In reply to:


My only disagreement is the targetting of SUVs and SUV drivers as the "evildoers" of our society. SUV and their drivers are being targetted by religious groups, vandals, governemt agencies and others as a scapegoat IMO while SO many other groups of rampant pollutors go unnoticed by the people and press. Most of the energy to educate is being lauched against SUVs. I think the owners factories, strip mines, lubmer companies, etc are sitting back and having a good laugh because there is no focus on them. I get the feeling that campaigning against SUVs allows people to feel like they are doing their part for our environment/future while frankly SUVs are a drop in the bucket of the problems we face.



The thing is, that a large chunk of the non-renewable energy the US uses each year goes on making cars/trucks/SUVs go.

A SUV is as you point out only one of the causes of the manyfold problems that the US (and by extension, everyone else) faces with burning fossil fuels.

However the SUV it has become a very obvious and noticeable symbol for some vocal lobby groups - and some not so vocal lobby groups.

Yes, these groups may be misguided to target only SUVs, but we/they have to start somewhere in reducing CO2 emissions and other emissions, and yes, cars & SUVs are not the only sources of those, but they do represent a large chunk of what are considered by some to be "non-essential" or discretionary activities, which can be reduced or redirected without significantly harming the "GDP"/economic output of the US.

And when looking at the area of Vehicular pollution/emissions, SUVs stand head and shoulders over any other vehicle on the road in terms of that, and the numbers are at 25% and growing fast portion of new vehicle sales.

So with that said, the facts would tend to indicate that to fix a large chunk of the current vehicle pollution problem, you have to fix the SUV problem.

And to fix the SUV problem you either have to legislate to make them cleaner - something which your politicians seem unwilling to contemplate, and/or in the meantime/absense of a law change, you re-educate a significant part of the 12.5 million buyers of SUVs to know what to consider when buying one, and maybe they end up buying an alternative - a non-SUV.

That alone would make a big impact on the vehicle emissions "problem", and then you would have to move to other targets elsewhere like in industry etc.

But we are not at that point yet.

The thing is with big issues like Global Warming is that nearly everyone agrees its a problem, but no-one wants to have *their* lives/choices etc affected by the hard decisions that need to be made and implemented by all of us, they want other folks to bear the brunt first. And then you end up with a situation where nothing gets done and the problems get a lot worse, and then eventually everyone has to suffer - some more than others, the side-effects of the "solution".

So, if you don't start somewhere, you don't start at all, but having started its important to keep on changing, not just making one change and then letting it be - that will never work long term.