Like a stumbling drunk reaching for the bottle governments reach out to bailout the automotive industry, responsible for some 20% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the US and 12% worldwide.
Since 1750 oil has contributed about one third of total global Carbon emissions (over 300 Gigatons Carbon) (GtC), currently contributing about 3 GtC per year out of a total of about 8 GtC per year.
In Australia, emissions from road transport account for 12.6% of national greenhouse gas emissions, with passenger cars accounting for around 7.8% of total national emissions, while light commercial vehicles and heavy trucks account for 4.8%. The industry has adopted a target to reduce average CO2 emissions from new light vehicles from levels around 252 grams of CO2 per km in 2002 to an average 222 grams of CO2 per km by 2010, an overall reduction of 12 per cent.
Not without resistance from the motor car industry. In California (and seven other US States) clean air bills, requiring all new cars to emit at least 30% less CO2 in 10 years time, are subject to lawsuits filed by car manufacturers.
According to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) new technologies still on the horizon could help reduce emissions by a total of 40 percent over the next five years.
Not that too much focus is placed on pollution-free technology, namely electric cars powered by electricity from thermal-solar plants, although the technology now exists for both.
But while the only form of “climate control” exercised to date is related to car air-conditioning systems, planetary climate changes races unabated at 2.2 parts per million CO2 per year.
Anthropogenic global warming, including feedback effects from carbon cycle, methane release and melting ice, is tracking toward about mid-temperature rise level reached during the last glacial termination between 14.7 and 11.7 thousand years ago, where abrupt climate tipping points occurred.
Had politicians, captains of industry and people in general understood the implications of CO2 rise to 450 ppm and temperature by 2 degrees, or to 550 ppm and temperature by near-3 degrees C, in terms of increasingly severe draughts and many metres-scale sea level rise, they would have taken a pause.
Instead of supporting a CO2-emitting motor car industry, they would have channelled the remaining resources into the construction of solar-thermal plants, solar-powered water desalination facilities, wind power generators, electric trains, electric cars, development of carbon draw-down technologies and reforesting of the fast extending deserts on this planet.
While I abhor government bailouts to the vehicle industry, we must not lose sight of the employment impact of letting the big three dodos go to the wall.
I suggest there be handouts and assistance based strictly on the performance of the vehicle produced – not planned for year 2100. There should be no holiday or phase in period that only lets the dodos snooze on.
Grants or handouts based on the well to wheel fuel efficiency will allow new entrants to join the market and also keep the dodos on life support but only if they abandon their futile opposition and act immediately.
Electric vehicles can deliver 1.15 km/Mj or nearly 200 kms per litre (fuel equivalent). That class of fuel consumption gets well rewarded in my model. Hummers, at 4 or 5 kms/litre get extra taxes over what they pay today. The Toyota Prius would get no subsidy until it becomes a plug in hybrid in my model.
How else can we force the vehicle industry on to environmentally sustainable transport?
I recently joined the electric vehicle association. I my first visit I stood about with a whole bunch of car nuts staring under the bonnet of an electric powered 1986 Charade in awe and rapture. And still these rev heads don’t get it. V8 super cars chopping down trees in the green zone of Olympic park. Wake up petrol sniffers.