People buying SUVs are cancelling out climate gains from electric cars(newscientist.com)
newscientist.com
People buying SUVs are cancelling out climate gains from electric cars
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2265449-people-buying-suvs-are-cancelling-out-climate-gains-from-electric-cars/
60 comments
There are a lot of big pickups and SUVs on the road. There's a tiny percentage where the vehicle suits the use, but in the vast majority of cases, the vehicles are entirely a fashion with no real utility - or even negative utility. There is only a self-reinforcing utility of defending yourself from other tall and heavy vehicles. All this has been said many times before. When it comes to vehicles, people have no shame. What it tells us about the future of global warming seems very clear.
People repeat this “defense” thing but it makes little sense to me. The range of crashes where it would be fatal if you were in a sudan and survivable if you were in an suv is surely small. Especially since suvs have additional risk of rolling.
Spending tens of thousands extra to make yourself safer on the road is surely better accomplished with better safety features in the car rather than tons of steel.
Spending tens of thousands extra to make yourself safer on the road is surely better accomplished with better safety features in the car rather than tons of steel.
People are really bad at evaluating risk.
Rollover, Blindspot, and high speed loss of control are huge safety factors that SUVs underperform Sedans in, but "bigger is safer" has somehow persisted.
Rollover, Blindspot, and high speed loss of control are huge safety factors that SUVs underperform Sedans in, but "bigger is safer" has somehow persisted.
Our new SUV (Honda CR-V Hybrid) has less blind spots than any sedan and hatchback I had in the last 20 years. Life is also much easier with SUV once you have children. Safety features are amazing on CR-V although not much more than Civic 2017 we had earlier. At speeds below 70mph the behaviour of CR-V is pretty similar to Civic.
prisoner's dilemma: if everyone is arming up with larger vehicles, will you keep a sedan just to make a point, putting your family at increasing risks?
Not sure from a rational point of view that the risks are lowered; safest cars today are not SUVs
Tragedy of the commons: everyone takes a bit more land to feed their extra goat, the field is overgrazed, all the goats starve. Ie, in wanting more we end up all losers
Tragedy of the commons: everyone takes a bit more land to feed their extra goat, the field is overgrazed, all the goats starve. Ie, in wanting more we end up all losers
Agreed, but SUVs do cause additional risk to smaller vehicles. For example, at busy intersections drivers in smaller cars have a lot less visibility due to the walls of SUVs around them.
I can't count the amount of times I've had to delay turning at a stop sign to wait for a larger vehicle that has pulled up next to me to leave so I can regain visibility and make the turn. That or it becomes a game of edging out past the big vehicle.
I can't count the amount of times I've had to delay turning at a stop sign to wait for a larger vehicle that has pulled up next to me to leave so I can regain visibility and make the turn. That or it becomes a game of edging out past the big vehicle.
SUVs are certainly safer: https://www.iihs.org/ratings/driver-death-rates-by-make-and-...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-11/the-dange...
Quote: Among the increasingly popular heavy-duty models, the height of the truck’s front end may reach a grown man’s shoulders or neck. When you involve children in this exercise it starts to become really disturbing. My four-year-old son, for example, barely cleared the bumper on a lifted F-250 we came across in a parking lot last summer.
Quote: Among the increasingly popular heavy-duty models, the height of the truck’s front end may reach a grown man’s shoulders or neck. When you involve children in this exercise it starts to become really disturbing. My four-year-old son, for example, barely cleared the bumper on a lifted F-250 we came across in a parking lot last summer.
Another quote:
Since 1990, U.S. pickup trucks have added almost 1,300 pounds on average. Some of the biggest vehicles on the market now weigh almost 7,000 pounds — or about three Honda Civics. These vehicles have a voracious appetite for space, one that’s increasingly irreconcilable with the way cities (and garages, and parking lots) are built.
Since 1990, U.S. pickup trucks have added almost 1,300 pounds on average. Some of the biggest vehicles on the market now weigh almost 7,000 pounds — or about three Honda Civics. These vehicles have a voracious appetite for space, one that’s increasingly irreconcilable with the way cities (and garages, and parking lots) are built.
I bought my SUV around 3 years ago. There wasn't and still isn't non-Tesla, non-crossover, somewhat affordable options. I would love it if they just made an electric version of the vehicle I own, Subaru Ascent. I would gladly trade it in for an electric version. I want a vehicle with 3 rows of seating that can fold down and doesn't try to make a statement with the design. Until companies make cars that don't scream "electric car" with their design, we will continue to see these trends. Looking forward to the F-150 Lightning because that seems like Ford gets it and I would have preordered one if the damn thing could fit in my garage length wise.
I’m not the first person to say it, but it’s a shame that the station wagon got such a bad rap in the US, because that’s really what a lot of SUV buyers are after, utility-wise.
Rear-facing child seats are safer; what about a rear-facing third row?
Rear-facing child seats are safer; what about a rear-facing third row?
2 years from now I think you'll have quite a few SUV options (though many of them are arguably more CUVS) - Kona, Niro, EV6, etc
A huge percentage (about 20%) of all cars I see are SUVs. Even for smaller cars there seems to be a trend towards really bulky bodies. Cars have become larger and larger over the years.
We have a giant problem with climate change yet car manufacturers keep making larger and larger cars. And people buy them. This does not make any sense to me. It only accelerates climate change, parking spaces become even harder to find in cities, and most people don't need an SUV at all.
I think SUVs and all large trucks that are not real utility vehicles should be outlawed.
We have a giant problem with climate change yet car manufacturers keep making larger and larger cars. And people buy them. This does not make any sense to me. It only accelerates climate change, parking spaces become even harder to find in cities, and most people don't need an SUV at all.
I think SUVs and all large trucks that are not real utility vehicles should be outlawed.
I need my SUV, but I do wonder what you have that you don't need that we can outlaw without thinking about the consequences.
I don't doubt that there are some legitimate use cases for SUVs. The problem is all the people living in cities have virtually zero need for an SUV. Since it is absolutely unfeasible to require people to provide proof that they need an SUV before purchase the only way seems to outlaw them.
The massive push for EVs while simultaneously allowing car manufacturers to build larger and larger ICE SUVs seems stupid and counterproductive.
The massive push for EVs while simultaneously allowing car manufacturers to build larger and larger ICE SUVs seems stupid and counterproductive.
Your totalitarian way of thinking is frightening.
"The problem is all the people living in cities have virtually zero need for an SUV." - who are you that you know so much about so many that you don't know? The problem is that you're a self centered totalitarian.
Is it totalitarian to expect people to pay for their externalities? Your damage is currently being subsidized by other people.
You have no idea what I do with my vehicle, yet you believe you can make that vehicle illegal. This is while your own actions and consumptions lead towards a disaster, which should certainly be made illegal as well. Whatever they are. I don't even need to know.
Taxing something and making it illegal are different things. And the damage caused by larger vehicles is not hard to understand. Damage to roads and emissions are simple functions.
And yeah, my behaviors that have harmful externalities should also be taxed.
And yeah, my behaviors that have harmful externalities should also be taxed.
The original post did not say that externalities should be taxed. It said, "SUVs and all large trucks that are not real utility vehicles should be outlawed".
That's not what your asking. If you can quantify externalities una suitable manner then do so and hold them responsible? If you can't and you decide to ban instead that tells us it's more about control than anything.
My wife and I trades in our Honda Civic for an SUV. We have 4 kids and we needed something that can hold 4 child seats.
We NEED the SUV- even if I only put all 4 kids in it 25% of the time, se still need it
We NEED the SUV- even if I only put all 4 kids in it 25% of the time, se still need it
No, you don’t. A van or station wagon could easily do the same.
Don’t claim you “NEED the SUV” when you really don’t.
Sure, you may WANT the SUV, but that’s not the same thing as NEEDING the SUV.
Don’t claim you “NEED the SUV” when you really don’t.
Sure, you may WANT the SUV, but that’s not the same thing as NEEDING the SUV.
Stricter occupant safety and emissions requirements incentivise the development of larger vehicle platforms.
Something missed in the conversation, because the Honda CR-V is a smaller platform than the Honda Accord; the facts for storage capacity or seating aren't there either.
If we really examine the differences at a fact level, the main child(ren) factor is really the height (not having to bend over @ a car seat). A small convenience, and a convenience that points to Americans continuing to have less physical mobility.
Anecdotally, I do think more people are complaining about the difficulty of squatting down to my sedan seats.
If we really examine the differences at a fact level, the main child(ren) factor is really the height (not having to bend over @ a car seat). A small convenience, and a convenience that points to Americans continuing to have less physical mobility.
Anecdotally, I do think more people are complaining about the difficulty of squatting down to my sedan seats.
Electric SUVs will be coming very soon. Two of the first vehicles using GM’s new EV platform rolling out in 2022 are SUVs.
I look forward to large SUVs losing their social license. Men can find another way to feel like big tough guys.
What a bizarre take on this.
As if there are zero reasons someone should own an SUV.
It's okay to feel weak my man.
SUVs look cool. That's why. They are also somewhat of a status symbol.
We could ban all gas-powered cars now: just start with vehicles priced over $100,000, and decrease the threshold by $10,000 annually.
Why ban higher priced vehicles first? If it's only about the environment you should ban by level of emissions.
There isn’t really an affordable option for people with kids, so it’s not a great idea regardless.
Model Y seats seven and the post said start with $100k cars. If they can afford a $100k ICE car they can easily afford a Model Y.
Or even two Model Ys, for the same money, because while 2x purchase price is over $100k, the TCO is so much lower than for an ICE car, and it’s really the TCO (total cost of ownership including everything after purchase) that matters if your worry is affordability.
So assuming two parents, it works for people with up to five kids, or if they have two drivers in the family, up to 12 kids. Most families have fewer than 12 children.
Or even two Model Ys, for the same money, because while 2x purchase price is over $100k, the TCO is so much lower than for an ICE car, and it’s really the TCO (total cost of ownership including everything after purchase) that matters if your worry is affordability.
So assuming two parents, it works for people with up to five kids, or if they have two drivers in the family, up to 12 kids. Most families have fewer than 12 children.
Just having 7 seats doesn’t mean that 7 can actually be seated. I would argue that if you had two car seats the third row would be completely in accessible.
Even if you didn’t have two car seats it’s unlikely that any of the kids stuff will fit as well. Kids come with a lot of stuff in general.
I bought my Tahoe for $30k, I looked at Tesla but we couldn’t afford the 100k price tag of the model X.
For people who are in lower or lower middle class total cost of ownership is something that you can’t really take into consideration because it’s easy to flex the amount spent on gas by reducing the driving around and being more efficient with your errands, but you can’t flex your payments.
Lastly while 57k isn’t bad for an electric vehicle, it’s still far from affordable for a large portion of Americans.
Even if you didn’t have two car seats it’s unlikely that any of the kids stuff will fit as well. Kids come with a lot of stuff in general.
I bought my Tahoe for $30k, I looked at Tesla but we couldn’t afford the 100k price tag of the model X.
For people who are in lower or lower middle class total cost of ownership is something that you can’t really take into consideration because it’s easy to flex the amount spent on gas by reducing the driving around and being more efficient with your errands, but you can’t flex your payments.
Lastly while 57k isn’t bad for an electric vehicle, it’s still far from affordable for a large portion of Americans.
> but you can’t flex your payments.
Interesting point, sounds like an unserved need that maybe could be a business opportunity for somebody.
Another thing you can’t flex is repairs, which tend to be more frequent for ICE cars.
> I would argue that if you had two car seats the third row would be completely in accessible.
I think you meant to say “I would imagine.”
And as is frequently the case with people underestimating Tesla, you would imagine wrong.
You can put not just two, but THREE car seats in the second row and still access the third row. The second row seats move forward easily and temporarily to enable this.
Interesting point, sounds like an unserved need that maybe could be a business opportunity for somebody.
Another thing you can’t flex is repairs, which tend to be more frequent for ICE cars.
> I would argue that if you had two car seats the third row would be completely in accessible.
I think you meant to say “I would imagine.”
And as is frequently the case with people underestimating Tesla, you would imagine wrong.
You can put not just two, but THREE car seats in the second row and still access the third row. The second row seats move forward easily and temporarily to enable this.
Hard to put a price on safety of your family.
Hank Williams’ daughter died in a Tahoe and my thought at the time was: someone like that, why weren’t they in a Model Y?
Later found out they were towing a boat. Choices.
Hank Williams’ daughter died in a Tahoe and my thought at the time was: someone like that, why weren’t they in a Model Y?
Later found out they were towing a boat. Choices.
Sure, so do both. One reason to limit the high priced ones is that those buyers should be able, with that money, to afford a truly fantastic EV, so there is generally little sensible reason for them to be buying an ICE vehicle given the circumstances.
Because people with kids should have to take public transit?
There really isn’t an affordable electric option for people with kids.
There really isn’t an affordable electric option for people with kids.
[deleted]
There are are a number of lower and lower middle class that people with kids do in fact have to take public transit. And if not public at least extended friend, family transit. Even, non electric, there is an SUV premium that only the top 30% of Americans ~can afford.
Asking for over half of all Americans - what public transit?? Even in cities like Dallas it's totally not a feasible alternative to a vehicle.
It’s the buses in Dallas that drive around all day with only the driver. If your on the outskirts sometimes there are two empty buses driving together.
Over half? I think you've read my post incorrectly.
I preemptively answered this by saying extended friends and family are a top source of transit.
But yes, walking, bus systems, getting rides, for some demographics, ride shares. Cities like Atlanta and Dallas have low economic mobility because you can't get anywhere except by car.
I preemptively answered this by saying extended friends and family are a top source of transit.
But yes, walking, bus systems, getting rides, for some demographics, ride shares. Cities like Atlanta and Dallas have low economic mobility because you can't get anywhere except by car.
If you have two kids and the grandparents live with you (our situation), unfortunately SUVs are more or less the only option. Otherwise you take two cars everywhere, and two sedans are worse for the environment than one SUV.
If you frequently have that many passengers, then the vehicle makes sense. However, my guess is that most SUVs and trucks on the road at any times have 1-2 passengers in them. It's not broken up by vehicle type, but the average car has 1.5 passengers.
https://css.umich.edu/factsheets/personal-transportation-fac...
https://css.umich.edu/factsheets/personal-transportation-fac...
Maybe an alternative would be to convert all major roads to tolls, then offer discounts for HOV and electric.
I suspect this may be in part because many people have a need for something like an SUV to carry children and/or cargo from time to time, but can't justify another vehicle so the SUV or truck doesn't need to be driven all the time.
In my case, I have a pickup truck I need for work, but I don't drive enough outside of work to justify the cost of keeping my smaller car on the road also.
In my case, I have a pickup truck I need for work, but I don't drive enough outside of work to justify the cost of keeping my smaller car on the road also.
When I first got my SUV, I was the only passenger 25% of the time. And I NEEDED it.
I would load my 3 kids up, take them to day care, got to work. My wife would pick them up from day care and I would drive home without kids.
The SUV was the smallest vehicle I could get to transport 3 kids in car seats. And I needed to drive my kids to day care.
I would load my 3 kids up, take them to day care, got to work. My wife would pick them up from day care and I would drive home without kids.
The SUV was the smallest vehicle I could get to transport 3 kids in car seats. And I needed to drive my kids to day care.
I think there's a disconnect between some of the folks here and the live of the average suburban family. My mother regularly had to drop-off 4 kids at school then pick up groceries for 6 people. You can't do that with a sedan. There'd be a better case against trucks - they're undoubtedly a fashion statement most of the time, but when you need a truck (which is inevitable for someone with a house/land) there's no substitute. It's even more so in rural areas - no one's gonna throw a deer carcass in the trunk of their Tesla.
Even a mid-sized sedan can handle that. A full-sized sedan could do it with room to spare.
Not comfortably...
What happened to minivans?
They're still around, just not as fashionable these days. I was under the impression that they get the same MPG that SUVs get, so they're equally inefficient in my mind.