Summary
The net reduction in GHG emissions attributable to speed limiters assumes that the remainder of the traffic flow is not affected. If speed governors on trucks cause increased traffic congestion or force more speed adjustments by cars and light trucks, GHG emissions could increase. Accelerating and decelerating creates more emissions than travelling at a constant speed.
If speed governors cannot be supported on safety or environmental grounds, then the only remaining argument is economic. The creation of a level playing field has intuitive appeal, but it depends on whether it improves competition and efficiency. If governors are mandated in Ontario and Quebec, can this regulation be extended to trucks coming from the U.S. and neighbouring provinces? The U.S. could view such regulation as a non-tariff barrier to trade. In Canada, the federal government has constitutional control over extra-provincial transport. If speed limiter regulation cannot be imposed on trucks from other jurisdictions, then regulated carriers could suffer a competitive disadvantage inside and outside their jurisdiction. The public debate prompted by the issue of mandatory governors on trucks is beneficial because speeding does cause accidents. The problem is that dividing the traffic flow into two distinct groups moving at different speeds causes congestion, raises safety issues and may increase GHG emissions. If speed limiters on trucks become mandatory, it is only a question of time before pressure will mount for mandatory speed governors on private automobiles and light trucks.See the full content of this document
Extract
To Keep On Truckin'
Speed limiters a great idea until you think about it
Barry PrenticeTRANSPORTATION policy changes can affect everyone and have to be weighed carefully in terms of safety/security, environmental impact and economics. The lobby to impose mandatory speed governors on transport trucks in Ontar...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
