are produced at the GM plant in Oshawa, a riding narrowly won by the Conservatives in the past two elections. The plant is minutes away from Mr. Flaherty's riding of Whitby-Oshawa, where the local economy is closely linked to the GM plant, with many residents employed at GM or in spin-off jobs tied to the plant.

The budget said that vehicles running on E85 meet the standards required to qualify for $1,000 rebates because they emit 40 per cent less greenhouse gases than if they ran on regular fuel.

However, the federal government is not aware of a single gas station in Canada that sells E85 fuel to the public. As a result, Canadians who buy these cars will have to use regular gas, so there will be no improvements to global warming.

G & M

Face up to it now. The energy intensive North American lifestyle is just not sustainable on a finite planet. The great age of the automobile is in its twilight. Don't be a drunk switching over to Lysol or aftershave!

People have been predicting the end of the world for several millennia now. Heck, some predicted tha the sky would fall if Harper became PM.

As a recently as 1975, the Club of Rome predicted that we would run out of most non-renewable resources by the 1990s.

You're going to have to do better than referring to a "finite planet". What is finite is our lifespans. That has far more relevance to any decision we make than talk of a finite planet.

[Canuck E Stan]

Government regulations. You can always find a way to get an SUV through.

The emphasis should not have been on the vehicles but rather on the fuel.

A substantial reduction on these fuels would reward people who use these fuels.

Reducing the cost of of these fuels by 25-50% might be a better incentive than the big engine/little engine rebate.

Many countries are promoting Diesel as an alternative to gasoline and have a greater difference in the price between the two.I know our diesel is not up to "clean" standards yet, but buyers may be more inclined to buy alternative fuels if the price warranted it.

Isn't the idea to get away from gasoline use?