Raise the Hammer

I see on problem already.... corporation/business buy in.

Also, trains are an issue for me. They're not regulated as strictly, at least here and actually are less efficient and produce more particulate matter than a truck with 2007 emission standards. Trains are only useful for long hauls with 25 or less containers since in cities, speeds are reduced drastically and longer than 25 containers requires more than one locomotive.

Also a study by the European Environmental Bureau in 2004 shows that although trucks emit more carbon dioxide than ships per ton per kilometer, ships produce significantly more particulate matter, sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide.

Frank, do your train-vs-truck efficiency calculations include:

-Maintenance of trains vs trucks (replacing truck tires for example) -Road repairs vs rail repairs -ploughing and other general road mainteenance -other secondary energy costs that I can't think of at the moment?

Not trying to argue, just double checking. There's more to the story than what comes out of the truck or locomotive's smokestacks.

FRance is also well ahead of the climate change issues with 59 nuclear power plants.

No hysterics, and the country is a net exporter of energy to other countries.

IS it the answer to tackling global warming? No, but it is part of the solution until less problematic by -products can be found.

I think we really missed the boat on Nuclear energy here.Too many hysterical types lobbying the previous liberal governments

Those big tax cuts to corporations I keep hearing about seem to be getting bigger.Surely by now the government is paying them to stay here no?

Keeping people unemployed by having corporations leave is also environmentaly freindly.

Unemployed people do not create nearly as much pollutants as those who do.WE should be laying off more and more people.Thats the answer.The air in Windsor is noticably cleaner since Ford has closed up shop.

True Frank.

And Europe has a very dense network of rail systems.Its a start if this works though, but the quote about commitment form various groups may be a bit optimistic.

These are some of the groups grinding France to a halt as we speak who will not give up one "Red" cent of pension money.Anything that goes into a French pocket to remove a nickle will be met with resistance.Sounds more like one of those "feel good" announcements corporations and the Liberal governemt party put on web sites with green trees and blue skies to fool the public they are actually going to do something.

Lets hope they do it.

Ryan, I meant corporate buy-in here would be difficult to get... It's hard enough to get companies to invest in scrubbers let alone more expensive methods.

Sean, I have no idea. I looked up the study and read it rather quickly. I'll look at it in more detail later and post an answer on here. Remember though that rail line maintenance is much more expensive, much more time consuming, no rail traffic can use the line while the maintenance is being performed. I'm talking mostly about impact to the environment since the entry is about green legislation, not necessarily cost of operation.
Ships and trains use heavier, less refined fuel oil which is why they produce more HC, NOx SO2 and PM. Some ships use a lighter machine oil mixture while in port but when steaming thru oceans and lakes they go back to the heavy stuff.