Transport committee  You have to understand that baseline fuel is 5,000 parts per million sulphur. Onroad now is 15. Natural gas traditionally has had a very strong advantage on particulate emissions. It was one of the reasons California encouraged the use of it way back when. I think measurability i

Transport committee  I think this is about opportunity and opportunity loss. We can leave it to the market, but we think it's going to happen. I'll give you the example of Shell's investment in Alberta. They're spending $250 million to build an LNG facility west of Calgary. They're doing that to su

Transport committee  We have talked with the OEMs, and we work quite closely with GM. I'm not sure if you're aware, but General Motors has their global gaseous fuel development centre in Oshawa, so they do this work here in Ontario. Part of it is that they also watch for signals from government. Ye

Transport committee  I don't think “support” is the right word. Right now we have the Canadian Automotive Partnership Council that Industry Canada has. I would ask committee members whether this subject has been discussed with that group, with all the OEMs around the table. I don't know the answer to

Transport committee  I guess I would go back to my earlier comment that looking broadly across Canada, we don't think the time is right for consumers. That said, there will be small groups—for instance, a plumber or an electrician who drives a lot of miles—who will be motivated to go out of their w

Transport committee  Yes. I would like to say that within the next three to five years I think is extremely realistic. The other thing we haven't mentioned this morning that we see as also encouraging is that we're starting to see more of the companies involved in the energy industry, the natural gas

Transport committee  I can tell you that on the GM and Chrysler pickup trucks, they're both going to come in at about a $9,000 premium. Pickup trucks these days are fairly expensive vehicles, so that's 20% to 25%.

Transport committee  Sorry, that was for conversion.

Transport committee  Probably, for one, because on these pickup trucks they're adding a lot of fuel capacity. It has more to do with the design of the pickup truck. The $7,500 to $12,000 is a range, and it depends on your engine size and how much fuel capacity you put on the vehicle.

Transport committee  There is a weight impact. Typically for a consumer we hear the weight and the payload issue is much bigger on trucks, of course, where volume and payload matters to them. One of things we find too in the more evolved markets, like in Europe, is that the OEMs will have a gasoline

Transport committee  I'm trying to remember with the North American OEM product. I think it's maybe about 10 or 20 litres for the pickup truck. Do you know offhand?

Transport committee  Yes. It's about a 20-litre tank.

Transport committee  I think they're starting to get there, now that we see availability from GM and Chrysler. Ford is also working with Westport to offer a product. I think it's coming, but for them it's strictly about cost: x amount to engineer the product, yamount to manufacture it, and they've go

Transport committee  No, they're not.

Transport committee  Yes. They are bi-fuel. They will start on gasoline, switch over when the engine reaches the right temperature, and then operate on natural gas.