Letters to the Editor
-
Oh yeah, "work vehicles"
I know the idiots who buy most pickups and SUV's are sucked in by the macho commercials that always seem to show these behemoths carrying parts through a construction site or hauling a horse trailer up a mountain. The reality is, I see them all the time in my downtown Minneapolis neighborhood, with shiny paint and not a speck of dirt -- obviously they've never been used for any heavier work than hauling a load of groceries home, a feat I manage just fine in my little Corolla. And given the way gas prices are, I'd expect that the small percentage of buyers who actually do use big vehicles for work would be pretty happy with higher fuel efficiency; carrying a heavy load uses enough gas as it is, and any increase in dealer price as a result of better efficiency would pay for itself very quickly with any vehicle that's actually used for the macho stuff.
-
You wanna drive a huge car? Then pay proportionally!
I've always wondered why we don't really make people pay for driving four-ton vehicles to pick up the dry cleaning. How about we put a scale in front of each gas pump and charge something like $1/gallon/1000 lbs. That is, gassing up a Mini would be $1.80 a gallon, but a Hummer would cost you $10/gallon.
-
People do pay proportionally...
The problem is that the penalty for driving a gas guzzler still isn't high enough. If you choose to drive a Hummer that gets gas mileage in the mid teens, you buy more gas, and, therefore, pay more gas tax. While I think its obnoxious and unsafe, I wouldn't find it irresponsible for people to drive 2 ton trucks if, magically, they managed to get 30 mpg or better. I'm not advocating european levels of taxation, but an increase of 50 cents a gallon would do wonders to make people think twice about buying a car that is larger than they need. And to help the financially less well off not get pinched by this, I'd propose that the government pay people to scrap cars more than a certain age while also giving a subsidy on purchase of vehicles whose gas mileage is over X mpg where I'd imagine a reasonable value of X is somewhere around 40. How would we pay for it? Why, with the 50 cents a gallon tax on cars that don't exceed X mpg.
I find the (now phased out?) special hybrid car subsidy a little silly since, really, we should be subsidizing any combination of technologies, whatever they may be, that get cars past some magic value of X mpg, even if that is through the simple use of smaller engines and tweaks in engine management software. Many people don't need anything more powerful than the old geo metros and if I recall, those easily exceeded 50 mpg when driven prudently.
-
It's Long-Term Economics
Whether or not this administration or this congress decides to actually have meaningful laws to increase miles-per-gallon, GM and Ford should be reading economic forcasts and peak oil predictions for their own future.
Research and development for increased fuel economy has existed since the 70's and the car-manufacturers have purchased patent rights since then, yet they choose not to implement them.
Now is the time for the health of their very own companies to impose their own fuel efficiency numbers on their engineers. The asian car-makers have already done this and have taken over the market here. How much longer will it take for shareholders to demand accountability for their long-term investments?
If GM and Ford are to survive, they need to put vehicles on the road today that go beyond the narrow-minded thinking of our current oil-whipped government. For the sake of their own companies, for the sake of their share-holders, for the sake of their workers, their leaders need to think long-term, not just next quarter returns.
-
Why are SUVs cool?
In the 90's, Detroit managed to pull of the most amazing feat in the history of marketing. They managed to convince large numbers of Americans that big, ugly, boxy truck-things were cool. This was really good for Detroit because the technology required on an SUV was minimal compared to cars. I'm not an expert, nor have I ever worked in Detroit, but I wager it must actually cost less per unit to produce a Chevy Tahoe than it does to produce, say, a Buick Lucerne.
So now it's a decade later, gas is pushing three bucks a gallon again this year, and what does Detroit do? Roll out yet another generation of big monster truck-things. GM even has the gall to attach the label "responsible" to the new Tahoe. It is little wonder why GM is in such sorry shape, or why GM is getting its backside kicked by Toyota. Sure, you can buy a Toyota SUV (as a concern troll at DU mentioned the other day) that eats just as much gas as a Chevy the same size, but their bread and butter is still the Camry, which gets 34 MPG on the highway, and its smaller cousins. GM's small and midsize cars do not compare well with Toyota's because they would rather sell SUVs, even in the face of three dollar gas.
Mildly updated mileage standards for SUVs and trucks do not help. What might help is an appeal from ANYONE who possesses a bully pulpit to use one's head when selecting one's next new vehicle. There are lots of reasons to do it. Do it for your neighbor. Do it for cleaner air. Do it for the troops, who have to endure tour after tour in the Middle East so that you can drive your Expedition to Dunkin' Donuts for a bag of bagels on Sundays. You can even do it for your bank balance, which could probably use the help. Just do it.
-
Mileage Standards - Wrong Test
Consumption per mile driven is the wrong test. The proper test is total consumption. I make no apologies for driving an SUV, because I have four Siberian Huskies, and I spend a lot of time in the snow in the Cascades. The offset is that I changed my lifestyle to enable my hobbies. I live in the city of Portland, I work at home, I walk or ride my bike, so I only drive 5000 miles per year. My total gasoline consumption is about 300 gallons per year. I know quite a number of people with 40 MPG vehicles that drive more than 30,000 miles per year. That's more than 750 gallons total consumption. Who's the gas guzzler here?