I don't think I actually asked a question, did I? I stated my inability to understand why auto makers are so reluctant to improve the efficiency of their products. It's like they believe the internal combustion engine was perfected in the 1950s and every change to improve efficiency (and the cleanliness of the exhaust) since then was unnecessary.
Why do they have to be forced to innovate? Why would they say "this is good enough"? It seems like backwards thinking to me. They should be eager to improve their products. Having higher efficiency than their competitor should be considered a marketing advantage.
Quote:
Car manufacturers want to build cars they can sell for a profit, not cars no one will buy.
I don't buy the argument that the automakers are only giving people what they want. If people don't know what is possible then of course they will settle for what is offered to them.
Auto makers have tried to keep consumers in the dark about more efficient technology. When GM built the EV1 they did everything they could to discourage people from buying it. And when it was finally killed GM had to threaten the leasers of the existing cars in order to get them back.
There are people who don't care about efficiency, and I don't understand that way of thinking any more than I understand why people continue to smoke cigarettes knowing full well that they cause cancer.
I would like to believe that if given a choice between two nearly identical cars they will choose the more efficient one. But that isn't the case. More often than not people will choose the one that has the "coolest sounding engine" or the one with the most cup holders, and that doesn't make sense to me.
Further skepticism need be applied to the assumption that governments could even implement potentially efficacious environmental reforms in a manner that would be useful.
Really? What about automotive emissions standards in California? Which, in fact, have impact outside California, because automotive companies tend to build them into all their cars rather than make cars specifically for the California market.
California's governmental policy is an economic disaster. I wouldn't look to that as an example of an effective and sustainable environmental policy.
I think efficiency is an ideal that automakers should be striving for, and I don't understand why they treat it like a burden that has to be forced upon them.
If a computer programmer wrote inefficient code their software would be less successful than their more efficient competitors. I like finding ways to make the programs I write do things with as few lines of code as possible. Clean and simple code is beautiful. And yet when it comes to cars people seem to love big, heavy, and inefficient. If I designed engines I would be obsessed with using as little gasoline as possible... and my cars wouldn't sell.
Although cars have been getting more efficient, of course. The advancement of technology made that possible. (Regulations can come only after the cost of the regulations is tolerable by the voters.) People do have a preference for efficiency because it lets them drive farther on a gallon of gas, it provides more horsepower, and it makes possible a lighter and more responsive car.
From a political perspective, we shouldn't concern ourselves with the reasons some people may prefer larger cars. Each of us will weigh the various factors and choose accordingly. Politically, our objective should be to maximize personal freedom so that people who enjoy owning an engineering marvel on wheels are able to pursue and attain that dream. It is exactly these types of rewards that drive us to get out of bed in the morning and work to make the world a better place.
Most people these days seem to want to force everybody into the likes of a Smart car. Since we are dreaming and masterminding out loud, I think that is exactly backwards. Many people enjoy having a larger and/or faster car. I bought and SUV (a Honda CRV) because I am tall and was tired having my head touch the ceiling. The CRV is great on vacations too. I think we should strive to make large and fast cars affordable to those who desire them and at the same time less polluting and more efficient users of resources. There is nothing wrong with wanting to maximize our enjoyment of life.
Why do they have to be forced to innovate? Why would they say "this is good enough"? It seems like backwards thinking to me. They should be eager to improve their products. Having higher efficiency than their competitor should be considered a marketing advantage.
Of course automakers are eager to improve their products - in the areas that are selling points for their customers. Efficiency simply wasn't that big an issue until gas prices started going up a lot.
Quote:
There are people who don't care about efficiency, and I don't understand that way of thinking any more than I understand why people continue to smoke cigarettes knowing full well that they cause cancer.
Well, I don't understand why people take the trade-offs involved in smoking cigarettes, but I do understand the attraction of buying big, inefficient cars (or, more often around here - trucks). Utah families are also large enough that buying SUVs and vans makes much more sense. Sedans simply don't have enough room to take the entire family somewhere.
FYI I currently drive a Honda sedan that gets around 29 mpg.
'How shall a man judge what to do in such times?' 'As he ever has judged,' said Aragorn. 'Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves, and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.'
Utah families are also large enough that buying SUVs and vans makes much more sense. Sedans simply don't have enough room to take the entire family somewhere.
If people have a justification for buying larger vehicles I don't have a problem with that (although I do hope the efficiency of those vehicles continues to improve).
The problem is that there are an awful lot of SUVs with just one person inside commuting into cities where the need for large tires, high ground clearances, powerful engines, and high torque for pulling trailers are completely unnecessary. Someone commuting to the office alone does not need a SUV.
The problem is that there are an awful lot of SUVs with just one person inside commuting into cities where the need for large tires, high ground clearances, powerful engines, and high torque for pulling trailers are completely unnecessary. Someone commuting to the office alone does not need a SUV.
I agree that it's a little silly. However, I would disagree with anyone who wanted to use government legislation to prevent such a situation.
'How shall a man judge what to do in such times?' 'As he ever has judged,' said Aragorn. 'Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves, and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.'
Joined: Mar 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 787 Location: a communist chocolate hellhole
Re: Doomsayer Environmentalists are Always Wrong « Reply #458 on Apr 26, 2010, 12:09pm »
I'm in a rare state of agreeing with Jason. I own a '72 Ford pickup - it's horridly inefficient, and it's exhaust stinks even when it passes emissions. But it's mine.
I have 3 kids, so I have a minivan with 7 seat belts and nearly a dozen cup holders. I sneer when I see a Hummer H3 with one car seat in the parking lot at the Ballet studio - but hey, it's their money, and at least they bought an American car.
Should we throw out any laws that get in the way of our personal freedoms when it comes to our cars?
I want to drive realllllly fast but those darn laws make it impossible.
You could always move to Germany.
There is a difference between a law that attempts to improve the safety of drivers using a road and one that attempts to mandate efficiency in gas consumption.
'How shall a man judge what to do in such times?' 'As he ever has judged,' said Aragorn. 'Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves, and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.'
Joined: Aug 2006 Gender: Female Posts: 3,492 Location: Olympia
Re: Doomsayer Environmentalists are Always Wrong « Reply #461 on Apr 26, 2010, 1:06pm »
When I was a kid, my mom stopped having a van because she was tired of being That Parent. (I think three kids is the reasonable limit of any intelligently-planned family, but that's me.) This was when we discovered that you can, if you are willing to violate the law a lot, fit seven people, with the youngest's being eleven, into a Subaru.
But isn't it intelligent, then, to work on making more efficient minivans? And actually-safer SUVs?
There is a difference between a law that attempts to improve the safety of drivers using a road and one that attempts to mandate efficiency in gas consumption.
I think both types of laws are ultimately for the greater good of society and should override individual freedoms.
Sure, the laws against speeding have a more obvious benefit, but I think all those people who have difficulty breathing will agree that clean air is beneficial to them and can lead to a longer life.
And if we're still hooked on oil a few decades from now when supplies start to run low we will regret having wasted it in that past. Imagine essential service vehicles like fire trucks and ambulances being unusable, and the transportation of food supplies grinding to a halt. Maybe we will revert to using horses.
There is a difference between a law that attempts to improve the safety of drivers using a road and one that attempts to mandate efficiency in gas consumption.
I think both types of laws are ultimately for the greater good of society and should override individual freedoms.
Sure, the laws against speeding have a more obvious benefit, but I think all those people who have difficulty breathing will agree that clean air is beneficial to them and can lead to a longer life.
Controlling toxic emissions that do real harm to people and mandating fuel efficiency to reduce carbon emissions are not necessarily the same thing.
Quote:
And if we're still hooked on oil a few decades from now when supplies start to run low we will regret having wasted it in that past. Imagine essential service vehicles like fire trucks and ambulances being unusable, and the transportation of food supplies grinding to a halt. Maybe we will revert to using horses.
Of course, many people in the '70s believed we were mere years (not decades) away from exhausting the Earth's oil supply. Where their prophetic vision failed was in underestimating human ingenuity. New techniques were developed to discover oil reserves and recover oil from reserves thought previously unworkable. The doomsday predictions of the energy crises believers proved to be wrong.
'How shall a man judge what to do in such times?' 'As he ever has judged,' said Aragorn. 'Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves, and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.'
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o162/lunarorbit/manonmoon.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4969/evergreen100.jpg "[avatar]")
![[msn]](http://images.proboards.com/msn.gif "[msn]")
![[avatar]](http://home.comcast.net/~jbpostma/d20.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.ricksantorum.com/sites/default/files/family_feature2_0.jpg "[avatar]")