How SUVs are the problem

El_Machinae · Mar 17, 2006

aka: why wasting fuel is not what you should be doing

luiz said:
El_Machinae said:

In addition, SUV drivers artificially inflate the cost of gasoline (or inflate the demand), thus hurting everyone who needs gasoline and does not have enough. Inflation is too regressive to affect SUV owners fast enough to save the poor.

Click to expand...

I don´t buy that. The price of gasoline is corrected almost every week here.

SUV owners are inflating the prices no more artificially than Mike Tyson inflated the gold price.

Anti-SUV people irritate the crap outta me. If you can pay for it, go ahead. I don't need eco-whiners telling me what I can or cannot do with my money.

Edit: and here's another thing that puzzles me? Why do eco-whiners only pick on SUVs? What about old cars, that consume far more gas and polute much more? What about super-sports car like a Ferrari or a a B. Veyron(which needs one liter of gas to do 2 kilometers, worse than any SUV) ?

Edit 2: I'm not refering to you as an eco-whiner, this is mostly a rant.

Here's the thing - an SUV has a function. Usually that function is to drive person to from A to B. An SUV offers very little utility over a sedan or an economy car. It has the same number of seats, it's just a little more roomy. I know there are people who make 'proper' use of the SUV, but they are being discounted for the discussion, because we all know of SUVs and minivans that are not being used with utility.

These vehicles place a demand upon gasoline stores greater than the owner needs, because these vehicles consume more. So, due to supply/demand, the price is higher, and the SUV owner is happy to pay. The issue is that a lot of people are less wealthy than the SUV owner and their price goes up too(even if they drive an efficient vehicle), hitting them relatively more. As well, any service that has gasoline as a component is affected, and the price for that service goes up. This causes a general, unnecessary, inflation. Inflation reduces overall wealth and productivity. So, owning an SUV is bad for your economy, if you're not getting good use out of it.

Now, why are we not whining about old vehicles? That's pretty easy. The majority of the pollution done by a vehicle is during its manufacturing. So, for every year you drive an old car, because you've maintained it well, the average pollution of that vehicle goes down. Buying a new vehicle and scrapping the old (when the old vehicle was still functional) puts a whole new fuel and pollution burden. Sure, a new car might have better fuel efficiency (and that's good), and so people purchasing new cars should worry about that (to reduce the average pollution per vehicle-year faster), but we're all better off if you can eek more time out of your old clunker.

Eran of Arcadia · Mar 17, 2006

Here, here. I am not what most would consider an environmentalist but I think that SUVs are a waste of money and gasoline, especially since they are used mostly to pick the twins up from soccer practice or drive to the bank half a block aways.

CamBot · Mar 17, 2006

Some are good and useful, especially for winter driving, towing a trailer/boat, or hauling stuff.

But if you need a truck the size of a Sherman tank to go to Starbucks and back you've got some....compensation issues with certain parts of the male anatomy.

El_Machinae · Mar 17, 2006

This discussion is specifically excluding individuals who need SUVs for good reason. I'm assuming that they are rare enough to do so.

ThePrankMonkey · Mar 17, 2006

i see lots of people driving trucks around in my area that arent using them in a utility way, in fact many of them just turn them into a bigger version of a civic or similar car where they put the wheels, wing and sound system in. basically ricing it out.

i think its a waste of money but it also uses a lot more gas than if they did own a civic. not to mention a lot of parking lots are getting tinier and some of these vehicles just cant park in some of them since they're so big.

but its a free country and unfortunately in this case people are free to waste their money and as much in natural resources as they can. of course if you bring back the ration stamps they had during WWII people would change their choice of vehicle real quick.

Matto the Hun · Mar 17, 2006

Where I live people (mostly) shouldn't have them either.

I live in ATL, in the city, in a condo. There shouldn't even be a QUARTER of the SUVs and gi-normous F-150 type pick-up trucks in our parking deck.

Tell me what giant things you're going to haul when you live in a condo in the city! And how often does that happen. I've lived this buiding 5 years and we could have used an SUV or a pickup TWICE. And even THAT is being generous, because all we really would have needed on those occasions would have been a hatchback.

Those clowns haul about as much in their giant gas guzzling smog machines as I do in my little old Escort.

I'll say it again, they live IN A CONDO IN THE CITY. They have noplace to build a shed or a jungle gym, they are highly unlikey to be hauling giant power tools or lumber or some such because whatever home projects they have it's not like they can do anything even half as big as building a deck or an extension. They have no place for a boat... although I think one dude has a trailer for their motorcycle so at least they have an excuse.

It's absurd. :mad:

luiz · Mar 17, 2006

El_Machinae said:
aka: why wasting fuel is not what you should be doing

Here's the thing - an SUV has a function. Usually that function is to drive person to from A to B. An SUV offers very little utility over a sedan or an economy car. It has the same number of seats, it's just a little more roomy. I know there are people who make 'proper' use of the SUV, but they are being discounted for the discussion, because we all know of SUVs and minivans that are not being used with utility.

These vehicles place a demand upon gasoline stores greater than the owner needs, because these vehicles consume more. So, due to supply/demand, the price is higher, and the SUV owner is happy to pay. The issue is that a lot of people are less wealthy than the SUV owner and their price goes up too(even if they drive an efficient vehicle), hitting them relatively more. As well, any service that has gasoline as a component is affected, and the price for that service goes up. This causes a general, unnecessary, inflation. Inflation reduces overall wealth and productivity. So, owning an SUV is bad for your economy, if you're not getting good use out of it.

Now, why are we not whining about old vehicles? That's pretty easy. The majority of the pollution done by a vehicle is during its manufacturing. So, for every year you drive an old car, because you've maintained it well, the average pollution of that vehicle goes down. Buying a new vehicle and scrapping the old (when the old vehicle was still functional) puts a whole new fuel and pollution burden. Sure, a new car might have better fuel efficiency (and that's good), and so people purchasing new cars should worry about that (to reduce the average pollution per vehicle-year faster), but we're all better off if you can eek more time out of your old clunker.

This is not consistent with economic theory.
The best allocation of resources, on a purely economical analysis, is the one in which they go to the people willing to pay more. This is what happens with SUVs.

Another thing to consider is that the effect of SUVs on the recent rise of gas proces has been marginal at most. The conflicts in the ME plus the rapid economic expansion of China are the real factors here.

Odin2006 · Mar 17, 2006

Those SUV's are going to be nice lawn ornaments when oil production peaks.

El_Machinae · Mar 17, 2006

This is not consistent with economic theory.
The best allocation of resources, on a purely economical analysis, is the one in which they go to the people willing to pay more.

That's how I used to interpret it too, but it's not true. When it comes to economy, we're looking for efficient use of supplies. The SUV owners want the gasoline more, that's very true, because they are willing to pay a higher rate - but their increased consumption does nothing to contribute to the economy. Their contribution to GDP does not increase with their extra consumption of gasoline (except the price of the extra gasoline) - they don't produce more by consuming more.

However, the person who uses gasoline (but is unable to, because of prices) to increase his productivity is having his productivity reduced by higher prices. Fewer cabbies can afford to drive cabs. Fewer pizza companies can afford to deliver. Fewer electricty companies can afford to service out-of-town powerlines, etc. This GDP-enhancing services are being reduced because of inflation.

(Yes, the war and global uncertainty is a problem. Chinese growth, however, is not. The Chinese are making MUCH better use of the gasoline that SUV owners are, because each barrel of gasoline is being used to augment productivity)

BirraImperial · Mar 17, 2006

Americans love their cars big, and of course, the bigger the car is, the more gas it needs. You need more alternative fuel sources to power your vehicles, like alcohol or so.

MobBoss · Mar 17, 2006

You dont like SUVs, do your part and dont buy one. But people owning them dont bother me.

However, people that have no idea how to drive one bothers the hell out of me.

Why do people worry so much about what other people do/own?

I dont get it.

Odin2006 · Mar 17, 2006

MobBoss said:
You dont like SUVs, do your part and dont buy one. But people owning them dont bother me.

However, people that have no idea how to drive one bothers the hell out of me.

Why do people worry so much about what other people do/own?

I dont get it.

Because what one person does affects other people. you use more gas by driving an SUV instead of a small car, and are therfore contributing to global warming needlessly. Your right to swing your fist ends at my face.

newfangle · Mar 17, 2006

My biggest problem with SUVs is that it worsens dependency on oil from the savage nations.

Sahkuhnder · Mar 17, 2006

Odin2006 said:
Those SUV's are going to be nice lawn ornaments when oil production peaks.

I volunteer to be the bad guy for this thread. :crazyeye:

I drive a full size SUV and I love it. I can afford to pay for the gas it consumes and will do so even if the price continues to rise.

Do I absolutely need to drive one? No. Then why? Valid question.

Mainly because I feel safe. I sit up high with a commanding view and know that if I do get into an accident I will be much, much more likely to be uninjured. Have you ever seen what happens when a full size vehicle crashes with a tiny little car? I really don't want to die or have my legs amputated or my body crushed in some hideous way all because I wanted to save a few gallons of gas or not contribute to global warming. I always wear my seatbelt so even in a rollover I should walk away. Whenever I ride in a tiny car I always feel exposed and at risk. Death by auto accident is a very popular way to die and I'd prefer not to be such a statistic.

It does sometimes come in handy to have lots of extra space. I have used all the seats a few times and have used all the cargo space before as well. I have moved things that would have been impossible in a tiny little car.

This doesn't mean I don't approve of saving gasoline or reducing damage to the environment, but not at the expense of my or my families safety. If/when they come out with a hybrid version of my SUV that has the same power I will probably buy one when I replace mine.

While I'm setting myself up to be flamed I may as well do it all the way.

I am also part-owner and night manager of a private independent limousine service (i.e. not associated with a casino limo fleet). You may well be in shock to see how much gasoline we use every month.

All right - fire away.

sanabas · Mar 17, 2006

El_Machinae said:
This discussion is specifically excluding individuals who need SUVs for good reason. I'm assuming that they are rare enough to do so.

So what's the solution then? People who actually take their 4WDs off the bitumen might be rare enough to exclude here, but there's enough of them that simply banning the use of 4WDs isn't feasible. And if they do get made, the main market for them is people who don't want to use them properly, so that's who they get aimed at.

And while it should be good for the population as a whole to use as little fuel as possible, people demonstrate all the time that self-interest comes first. Just look at the amount of car use in general. It would be far better for petrol prices, and for other reasons, if most commuters used public transport. Doesn't happen though.

Eran of Arcadia · Mar 17, 2006

Who needs a solution? I just like complaining.

Desmond Hawkins · Mar 17, 2006

Both El_Machinae and luiz have a point. SUVs are usually a terrible waste of resources for the purpose they serve, but you can't just pick on them. There are lots of different kinds of vehicles that could also be considered a complete waste of resources for the purpose they serve. This could be applied outside of the transportation sphere. In fact we could go to a lot of the people's houses who complain about SUVs and check their sealing and insulation to find out how much heat they are leaking in winter, or how much unnecessary AC they use.

Society as a whole wastes resources on all sorts of stuff. SUVs are a very visible example and people have decided to use it as a rallying point, however step one for them should be to go look in the mirror and find out how they live. Find out where they are wasting. Then perhaps go give hell to people doing all sorts of damaging things, not just SUV drivers.

Also, there is an easy way to do this. Raise gasoline tax. I know lots of people hate this, but it is fair if it forces people to internalize the true costs of their practices. It also gives people a choice. If they really want to spend their money on an SUV and burn a lot more gas, that is less money they can spend on an even more polluting plane ticket...

Desmond Hawkins · Mar 17, 2006

MobBoss said:
Why do people worry so much about what other people do/own?

If they have to pay for part of the cost of the other person owning/doing said thing...

Swiss Bezerker · Mar 17, 2006

luiz said:
This is not consistent with economic theory.
The best allocation of resources, on a purely economical analysis, is the one in which they go to the people willing to pay more. This is what happens with SUVs.

Another thing to consider is that the effect of SUVs on the recent rise of gas proces has been marginal at most. The conflicts in the ME plus the rapid economic expansion of China are the real factors here.

Imagin this. food is limited and their will be no food surplies until about 1.5 months in the future in your small little town. A rich man goes to the only food suply store and buys all the food, leaving a bit for the store owner. You starve to death after eating your cat. How does this make you feel

According to you, that totaly OK, because its his money that he can do whatever you want with.

amadeus · Mar 17, 2006

El_Machinae said:
Here's the thing - an SUV has a function. Usually that function is to drive person to from A to B. An SUV offers very little utility over a sedan or an economy car.

I'd like to know first what your solution would be to this supposed problem and to what sector of the economy would you not apply this logic.

How SUVs are the problem

Colour vision since 2018

Stormin' Mormon

I lurk, therefore I am..

Colour vision since 2018

mowing em' down!

Chieftain

Trendy Revolutionary

Apolytonian

Colour vision since 2018

Pura Vida!

Off-Topic Overlord

Apolytonian

hates you.

Delusions of grandeur

Psycho Bunny

Stormin' Mormon

Deity

Deity

Emperor

Serenity now

Similar threads