In reply to:
Every fuel-consuming engine is a problematic powerplant from lawn mowers to Boeing Airliners the focus seems to single out SUVs as the first "layer" to correct. This simply doesn't make sense to me.
I agree, actually. I personally think effective mass transit is the way to go in general. I think the reason SUV's are singled out is that they are dramatically less fuel efficient than smaller cars, which in many cases would suit the needs of a lot of SUV drivers. Give me a reasonable replacement to the car and I'll go for it, but currently the combustion-engine car is the smallest vehicle that is a reasonable means of transportation. I do think there should be more pressure on car manufacturers to accelerate R&D on alternative fuels.
In reply to:
I think the number of large trucks (which include panel trucks, tow trucks, pickups as well as semis and others) on the road must be greater than SUVs. Using the same logic cars are not "less bad" than SUVs
SUV's (as far as I can tell from other searches) falls into the "light truck" category and outnumbers large trucks, but obviously does not outnumber passenger cars. I agree that cars are not "less bad" either. As I mentioned up there, show me a good alternative. In most cases, there are much better alternatives for people than SUV's (except obviously if overall design and styling is a primary factor -- there's not much that can be argued on this one).
In reply to:
Maybe a bit overdramatic but I take exception to the Queen comment!
Incidentally, I did find the numbers on SUV-car collisions and people in cars are something like 47 times more likely to die
Their point on the page I found that on (admittedly an anti-SUV page) was that SUV's were killing more people in other cars than they were saving people in SUVs.
Previous Topic
Index
