I NEED an SUV - an environmental screed

[mtnrider]

I know an older, semi-retired couple that fret about the horrors of global warming, saying that the world is becoming worse off.  They comment on facebook that politicians need to do something, that people are so irresponsible, that big business needs to be restrained.

Now they're trading up their high mileage station wagon for an SUV.  I pointed out that a hatchback sedan would be as useful, but less expensive and more environmentally responsible. 

They said they would not reconsider; they want the SUV for camping, for moving some small business stuff around, and for winter safety.  They do camp about a month or two a year, but at established sites on graded dirt roads.  Their business items would easily fit in a hatchback with the back seats down.  They live in a snowy state and need to drive from their exurban home to downtown almost daily, but there's no mountains.  Snow tires would be all they need. 

Thanks.  I needed to tilt at the windmills of hypocrisy for a minute.

[Just Joe]

That's okay. Let it all out. Hypocrisy is all around us at times. This forum has safely absorbed alot of anonymous venting. Early on I did more than my share. I'm better now. ;)

[nessness]

What kind of SUV is it? If they're buying a suburban, that's clearly hypocritical, but some small SUVs get comparable gas mileage to hatchbacks.

[therethere]

What kind of SUV is it? If they're buying a suburban, that's clearly hypocritical, but some small SUVs get comparable gas mileage to hatchbacks.

Well, the SUV took energy and base materials to build.... Gas mileage and emissions is not the only environmental impact of a car.

[The_Big_H]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

[dragoncar]

What kind of SUV is it? If they're buying a suburban, that's clearly hypocritical, but some small SUVs get comparable gas mileage to hatchbacks.

Well, the SUV took energy and base materials to build.... Gas mileage and emissions is not the only environmental impact of a car.

That's fine, just tell them to buy some carbon offsets.

[nessness]

What kind of SUV is it? If they're buying a suburban, that's clearly hypocritical, but some small SUVs get comparable gas mileage to hatchbacks.

Well, the SUV took energy and base materials to build.... Gas mileage and emissions is not the only environmental impact of a car.

Sure, but so does a hatchback.  And the OP also doesn't specify whether they're looking at new or used vehicles, nor whether keeping their current vehicle is an option, or if it is no longer functional.

[mtnrider]

I was probably too harsh, we're all a little hypocritical.

In this case, the SUV is a Honda CR-V, which isn't horrible.  Keeping the current car is an option, but it does need some engine work.

[mtnrider]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

I feel that way sometimes.  Unfortunately though, it's regressive.  People with low incomes would be disproportionately affected.

[dragoncar]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

I feel that way sometimes.  Unfortunately though, it's regressive.  People with low incomes would be disproportionately affected.

What we really need is a carbon tax that's redistributed per capita.  So you spend $5 a gallon on gas, but get a $1000 check each year.  We kinda do this in California where you get a credit on your energy bill twice a year with the proceeds from the cap and trade program.  Not sure exactly what the concept is called, but I've been hearing more about it lately.

The benefit is that it's less regressive since poor people in general already use less gas than rich people.  So in theory the carbon dividend would be a wash or positive for them.

Ëven if all the rich people switch to EV, the program would be a wash for the poor since they would just be getting back the same money they spend.

[Buffaloski Boris]

I’m fine with someone choosing a used SUV over a new hatchback. Heck, if it’s a Fine Ancient Vehicle, it’s almost always better across the board, even if it’s a guzzler. That’s one less clown car being manufactured.

Yeah, people should ride bikes instead to they extent they can. But people are people and most aren’t going to suddenly turn over a new leaf and ditch their clown cars. So you go with less worse alternatives.

[libertarian4321]

I was probably too harsh, we're all a little hypocritical.

In this case, the SUV is a Honda CR-V, which isn't horrible.  Keeping the current car is an option, but it does need some engine work.

That vehicle gets 34 mpg. 

Probably better mileage than their old station wagon.

If you weren't getting in their face about driving that old station wagon, do you really think their buying a small SUV that gets 34 mpg is something you need to get worked up about?

[Fru-Gal]

Angry at cars & their entitled drivers lately. Talk me down from throwing tacks on the road, anyone?

[scottish]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

I feel that way sometimes.  Unfortunately though, it's regressive.  People with low incomes would be disproportionately affected.

What we really need is a carbon tax that's redistributed per capita.  So you spend $5 a gallon on gas, but get a $1000 check each year.  We kinda do this in California where you get a credit on your energy bill twice a year with the proceeds from the cap and trade program.  Not sure exactly what the concept is called, but I've been hearing more about it lately.

The benefit is that it's less regressive since poor people in general already use less gas than rich people.  So in theory the carbon dividend would be a wash or positive for them.

Ëven if all the rich people switch to EV, the program would be a wash for the poor since they would just be getting back the same money they spend.

Well, then, move to Canada.   We have a carbon tax like that.    (Though it's not clear how much will be left to redistribute after the government bureaucracy takes its piece of the action.)

[Montecarlo]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

Would be much better than fuel efficiency standards

Emissions = emissions/mile * miles driven

Policy tends to focus on the first part of the product instead of the second part, which counter-intuitively makes the problem worse.

[Montecarlo]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

Would be much better than fuel efficiency standards

Emissions = emissions/mile * miles driven

Policy tends to focus on the first part of the product instead of the second part, which counter-intuitively makes the problem worse.

Of course I'm also the guy that thinks global warming is a self correcting problem.  Billions of people dieing from famine and displacement from coastal flooding = fewer emissions

[dragoncar]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

I feel that way sometimes.  Unfortunately though, it's regressive.  People with low incomes would be disproportionately affected.

What we really need is a carbon tax that's redistributed per capita.  So you spend $5 a gallon on gas, but get a $1000 check each year.  We kinda do this in California where you get a credit on your energy bill twice a year with the proceeds from the cap and trade program.  Not sure exactly what the concept is called, but I've been hearing more about it lately.

The benefit is that it's less regressive since poor people in general already use less gas than rich people.  So in theory the carbon dividend would be a wash or positive for them.

Ëven if all the rich people switch to EV, the program would be a wash for the poor since they would just be getting back the same money they spend.

Well, then, move to Canada.   We have a carbon tax like that.    (Though it's not clear how much will be left to redistribute after the government bureaucracy takes its piece of the action.)

Lol, moving to Canada won’t solve the problem of carbon emissions in the US

[dezfreeze]

I always thought I was doing an environmental service keeping older cars on the road when no one else would, but some thoughtful analysis of CO2 emissions shows that production of the vehicle is a very limited part of those emissions.  Actually driving a vehicle is the big contributor (depending on the vehicle's MPG).  THis made me think of a good video from the "Engineering Explained" series on Youtube.  He does a good job comparing a Nissan Leaf to a traditional gas powered car in terms of lifetime CO2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM
All that to say, your neighbors may be making the best choice from a CO2 perspective by replacing an older car.  (They still could have gotten a Prius V though)

[mtnrider]

I was probably too harsh, we're all a little hypocritical.

In this case, the SUV is a Honda CR-V, which isn't horrible.  Keeping the current car is an option, but it does need some engine work.

That vehicle gets 34 mpg. 

Probably better mileage than their old station wagon.

If you weren't getting in their face about driving that old station wagon, do you really think their buying a small SUV that gets 34 mpg is something you need to get worked up about?

Oh. It does get slightly better gas mileage than the station wagon.  My issue is that if you are a performative environmentalist on Facebook, please do at least look at alternative smaller cars.

Otherwise, I'm happy when people trade their F-150s in for an SUV.

[RFAAOATB]

This country really needs $5 a gallon gas

I feel that way sometimes.  Unfortunately though, it's regressive.  People with low incomes would be disproportionately affected.

How low income is too low income to have a car?  If you raise the gas tax enough to fund public transit, it should mean better less congested driving for the rich and more accessible public transit for the poor.

[kimmarg]

I was probably too harsh, we're all a little hypocritical.

In this case, the SUV is a Honda CR-V, which isn't horrible.  Keeping the current car is an option, but it does need some engine work.

That vehicle gets 34 mpg. 

Probably better mileage than their old station wagon.

If you weren't getting in their face about driving that old station wagon, do you really think their buying a small SUV that gets 34 mpg is something you need to get worked up about?

I actually just got rid of a 2008 Suzuki SX4 (small hatchback) and got a 2016 Honda CRV. I was pleasantly surprised to discover the mileage of the CRV was the same or better than the SX4. I thought it would be worse. I don't claim to be making the most environmental choice, just needed to get my knees out of the dash with rear facing car seat(s).

[Just Joe]

Where and how you drive a vehicle makes a difference too. With my low speed semi-rural commute I see MPGs as high as mid-40s in our mid-size SUV.

Around town its lower but out on the interstate at legal speeds it gets nearly 30 MPG.

[PDXTabs]

Angry at cars & their entitled drivers lately. Talk me down from throwing tacks on the road, anyone?

You're going to need caltrops.