Getting votes with the green-car shell game
Getting votes with the green-car shell game
When it comes to new vehicles, governments have honed in on fuel economy as their eco target. Important, yes, but just one very tiny piece of the puzzle.
It’s a shell game, really. Cars that pollute less are important, but drivers that pollute less are even more important.
Since climate change is top of mind, and carbon dioxide is linked to it, governments want to cut back on gas consumption. That, of course, makes sense. It’s as easy to grasp as this: if you could improve fuel economy by 10 per cent, carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by 10 per cent.
Just how much carbon dioxide does your car put out? It would take just 475 litres — about eight tanks — of gasoline to completely fill the Washington monument at 170 metres tall, by 17 metres wide and 17 metres deep. That’s assuming about 9.0 L/100 km economy, and 475 litres covers about three months of driving.
If your vehicle averages 15.0 L/100 km, then you’re filling up the ol’ monument in less than two months.
But remember, governments are all about being popular. So, by hitting big business and targeting fuel economy — the easiest possible target it could find — is government really serving you? Or is it merely trying to appear to be doing something about the problem for voters so it can get re-elected?
It’s as simple and obvious as this: upping fuel economy is important but our vehicle use is, without any question, the biggest overriding factor when it comes to carbon dioxide emissions. Consider if you had no reason to drive. Your vehicle would not emit carbon dioxide. Put in perspective, it makes all this scrapping for slight increases in fleet-fueleconomy averages seem secondary to the real issue.
Take Vehicle 1, a car that gets 7.0 L/100 km, and compare it to Vehicle 2, one that consumes 15.0 L/100 km. Obviously, 7.0 is better than 15. But if the driver of Vehicle 1 logs 80,000 kilometres in a year and the driver of Vehicle 2 logs just 10,000, which driver is the bigger polluter? Suddenly you discover the most important factor of pollution: driver use.
So, I really get my back up when people with three vehicles who drive two hours to work every day start going on about automakers needing to cut down on greenhouse gas. Aside from being hypocritical, it turns a blind eye to the big issue: our use.
It’s sad that we’ve dialed out common sense and have instead relied on government to tell us what’s good and bad.
The simple fact is government will not meddle this far into voters’ personal life. That includes vehicle use.
So, to substantially reduce carbon dioxide emissions, we have to govern ourselves because no one else is going to do it.
Remember, you pollute by driving. Cars can’t produce tailpipe emissions without you behind the wheel.
And carbon dioxide is just one issue that’s tied to high use. There’s more frequent tire replacement when more kilometres are traveled, more road wear (which is fixed with oilbased asphalt), and, most importantly, more frequent vehicle replacement.
It’s sad that while governments hand down strict new emissions and fuel-performance regulations and automakers spend billions of dollars and precious resources to meet them, we, the people who can make the most difference, just keep on doing what we’re doing.
It’s not enough to just blame ourselves. Let’s take responsibility and do something about it. Challenge yourself to improve your driving habits, to improve economy and reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and challenge yourself to cut your kilometres traveled.
Among her numerous accomplishments, Courtney Hansen is the author of her own book entitled the Garage Girl’s Guide, the host of Spike TV’s “Power Block,” the former host of TLC’s Overhaulin’ and a writer with Wheelbase Communications. You can e-mail her by logging onto www.wheelbase.ws/mailbag.html.