Tags
auto manufacturers, cheap gas, europe, finite resource, fuel efficient cars, gas, petroleum, toothpaste, united states, waste
Recently heard an auto manufacturing executive say that the reason car manufacturers in the United States don’t make fuel efficient cars is because gas is so cheap here. If we had expensive gas, like in Europe, we’d have fuel efficient cars. I think he’s missing the point. Gas/petroleum is a finite resource. No matter how inexpensive it is to buy, we shouldn’t be wasting it. Period.
Toothpaste is inexpensive. That doesn’t mean I’m going to use half the tube and throw the rest away. See my point?
Advertisement
From an ethical/common sense perspective, you’re right on the mark, Mary. From an economic perspective, I can see where he has a point. When gas prices are low, the average consumer wants power, not fuel efficiency, and they’re willing to pay for power, but not fuel efficiency. Any automaker offering fuel efficiency would be outcompeted by those who don’t. Either the car would be less powerful, or it would cost more. Either way, the majority of Americans weren’t willing to pay for that until gas prices started hitting $4/gallon.
One of the reasons gas costs so much in Europe is that governments tax the crap out of it. And we live in a culture where the majority doesn’t want to pay taxes and will toss out politicians who suggest raising them.
So I don’t just blame Detroit for the dearth of fuel efficiency. It’s We the People who are largely in the driver’s seat on this one.
To a degree, I understand consumers wanting more power. My car doesn’t have it, and it can get a little scary on the highways sometimes, since other drivers assume my car can do things that theirs can’t. When I’m poking along, sometimes people behind me get angry and think I’m just not paying attention. Nope. It’s just that I have an older, less powerful car that cannot respond the way theirs can, and running me over or getting pissed off isn’t going to help.
This is a problem that really requires federal intervention to solve. And not just with new standards, but with an emphasis on figuring out better energy sources than gas and oil. And then we have to not toss them out of office for doing it.
Hi, Amy – You make many great points here. The lack of fuel efficiency is, to some extent, our fault, too, because we do tend to take the path of least resistance. We can’t seem to do the right thing without having some measure of pain to force us into it.
I do think, however, that if auto manufacturers would simply decide to start offering more fuel efficient vehicles alongside the gas hogs, and the cost wasn’t considerably different, people would choose the fuel efficient models. This would only work if the vehicles being offered were pretty much the same. The fuel efficiency would also have to be a great increase over what we are now being offered, not a measly 5 to 10 miles per gallon increase, but 25-50 miles per gallon. Make the choice easy and obvious and most people will do the right thing. It’s why some recycling companies are allowing people to co-mingle their recyclables, rather than making them separate everything.
Of course, I’m an eternal optimist/idealist about this, truly hoping that if the decision was easy, people would care, but maybe they wouldn’t. Plenty of people have ridden my tail and while my car has enough get-up-and-go to get out of their way, why should I? I go the speed limit. I can’t cure their impatience or their need to show off the power of their vehicle. (I always tell myself that I’m preventing them from getting a ticket by maintaining the speed limit.)
This month’s Wired magazine has an article with ideas for re-imagining the auto industry. It’s called Beyond Detroit and was written by Charles C. Mann: http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/17-06/nep_auto
Thanks for your well-considered comments, Amy.