So many of you have heard about this government program that offers you money back for trading in your old car for a newer, more gas efficient model. The Sierra Club explains it briefly:
Just over a month ago, President Obama signed into law the Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS), aka “Cash for Clunkers.” Between now and November 1, $1 billion in federal funding is available to help sell new vehicles. That means you can get a $3,500 to $4,500 credit toward replacing your old gas guzzler with a newer, more-efficient model.
Yes, this in theory is great. However, why not put that money toward improving the cars people already drive? I know, I know, our auto industry is in trouble. But I have one solution. Yes, it’s off the top of my head, and yes, it has no cost benefit analysis attached, but I still think it’s worth sharing. I put this to you, auto companies. Why not partner with an organization like Lovecraft and help transition “clunkers” into perfectly healthy, uber efficient vegetable oil-guzzling roadsters? $3,500 is more than enough. I say this creates jobs AND a new market for veggie oil outlets …Bah, I know why. Because auto companies, like oil companies, need us to remain dependent on them. They can’t have us running all willy nilly using waste to get around town.
On a more serious note, I am curious: Do the carbon emissions savings from improving gas efficiency outweigh the waste (not to mention now wasted energy) that those “clunkers” become after dealerships take them in? I am sure they are recycled. But the energy used to make them in the first place was already spent. So is using more energy to turn them into parts for something else really saving the planet? Maybe that is a silly paradox, but it’s worth pondering. There is a math problem in there somewhere. If 10 people get rid of 10 working Hummers and each of them buy a Prius, then the energy spent is 10 X the energy used to make the Hummer + 10 X the energy used to recycle the Hummer + 10 X the energy used to make the Prius. Compare that to the amount of energy spent per Hummer across the next, say, 10 years each Hummer would be driven … maybe it evens out, maybe it doesnt? Food for thought. Or energy for thought. Your thoughts?
I agree, scrapping the big guys has got to be more wasteful than letting them die a natural death.
I find it most amusing that no one considers the problems with switching from fossil fuels to giant batteries which are filled mostly with lead and corrosive chemicals and are extremely energy intensive to produce. Everything’s a trade-off.