proposed canadian Clunker Laws, be afraid it could happen here!

[noosacuda]

This is scarey stuff..........


Feds pledge $92 million to get old cars scrapped

CTV.ca News Staff

The federal government is giving $92 million to a Toronto-based environmental organization to help get older vehicles off the road.

Environment Minister John Baird announced the long-delayed program on Wednesday, saying it will give drivers incentives to get older, polluting vehicles out of operation.

The national vehicle "scrappage" program will be managed by the Clean Air Foundation, who will receive the allocated funding over the next four years. The foundation already runs the "Car Heaven" program, which will be expanded with the new federal money.

Incentives will include rebates on new vehicles, free transit passes, bicycles, membership in ride-sharing programs and cash payments of $300.

Car Heaven sends the aging gas guzzlers to scrapyards, where they will be recycled according to provincial standards.

Vehicle models earlier than 1996 are eligible for the program, which currently gets much of its funding from General Motors and Imperial Oil. Drivers who send their old cars to the scrapyard are offered $750 toward a new GM vehicle.

According to government estimates, about five million vehicles that predate emission standards set in 1996 were on the roads last year. Such vehicles comprise just a fraction of the estimated 18 million being driven in Canada, but produce up to two-thirds of the smog-causing pollution.

The expanded national program is expected to be running by January 2009. In the meantime, Ottawa plans to give $3.4 million to seven regional scrapping groups that have received federal funding in the past.

Ersilia Serafini of the Clean Air Foundation says she'd like to bring those regional programs under the Car Heaven umbrella with launch of the national program.

"We hope to work and talk with them over the next couple of months and integrate them into the national delivery network of our national program,'' she told The Canadian Press.

Serafini expects the regional programs to adopt the Car Heaven Brand but that doesn't sit well with Scott Gillard, the co-ordinator of one of the groups that previously received funding.

He said his group, the Halifax-based Ecology Action Centre's Steer Clean program, doesn't want to join forces with an operation that promotes purchasing new vehicles.

"This was probably my greatest fear scenario,'' he said. "The idea of re-branding, basically starting from scratch -- and with a program that's very different philosophically from what we were doing -- doesn't seem very likely to me.''

Although the announcement came on Wednesday, many were aware it was on its way. The government set aside federal money for two years worth of scrapping programs in last year's budget and a recent Environment Canada planning report set aside $90 million for scrappage over the next three years.

With files from The Canadian Press

[Road_Warrior]

$750 is pretty weak.

It won't happen here anyway, too much opposition to the scheme and Uncle Kev has already spent the available funds on cash handouts

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

$750 is pretty weak.

It won't happen here anyway, too much opposition to the scheme and Uncle Kev has already spent the available funds on cash handouts

It is a good way to help the motor vehicle manufacturing industry. How about maybe $5K off a NEW car made in Australia? It would not be "real" money as it would just be tax that would not have been collected if the new vehicle had not been sold in the first place.
There would also have to be a a couple of limits imposed. Private sales only, one per family and the trade in would have to be owned for a year or two to prevent gouging.

I did a hypothetical on this a while ago (I must remember to send an invoice to the Canadian Govt) and there were some VERY angry ants getting wound up over perceived attacks on their "precious".

With motor vehicles (along with many other subjects) quite often emotion overrides logic.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is a good way to help the motor vehicle manufacturing industry. How about maybe $5K off a NEW car made in Australia? It would not be "real" money as it would just be tax that would not have been collected if the new vehicle had not been sold in the first place.
There would also have to be a a couple of limits imposed. Private sales only, one per family and the trade in would have to be owned for a year or two to prevent gouging.

I did a hypothetical on this a while ago (I must remember to send an invoice to the Canadian Govt) and there were some VERY angry ants getting wound up over perceived attacks on their "precious".

With motor vehicles (along with many other subjects) quite often emotion overrides logic.

For memory the FCAI proposed a $3,000 scrappage rebate but Uncle Kev's minions didnt like it. Someone else, some industry expert didnt like it either, citing the "failure" of Germany's scrappage scheme and the cost.

[RSgerry]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

$750 is pretty weak.

It won't happen here anyway, too much opposition to the scheme and Uncle Kev has already spent the available funds on cash handouts

i would hate to see something like this here, however, whilst most car lovers would also disagree, we are utterly useless as a political force. there are huge numbers of car lovers, however, the divisions within the car loving community are so great, there is no way we could organise ourselves to stand together. there is too much 'my car is bbeter than your cos it is bigger/smaller/faster.slower/nicer colour/has 4, 6, or 8 cyls/ is a better make/ is Australian/American/English?German etc etc etc

it is for this reason that enthusiasts are forever government whipping boys. 'speed kills, increased taxes of all kinds, misuse of speed cameras' you name it.

the last thing we need is more political points scoring by a politician looking to score some cheap votes.

"Vehicle models earlier than 1996 are eligible for the program, which currently gets much of its funding from General Motors and Imperial Oil. Drivers who send their old cars to the scrapyard are offered $750 toward a new GM vehicle."

that says it all. it isnt another misguided green initiative, but a ploy by an ailing car giant to increase turnover whilst giving the appearance of caring.

[ILLaViTaR]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

$750 is pretty weak.

It won't happen here anyway, too much opposition to the scheme and Uncle Kev has already spent the available funds on cash handouts

Not any worse than Selling off government assets such as Telstra.

[Fev]

seems like a good thing to me. It's entirely voluntary if you wanna scrap your car - most of those cars i would imagine being old crappy cars no one wants (gemmies, civics magnas pulsars etc etc) and im happy about that

[Iggypoppin']

Originally Posted by Fev

seems like a good thing to me. It's entirely voluntary if you wanna scrap your car - most of those cars i would imagine being old crappy cars no one wants (gemmies, civics magnas pulsars etc etc) and im happy about that

I want geminis....:(

[Mr Brooksy]

Originally Posted by noosacuda

This is scarey stuff..........


Feds pledge $92 million to get old cars scrapped

According to government estimates, about five million vehicles that predate emission standards set in 1996 were on the roads last year. Such vehicles comprise just a fraction of the estimated 18 million being driven in Canada, but produce up to two-thirds of the smog-causing pollution.

With files from The Canadian Press

I haven't read anything other than this article, but where on earth did they get this stat from? Is it another one of those "93% of statistics are made up on the spot" ones? Or is there some hard evidence to prove it?

And who was it done by, a division of the green organisation that wants all cars to be 1cyl? I love how newspapers articles state facts and never mention their souce. Kinda like "Today Tonight"!

[Iggypoppin']

Originally Posted by Mr Brooksy

I haven't read anything other than this article, but where on earth did they get this stat from? Is it another one of those "93% of statistics are made up on the spot" ones? Or is there some hard evidence to prove it?

And who was it done by, a division of the green organisation that wants all cars to be 1cyl? I love how newspapers articles state facts and never mention their souce. Kinda like "Today Tonight"!

You'll find it's also a case of "people can make up statistics to prove anything. 40% of all people know that". It is ridiculous to think you can lump all pre-1996 cars in one category. What about LPG ford sedans, economical lasers, charades and hatchs? Maybe not the most desirable vehicles to drive but good as dailys if you own a big V8. And not everyone can afford a new car, even with a small bonus payment. Single mums, low income earners etc??

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by NJXR6

It is ridiculous to think you can lump all pre-1996 cars in one category. What about LPG ford sedans, economical lasers, charades and hatchs? Maybe not the most desirable vehicles to drive but good as dailys if you own a big V8. And not everyone can afford a new car, even with a small bonus payment. Single mums, low income earners etc??

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Take my Festiva, a 99 Model based on a re-bodied 94 Model Festiva that is based on a 1990 Mazda 121....

All models probably have very similar emissions and impact on the environment....

My Festiva can still better some of the newer 1.5 litre cars in fuel consumption because it was tuned for economy first and power second (56kw) whereas the newer 1.5 litre cars are now pushing for high power numbers first (80kw+) and economy a very close second..

[zetec]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Take my Festiva, a 99 Model based on a re-bodied 94 Model Festiva that is based on a 1990 Mazda 121....

All models probably have very similar emissions and impact on the environment....

My Festiva can still better some of the newer 1.5 litre cars in fuel consumption because it was tuned for economy first and power second (56kw) whereas the newer 1.5 litre cars are now pushing for high power numbers first (80kw+) and economy a very close second..

Fuel consumption and Emissions are not one and the same however... Your car may emit far more toxins that a Falcon quite possibly.

[Barry_v]

most 'registered and going' cars would be worth more than $750 to a private buyer or even a wreaker.... i suspect the scheme will have limited appeal.

Originally Posted by zetec

Fuel consumption and Emissions are not one and the same however... Your car may emit far more toxins that a Falcon quite possibly.

depends what sort of pollution you're trying to prevent. if its hydrocarbons/NOx then yes, i think later model cars are usually better. but if you're talking the deadly CO2 (otherwise known as man bear pig) i suspect engine displacement and fuel economy are the more telling factors. perhaps someone could correct me though?

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by zetec

Fuel consumption and Emissions are not one and the same however... Your car may emit far more toxins that a Falcon quite possibly.

Consumption is directly linked to emissions. Many manufacturers have downgraded power outputs to reduce consumption and in turn reduce emissions.

It happened a few years ago with Corolla and it is happening now with the V8 Holdens.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...25714E000A38FF

What I would love to know is the CO2 emissions of a well maintained 1.5 litre 99 Festiva for arguments sake putting out its measly 56kw compared to a 2009 1.5l engine putting out 30kw more.

I would still hazzard a guess to say that the 09 engine is cleaner, but by how much??

And, are there any current cars that have the same engine but have detuned models and sport models?? I would be interested to know their consumption figures compared to emissions (eg 05 Corolla 100kw compared to Sportivo with 141kw - can't find figures on these either).

Cheers,

Jason

[vztrt]

Already calling for it here.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11254081

[vztrt]

These laws aren't mandatory. They are an incentive for people to trade their cars in.

The older cars will still be around.

I have an old registered car that would go well at sims metal as it is worthless but good for very short trips. So to trade it in for 3k would be good.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by noosacuda

Drivers who send their old cars to the scrapyard are offered $750 toward a new GM vehicle.

Hold out a little longer and you could buy GM for $750 :

The people who would hand over their car for $750 would be driving absolute heaps of crap that have one *tyre* in the car grave.

[Bad Bird]

This kind of scheme is far more about boosting industry than it is about "saving the planet". There is a vast amount of resources consumed in the construction of a car, so it makes sense (environmentally) to keep driving a (well-maintained) older car.

[Melz]

I don't see a problem with it, as long as they don't make it 'compulsory hand in your old clunker'

[Iggypoppin']

Any gov tried to do that I'd chain myself to it. Get nicked and all that. Besides it's be impossible anyway, imagine the ruckus it'd kick up. Boosting the industry yes, I'd also see it aimed at old ladies driving the torana they've owned from new, hoping they'll like a nice new corolla or some such with fandangled power steering etc. It'd be a sore blow if some xy or similar got scrapped by an old fellow wanting a new car. Ouch.

[dave351cid]

there has been rumors that old cars will be put off the road for about as long as i can remember. a few years ago it was going to be any car over 10 years old would be reregisted, before that unleaded fuel was going to mean any any pre unleaded cars would be unusable.

there is always someone draging this idea around.
as a voluntary scheme i could see some benifits. there are a lot of crappy old dungers out there that should be put off the road and into the recycle bin.
its really not that different to a car yard offering a minimin trade in price.

[T_Terror]

In the euro countries where this has been applied sales of the cheapest possible new car (ie. hyundai excel but 5 times shitter) have skyrocketed

[russellw]

The average age of the National vehicle fleet in Australia (source: ABS Q4/2008) has been dropping over the last few years while we have been seeing a boom in new vehicle sales.

In 2000, the average age of our vehicle fleet was about 10.5 and at the end of 2008 it had dropped to about 9.8 - although in the current climate you would expect that to start reversing back the other way again. As a matter of interest the average age in 1971 was 6.1

If we consider that almost 8 million new vehicles were purchased during this same period and also consider that car ownership per 1,000 people went up from 640 to 720 in the same period and we know the total vehicle fleet is now about 15.5 million then we can apply some deductive (if simplistic) logic. We also know that almost 135,000 vehicles are written off in Australia each year and for the purpose of this exercise we can assume that they are evenly spread between old and new.

That effectively means there are some 8 million vehicles in Australia manufactured before 2000 compared to the 7.5 million post 2000 but in the absence of any reliable data it would be impossible to assess what era they come from with any degree of precision.

What we do know from various research is that cars in the pre 1986 (ADR27) era emit about 2.0 g / km of hydrocarbons and that this generally deteriorates with mileage - although test data reveals that even at 400,000 km this has only changed to 2.2 g / km.

Somewhat ironically, the deterioration rate for post 1986 vehicles is actually worse so that although they start at the mandated 0.95 g / km they generally exceed it beyond 150,000 km and by 400,000 km are at the 2.0 g / km level.

This tends to suggest that (for HC at least) the benefit of a modern vehicle fleet is relatively shorter term and as these cars get older they will actually provide minimal improvement to the HC landscape.

It was interesting to note in the NISE study that good maintenance of the older vehicles in their sample produced both fuel economy gains (around 5%) and a 20% reduction in both HC and CO2 emissions.

Questions of fuel consumption, accident survivability and dynamic safety are a different issue but if the primary reason is to help reduce hydrocarbon and CO2 emissions then perhaps we might be better served by changing the rules that currently apply about how much deterioration in vehicle emissions is allowed. Currently new vehicles are only required to meet the applicable ADR for 80,000 km and even that allows some tolerance!

Cheers
Russ