The Kyoto Protocol came into effect on February 16, but Ottawa has yet to release an implementation strategy outlining how the country will achieve its targets. With the recent ratification by Russia on the controversial climate change policy, Canada becomes one of 123 countries committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to six per cent below 1990 levels by 2012.
Greenhouse gas emissions are primarily composed of carbon dioxide (75 to 85 per cent), methane (10 to 15 per cent) and nitrous oxide (5 to 10 per cent). According to Environment Canada’s 2002 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, total greenhouse gas emissions in Canada have increased by 20 per cent since 1990. The transportation sector accounts for about 25 per cent of total emissions, rising 24 per cent since 1990. Light duty gasoline trucks (primarily pick-up trucks, mini-vans and SUVs) represent the single largest increase in transportation emission contributions, increasing nearly 100 per cent over the last 12 years. Gasoline-powered cars represent 26 per cent of the transportation sector’s emissions, which have slightly declined since 1990.
Often publicized as one of the most significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, the automotive industry has invested considerable efforts to streamline production processes to become more energy efficient. According to Heather MacLean, a U of T Civil and Environmental Engineering professor and one of North America’s leading researchers on alternative fuels, “The auto industry in recent years has made substantial reductions in energy use, hence carbon dioxide emissions, from their manufacturing processes. However, the key issue for the industry related to the Kyoto Protocol is the emissions resulting from the driving of the vehicles.”
Dennis DesRosiers, president of DesRosiers Automotive Consultants Inc., a global consulting and market research company, suggests that it has become a matter of consumer preference. One of the underlying problems, he explains “is that the vehicle companies have no control over how many vehicles consumers own, how much they drive, how they drive, or the quality of fuel in their tank.”
Based on this, DesRosiers believes governments and environmental groups have unfairly targeted the automotive industry. “Almost all the attention is on the vehicle companies,” he explains. “In reality they are one of the few good guys in the whole policy process.” According to DesRosiers, car manufacturers spend billions of dollars each year on energy saving technologies that are designed to address issues of greenhouse gas emissions.
However, a recent Greenpeace campaign accused the Ford Motor Company of standing in the way of government action to tackle climate change. “In both Europe and the U.S.,” their pamphlets state, “Ford has opposed measures which would improve the fuel efficiency of vehicles and reduce road transport’s impact on climate change.”
Furthermore, Greenpeace suggests that in the last 15 years Ford has played a key role in car lobby efforts to prevent measures to fight climate change. Greenpeace claims that Ford’s opposition to improving the U.S.’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy legislation, and its broken promises to improve the efficiency of its SUV fleet by 25 per cent by 2005, are indicators the automotive industry hasn’t done everything it can do.
Although Greenpeace doesn’t have a problem with SUVs being used in towing or farming applications, it believes Ford’s aggressive, multi-million dollar marketing campaign promoting the use of its gas-guzzling vehicles in cities is one of the biggest problems contributing to increased greenhouse gas emissions. The long-standing perception created by the automotive industry that larger, stronger SUVs are safer than conventional automobiles was refuted in a 2004 U.S. federal traffic report showing that people driving or riding in an SUV are nearly 11 per cent more likely to die than people in ordinary cars in the event of a serious accident.
The growth of hybrid vehicles has been explosive. According to J.D. Power and Associates, roughly 88,000 hybrid vehicles were sold in the U.S. alone last year, with projections to more than double to about 220,000 cars in 2005.
Furthermore, the Toyota Prius, considered the most fuel-efficient vehicle on the market, was voted the European Car of the Year 2005. Considering it does around 55 miles per gallon in the city, nearly fives times as fuel efficient as Ford’s Land Rover Discovery, the award comes as no surprise to many. In conjunction with declining SUV sales in the last year, this trend suggests that consumers are becoming wary of increasing gasoline prices, and that some car manufacturers are capitalizing on these emerging markets.
At the 2005 Toronto International Auto Show, prospective buyer Dan MacKay of Toronto was impressed with the new Honda Accord hybrid. “Although the price is somewhat higher, it has great fuel mileage and relatively nice body styling.” On the topic of style MacKay suggested, “up until this year the body styles of the Honda Insight and Toyota Prius were very odd. Now, it seems you can get a normal-looking car with a hybrid option.”
With respect to the long-term goal to minimize our dependency on fossil fuels, Michael Rosenberg from Canada’s Ballard Power suggests that hybrid vehicles, which are powered by both gasoline and batteries, are merely a stepping stone. “They’re still just a bridge to the ultimate fuel-cell future…hybrids will always have emissions, because they [still] are burning fuel in an internal combustion engine.” Rosenberg speculates that the development of fuel cell vehicles is about 10 years behind hybrids.
Although it may seem that the automotive industry is responding to the government mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the continued production of SUVs seem to contradict the industry’s investment in hybrid and fuel-cell technology. The onus may now fall on consumers to continue to demand more fuel efficient, environmentally friendly vehicles.
