How SUVs are the problem

[amadeus]

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.

If the grocer is smart enough, he'll know that not letting his customers starve to death is the best long-term business decision.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

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

We don't live in Utopia. People with more money consume more than their share of resources. People will stave to death today while we all sit around with full stomachs and have this nice little conversation on our computers.

Money equals power. It has always been that way and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

 

[Dann]

(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)

Fuel here isn't particularly expensive, but vehicles are. The taxes for even a small sedan here are ridiculously high. Those for an SUV are insane! On top of this you have all them road taxes, highway tolls etc. Only the very rich here can afford cars, not to mention an SUV. Thus the controlled growth of the motor vehicle market here.

I'm sure the American public could never possibly stand for vehicle taxes that hover just above or below the price of the vehicle itself.

OTOH, mass transport coverage here is Ok, even if not yet up to world class standards in efficiency. Thus people still cope.

 

[amadeus]

Well, you're talking about a country with a different kind of infrastructure and a larger population to support. Mass transit is certainly practical in those high density areas, but even in places like downtown Minneapolis, traffic is not a severe problem (albeit the outer ring of highways do get backed up and need to be enlarged).

 

[El_Machinae]

step one for them should be to go look in the mirror and find out how they live.

This is very true. But there is only so much efficiency that I can introduce into my life (especially when I balance my efficiency with my productivity). People often don't think of things in terms of productivity/barrel - but think in terms of 'how much can I afford?'. And that's not the best system.

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.

I actually see no good solution - raising gasoline taxes won't stop the SUV owners faster than it will hurt the economy generally (it would have the same effect as the SUV inflated demand, actually). I could accept a taxation on SUVs, so that the people who truely needed them would be disadvantaged, but the people who didn't would be discouraged from purchasing them. However, that solution is totally unfair to the person who actually gets good value from an SUV, and then has the SUV taken out of his price range by a tax.

I think that a general education of the society; that wasting energy is bad for the country and the economy, is what's needed. People being able to spell out "artificial demand on gasoline=reduced productivity" would go a long way.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

@ El_Machinae -

You brought up an excellent point about efficiency.

If a person with a small car that gets 30 miles per gallon lives 10 miles from work and a person with an SUV that gets 15 mpg lives 5 miles from work, who is burning more gas in their daily commute? Who is actually on the road for a longer period of time?

These issues are often more complex than they may appear at first glance.

 

[Urederra]

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.

Sorry for the off topic, but, does your avatar show any 'compensation issues with certain parts' of your anatomy?

Having this in mind, your avatar is hilarious.

 

[Verbose]

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.

And the logical conclusion for me — who drive a much smaller car and feel decidedly unsafe around the massive SUV:s zipping about the landscape at idiot speed on crummy winter roads, presumably because the drivers feel safe doing it — is that I must also afford myself a spanking new SUV.

But when I do there will shortly be an even bigger model of SUV, and the present SUV owners will get these in order to regain that feeling of safety. So I will now have an unsafely small SUV and need to get myself a new monster.

And on the spiral of the car-race will go.

It's been said that the SUV is the only car model where sales would increase if they came equipped with machine-guns. This car seems to be a vector of fear and feelings of exposure for some reason?

How big do we need to be safe? Get a tank? That's good protection. Until the other guy gets a bigger tank.

OTOH, get rid of the SUVs and suddenly the danger of being crushed in an accident with one will be greatly reduced.

But concerning the safety aspects of small cars, in Europe safety is increasing by leaps and bounds. The chances of walking out of you totalled little Toyota increases steadily. Dunno how this works in the US. Are small cars there inherently unsafe there?

And if you're worried about being crushed in a small car by a big car, you need legislation requiring manufacturers to build the SUVs with decent collapse zones that go easy on smaller cars in a collision. That's perfectly doable from an engineering POV, but I don't know if it's done in the US though.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

@ Verbose -

Cars and SUVs, big and small, are basically built the same here as they are anywhere else safety feature wise with crumple zones, etc. Many vehicles in the US are foreign brands.

The 'size war car race' spiral has a practical limit. My SUV must fit into my garage and into a standard parking space.

Getting rid of SUVs just isn't practical. There are way too many and there would be business exemptions. I would register mine as a business vehicle if I had to in order to keep it.

As for collisions, it's what we in the Navy used to call 'The law of gross tonnage', mainly that a heavier object will bounce a lighter object out of its path, usually to the detriment of the lighter object and its occupants.

I think we both agree about poor drivers, but that's a different issue.

I'm still hoping for that machine-gun option.

 

[MobBoss]

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.

Thats crap logic. SUVs are the cause of global warming? Please. Your right to choose what kind of car I drive ends at what I want, not what you want.

WTH difference does it make if someone uses more gas than you? If they can pay for it, let them have it.

Whats next...you going to go around neighborhoods to make them turn off porchlights?

 

[MobBoss]

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.

Another crap analogy that is simply not the case. If you are happy driving your little 4 cylinder honda then fine...but let other people drive what the hell they want as well.

Oil isnt goint to run out anytime soon (if ever). If you are really that concerned become a chemist/engineer and design an automobile engine that works on something common..like water.

 

[Verbose]

As for collisions, it's what we in the Navy used to call 'The law of gross tonnage', mainly that a heavier object will bounce a lighter object out of its path, usually to the detriment of the lighter object and its occupants.

Sure, and the real killers on the roads are the big-rigs, the heavy trucks anyway. Dunno if a SUV has what it takes to handle being run into by one of those?

As far as the practical limitations of SUV-size, that's to a large extent a question of infrastructure and priorities. The present situation puts a cap on it, but if considered important enough those bottlenecks can be dealt with. If you're willing to buy-a-bigger-SUV you might feel inclined to pay for the extra parking space necessary.

Just generally I think the SUV issue is about the open and hidden costs of fuel, environment, etc. — the consumption of limited natural resources and the effects thereof.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

Sure, and the real killers on the roads are the big-rigs, the heavy trucks anyway. Dunno if a SUV has what it takes to handle being run into by one of those?

As far as the practical limitations of SUV-size, that's to a large extent a question of infrastructure and priorities. The present situation puts a cap on it, but if considered important enough those bottlenecks can be dealt with. If you're willing to buy-a-bigger-SUV you might feel inclined to pay for the extra parking space necessary.

Just generally I think the SUV issue is about the open and hidden costs of fuel, environment, etc. — the consumption of limited natural resources and the effects thereof.

If you're going to get into a wreck with a big-rig, would you rather be in a full size SUV or a tiny car?

You might have a great idea there. Bigger parking spaces and charge a fee to use them. I could enlarge my garage a bit to fit an even bigger SUV...

I really don't know that this question has an easy solution. If the government is going to get involved I think helping the automakers to produce hybrid vehicles would be a good place to start.

I must do what I think is best for me and my family first, and the global petroleum supply and global warming second.

 

[Verbose]

Another crap analogy that is simply not the case. If you are happy driving your little 4 cylinder honda then fine...but let other people drive what the hell they want as well.

Oil isnt goint to run out anytime soon (if ever). If you are really that concerned become a chemist/engineer and design an automobile engine that works on something common..like water.

Yeah well, these things are about politics.

We might not want to accept that there is political dimension to how we live our lives, but that's nevertheless the case.
And here it hinges upon whether there is a greater common good involved in reducing car size and fuel consumption. The ones convinced there is have no compulsion about using legislation.

So either we leave it as a matter of personal choice and present relative buying power — with a lot of hidden costs being billed to someone else (future generations for instance).

Or we try to deal with it though political processes ending in legislation — which is how democracy works. Some of us will try that. It remains to be seen how successful it will be.

And alternative fuel cars are a big things these days — watch out for the Italians. Their govt. has sunk several billions into developing environment friendly cars. If it takes off, the Italians might be able to cash in on that investment, leaving the late-comers to strugge.

It all depends on, again, a public political process of raising awareness and providing alternatives to the kinds of cars we get to choose from at present.
And from the Euro perspective it doesn't look as if it's the US preferences that have a future. It might be easier for China and India to enjoy the joys for general car-ownership if the cars are relatively small, made from recycled materials and runs of bio-gas. They would get less of the not so nice side effects of pollution and congestion.

Of course the logic of ostentatious consumption that seems to fuel the increase in US car size might apply, meaning that the ones who can afford huge cars will get them just to show how they can afford it.

Which is again where legislation comes into play. Let them get these cars, just tax the living daylight out of them, making them again prohibitively expensive. If the absolutely need a huge car for wharever reason, at least make sure they pay enough for the pleasure for everyone else to benefit from their choice.

 

[Verbose]

If you're going to get into a wreck with a big-rig, would you rather be in a full size SUV or a tiny car?
[...]
I must do what I think is best for me and my family first, and the global petroleum supply and global warming second.

That's fair enough.

But I also think this has to do with the general level safety in traffic in various countries.

I've driven a lot in France, and the frankly irrational traffic system and small cars zipping about at high speeds make me nervous, especially in view of the relatively high number of fatal accidents France has. I might buy myself a big car there, for safety.
Sweden by comparison has the biggest cars in Europe, not quite like in the US, but enough for a noticible difference compared to many other European nations.

But Sweden is also "the land of the zero vision", i.e. the stated political goal is to have zero fatalities in traffic accidents. Short of illegalising private cars, that's not going to happen, but they have very consciously proceeded to identify and correct as many hazards as could be found.

The result is very safe traffic and the lowest number of per capita fatal accidents in Europe. Since traffic itself is so safe I have no problem getting a small car.
Would I be safer in a big one? Sure, but the added security is so small it's negligible. Accidents here are mostly of the freak, maximum bad luck kind where car size matters little.

Except that statistically SUVs here are proving themselves as liability, upping the fatalities (were talking small actual numbers but still a statistically significant impact). And partly it's because the size gives people an inflated sense of security, leading to more careless driving.

So I would like to give the SUVs a miss. They may provide more safety for their owners, but they are decreasing the safety in general.

 

[bhsup]

you use more gas by driving an SUV instead of a small car

Go check out the mileage of a Lexus all wheel drive and get back to me.

 

[Strider]

I drive a a fairly small vechile (Jeep Wrangler), but I really don't care one way or the other what anyone else drives. What alot of you don't seem to understand, is that high gas prices are a good thing.

Higher gas prices gives people a greater incentive to create and use alternative fuel methods. Hell, if you can make a fuel that is cheap to make, then sell if for 30 or 40 cents less than gasoline, you'd make a fortune. I believe the most popular (alternative fuel) at this moment is Ethanol, which would be about the same price as gasoline today.

Only problem really with Ethanol is that it leaves almost everyone except the U.S. and Brazil begging for fuel, as they are the only two countries capable of producing it on a large scale.

I get tired of hearing about this "fuel problem" constantly. There are hundreds upon thousands of differant types of fuels, most of which will never run out. Gasoline is just the easiest and cheapest at the moment. Once it becomes more expensive, then were switch.

 

[Verbose]

I get tired of hearing about this "fuel problem" constantly. There are hundreds upon thousands of differant types of fuels, most of which will never run out. Gasoline is just the easiest and cheapest at the moment. Once it becomes more expensive, then were switch.

It's also a question of inftastructure. We've built ourselves an infrastructure that favours gasoline (it's one of these "large technical systems").

Getting another takes investments and a politcial will to spend serious money. What's happened is that now alternatives are being put forward that can modify and use the present infra.

That's prolly a prerequisite for success. We will be hard pressed to build something on that scale unless absolutely necessary.

And gas prices can be artificially inflated by taxes, provided there's the political will to try to effectuate a switch to something besides petrol. Dunno if that's being done in the US at present. California mayhaps?

 

[BasketCase]

Higher gas prices gives people a greater incentive to create and use alternative fuel methods.

Alternative fuels are not necessarily better. There are a large number of people (maybe a majority, maybe not) who prefer fossil fuels over nuclear energy. Additionally (from what I know, anyway) fossil fuels are a lot cleaner than coal.

 

[Strider]

Alternative fuels are not necessarily better. There are a large number of people (maybe a majority, maybe not) who prefer fossil fuels over nuclear energy. Additionally (from what I know, anyway) fossil fuels are a lot cleaner than coal.

Economics doesn't overly care about better, just cheaper.