Go Green -- Buy a Used Car. It's Better Than a Hybrid
Ditching your gas guzzler is a great way to reduce your carbon footprint, but if you really want to do something about global warming, get a used car. You'll be putting less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
As Matt Power notes in this month's issue of Wired, hybrids get great gas mileage but it takes 113 million BTUs of energy to make a Toyota Prius. Because there are about 113,000 BTUs of energy in a gallon of gasoline, the Prius has consumed the equivalent of 1,000 gallons of gasoline before it reaches the showroom. Think of it as a carbon debt -- one you won't pay off until the Prius has turned over 46,000 miles or so.
There's an easy way to avoid that debt -- buy a used car. The debt has already been paid. But not just any used car will do.
It has to be something fuel efficient. Like, say, a 1998 Toyota Tercel that gets 27 mpg city / 35 mpg highway miles. The Prius will have to go 100,000 miles to achieve the same carbon savings as the 10-year-old Tercel. Get behind the wheel of a 1994 Geo Metro XFi, which matches the Prius' 46 mpg, and the Prius would never close the carbon gap, Power writes.
There are a lot of used cars out there that top 30 mpg, and more than a few that reach into the 40s. Just about any Ford Festiva or Aspire will deliver 33 mpg. The mid-'90s Mazda Proteges are good for 30 mpg or so, as are the Dodge Colts of the early '90s.
Go back a little further and the Honda CRX HF models will give you 39 to 45 mpg in a sporty two-seater that's fun to drive. If you don't mind driving the cheapest of cheap econoboxes, the 1985 Chevrolet Chevette got 36 mpg and the '87 Chevrolet Sprint got 40.
You may laugh, but these cars are becoming big sellers. USA Today says fuel-misers from the early 1990s are selling like crazy and prices have gone up 30 percent in the past few months. A rust-bucket Geo Metro with 175,000 on the odometer recently sold for three grand on eBay.
Of course, it can be tough finding a car that old that hasn't been beaten like a drum, and Robyn Eckard of Kelley Blue Book tells us most used car buyers prefer something no more than 5 to 7 years old and with fewer than 100K on the odometer. No problem.
The auto industry has spent much of the past decade cranking out SUVs, but it has managed to offer a few highly efficient cars as well. The Toyota Echo delivers 30 mpg or better, as does the Honda Civic. The Chevrolet Prizm and Mini Cooper come close. Volkswagen's diesels are good for mileage in the low 30s.
We've undoubtedly left some off the list. But the point is, you don't need to buy a Prius -- or any other hybrid, for that matter -- to get great fuel economy and minimize your carbon footprint. You might feel better driving a hybrid, but you won't necessarily be greener.
Photo: Jeremy Brooks/Flickr
Posted by: Brad | May 19, 2008 2:38:56 PM
If Ford would just begin building the 1965 Mustang again, they could not keep them on the lot!!
Posted by: Larry | May 19, 2008 2:49:44 PM
Yep -- and if you slap a hybrid adapter on the back -- you've got the best of both worlds -- money and a hybrid....
http://www.hybrad.com
Posted by: iHero | May 19, 2008 2:54:10 PM
I inherited an 89 HONDA CIVIC dx with 0 power anything (rollup windows, 4speed stick,no airconditioning-ugh!) and it gets 50 MPG and with a little hypermiling I can get 60. it only has 52k nmiles on it and is in mint condition. Ive had 5 offers to sell it.
Posted by: Charlie | May 19, 2008 3:03:19 PM
I inherited an 89 HONDA CIVIC dx with 0 power anything (rollup windows, 4speed stick,no airconditioning-ugh!) and it gets 50 MPG and with a little hypermiling I can get 60. it only has 52k nmiles on it and is in mint condition. Ive had 5 offers to sell it.
Posted by: Charlie | May 19, 2008 3:03:59 PM
BTUs? Miles? Gallons? Really, it's time to use real units! What is wrong with Americans? USA, Liberia and Burma! Go team!
Posted by: Ed | May 19, 2008 3:17:28 PM
Ride a motorcycle... simple as that! Keep your used car for trips where you *must* carry gear. Hire a car if you need to take a long journey.
I used to own an Australian equivalent of a Chevette - The good ol' Holden Gemini, 40mpg was not uncommon.
Posted by: Benjamin | May 19, 2008 3:19:17 PM
@Ed
Shut up.
Posted by: ExtraKilometer? | May 19, 2008 3:45:11 PM
what about a used hybrid?
Posted by: derek | May 19, 2008 3:53:01 PM
interesting.. but one should figure in how many BTUs are used in manufacturing the used car as well. I doubt it takes as much as the prius but you never know without the calculation.
and ed.. feel free to live in Europe if you like their system so much. Ours works just fine.
Posted by: david b | May 19, 2008 3:55:51 PM
Also @ Ed - BTU = BRITISH thermal units
Posted by: bballchris | May 19, 2008 4:04:40 PM
An interesting way to look at vehicles with global warming in mind. The problem here is there are many people out there that need to seriously think about removing any and every source of petrol consumption from their lives that is possible, leading people to believe that buying 1998 toyota turcel is somehow "doing their part" to help out the world is a little irresponsible.... nice point about hybrids maybe not being as green friendly as some would have you believe.... but really too many people drive in this country when they dont have to.
Posted by: shawn | May 19, 2008 4:05:12 PM
The point about buying an older used car is that the BTU's are a sunk cost. The hybrid must be built new, which is an incremental cost in BTU's. Simple economics as well.
Posted by: Accountant | May 19, 2008 4:10:52 PM
@brad: wth is a standard? Is that a stick-shift or manual transmission car? Automatics are "standard" here in America and yes they do drop your mileage, sometimes more than most people would like to know. Most of the mentioned old cars are sticks too!
I just hope enough people take this advice and start driving down the prices of new cars and gas prices to a reasonable level or very soon only the middle and upper class will be able to afford to drive.
Posted by: carl | May 19, 2008 4:11:52 PM
For the last time: ppl aren't buying hybrids or high mpg cars cause they give a damn about carbon. I certainly don't. They are buying because gas costs too much and evil ppl are usualy in control of the lion's share of oil. When I finally get my Aptera, I plan to put a wood and tire burning stove on the back of it to make up for my lost share of carbon.
Posted by: octal040 | May 19, 2008 4:16:39 PM
I'm with Ed. Motorcycles get better gas milage and cost a ton less to build which equates to a smaller carbon footprint to start with.
Posted by: noneya | May 19, 2008 4:17:31 PM
I am not sure I agree fully.
A 10 year old Toyota Tercel will a lot of new parts compared to new Prius,till it runs 100,000 more miles. Have we calculated BTUs for those parts? And when a car is discarded, a lot of parts from that car are taken out and sold in used parts market. So those are not really waste.
And Prius was targeted at SUV buyers, not used car buyers. If you are ready to go for a lighter vehicle, then as somebody rightly said here, why not just go for a motorcycle?
Posted by: ManWhoSawTomorrow | May 19, 2008 4:18:08 PM
Wait, so what about a used small SUV? If I'm in the market for a vehicle, should I consider buying used regardless of fuel consumption?
(Also, on the topic of units, not only does 95% of the world use metric -- including Canada -- it's also theoretically the official system in the USA anyway. You should switch if for no other reason than it's easier. :/)
Posted by: RealMonster | May 19, 2008 4:18:09 PM
Manual aka Stick aka Standard transmission does increase your gas mileage. Why? Simple: anything that gives you more control of the engine gives you more choice over how efficient you wish to be.
Get a VW anything from any year with a turbo or 4 cylinder engine and you'll see your mileage improve a lot.
Posted by: | May 19, 2008 4:21:06 PM
@carl: 'Standard' is common vernacular for a manual transmission, even here in North America.
Posted by: RealMonster | May 19, 2008 4:21:46 PM
This article forgot to mention that you can get a really good used car between $2000.00 and $5000.00. Let the guy that bought it new take the depreciation. I haven't bought a new car for 30 years. My current ride is a 97 Mercedes E420 that I bought three years ago for $9500.00 with 112,000 miles. The poor sap that bought it new paid about $50,000 and I have had zero problems. Great ride. Lousy mileage though.
Posted by: checkmoot | May 19, 2008 4:23:12 PM
a diesel golf/jetta/beetle is good for mid 40's, not low 30's. I've had a jetta tdi for 3 yrs now and average well over 40mpg on every tank.
Posted by: sean | May 19, 2008 4:28:02 PM
My '99 Saturn SL gets 33mpg. The old Saturn S series is a reall good car, solid, dependable, inexpensive to maintain, and efficient. Stay away from the newer Saturns.
Posted by: RevMike | May 19, 2008 4:33:28 PM
@Accountant: Just where do you think used cars come from, anyway? Used cars have to be replaced sooner or later, and eventually the replacement will have the same "hit".
Older cars are also more likely to have emission problems, burn oil, need expensive spare parts, batteries, and so forth. All of which also have to be manufactured and have their own energy footprint.
Finally, it's also likely that a Prius will take an older and unwanted SUV or other gas guzzler off the road to be shredded and recycled. Most calculations of this sort ignore all sorts of second and third order effects in order to make their sensationalistic claims...
Posted by: Michael Long | May 19, 2008 4:40:04 PM
Asphalt Nation (Jane Holtz Kay) states that 1/2 of a vehicle's pollution is created in it's manufacture.
Posted by: Aubrey Pullman | May 19, 2008 4:40:11 PM
Why on Wired.com is there an article encouraging people to buy old technology?
This is such a poor article on so many levels, that has attempted to compare rotten apples with ripe oranges.
A few things to consider:
- Article is filed under category 'emissions'. Older vehicles were built to lower emission standards.
Check out CO2 emission stats for the authors recommendations vs. Toyota Prius on fueleconomy.gov.
- The manufacturing carbon footprint is for the industry to off-set, not the consumer. If Toyota manufactures in Japan & ships to the USA, rather than manufacturing here, then Toyota need to compensate for this. On this note, Toyota are exploring manufacturing the Prius (Plugin) in the US.
- When developing new technology there is always a greater initial cost.
The author, Chuck Squatriglia, can thank those that adopt cleaner, more efficient vehicles like Hybrids now, so he can one day buy a used one & tell himself he can sleep better at night.
Posted by: Scott | May 19, 2008 4:43:14 PM
When we drove a Chevy Sprint (same basic car as the Geo Metro) when I was younger, no one would believe me when I said we couldn't have air conditioning on long trips because the engine was only 3 cylinders. "There's no way it has only 3 cylinders. That's like a motorcycle engine!"
.
Great for zipping around town, but not good for long trips. We used to drive to Arizona and rub ice cubes on our skin to stay cool.
.
.
About used cars, though: don't most cars see an increase in emissions as they get older? Was this taken into account?
Posted by: ejoy | May 19, 2008 4:46:47 PM
The point of buying cars like the Prius, aside from saving money on gas, is to prove that fuel-efficient, alt-energy autos are a viable product, so that maybe the fucking auto companies will build more of them. Look, new cars are going to be built, they may as well be hybrid or some other (better) technology.
This article does bring up a good point about older cars with fantastic gas mileage. I had an 86 Honda Accord 4-door sedan. That was a full-size car. It got 45+ on the highway. So I'm really not that impressed with a Prius getting just over 50. It's ridiculous that that is the standard-bearer of a green car. We can do (and have done) better.
Posted by: JV | May 19, 2008 4:48:32 PM
Used cars are always better bang4buck.
[& only suckers buy new cars]
Agree that any 4 cyl VW w/ a turbo gets good enough mileage...and that inlcludes such bonbons as any Audi w/ the same small [1.7L.] block...some even have AWD...
Very good fun 2 drive, german design, quick, [almost fast], & 31mpg; '01-'03 TT, A3 \ A4 Audi can be had around $15-20K w/ a 2yr.CPO warranty...
instead of the ugly old slugs touted above, improv yr image and have fun driving, too.
Posted by: haole | May 19, 2008 5:07:54 PM
I wonder how many pounds per mpg these cars can carry? I only bring this up because I'm constantly being told how my diesel truck is some sort of sin against mankind. Of course it's almost always got 4 kids, two adults, 5 dogs and a bunch of gear going some place at 20mpg.
Posted by: JML | May 19, 2008 5:12:05 PM
I have to say. If we all buy a Prius, use Macs and drink Starbucks coffee. The world would be a better place. Throw in some indie bands no one has heard of and wow, EARTH SAVED!!!
No but seriously. I understand the point of the article but I'm not sure its the best idea. Its just a call for recycling. Which I am all for. But how about we melt down the old used cars and use them to make new better cars. Ones that run on hopes and dreams. Sorry...
Posted by: MH | May 19, 2008 5:14:08 PM
I'm with Sean. If your Volkswagen Diesel is getting 30mpg, you should take it in for service, something is very wrong. Mid to late 90's Jetta TDIs routinely return over 40mpg, our '98 Jetta TDI Wagon has always been between 43 and 45mpg. Oh, and we bought it used, so we get some sort of extra karma points? Wow, I must be shooting rainbows out my butt! Someone please do the math on a bicycle vs. a new Prius...
Posted by: krwalsh | May 19, 2008 5:14:45 PM
MH:
Melting and rebuilding those cars costs a lot more energy than fixing the old ones and keeping them running until they're dead (or close to it).
A new exhaust system to keep them cleaner, or some work on the engine, is nothing compared to casting a new block.
Posted by: Ben Schiendelman | May 19, 2008 5:31:37 PM
It hasn't gotten that bad people!
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
Posted by: steveballmer | May 19, 2008 5:35:07 PM
I just went to fueleconomy.gov and looked at these cars. For example the 98 Tercel gets a 6.1 CO2 footprint, while the 07 Prius gets a 4.0, they're both from Toyota of course. I don't see how we will help the environment by basically making a statement against the development of better hybrid technology. Keep buying hybrids and they will get better as technology advances, kind of a free market law. Besides, CO2 is not the whole story, I would like to see some numbers for other gases because old cars tend not to have very good emission control.
@checkmoot: Mercedes is a status symbol, so to start with the guy who bought it is undoubtly not a poor sap (specially not the poor part). He probably traded for a newer model years ago. Boasting in public that you bought a decade-plus old Mercedes and mocking the original buyer (who seemed to have worked it a lot judging by the 112K miles on it) makes you a poor sap wannabe. But don't worry, there are a lot of those, after all, once used Mercedes cars have to go somewhere and they are really great cars (I would buy one).
Posted by: A.F. | May 19, 2008 5:38:52 PM
Of course what's better than all these would be an Aptera... assuming that's it's claims of 300 miles per gallon are true of course.
Posted by: happle bapple cobbler | May 19, 2008 5:39:50 PM
I have to second charly - I have an 88 civic DX, but an auto. Right now, we're getting 38mpg average. Not bad, considering the car's got 292,000 miles on it. It's getting time for me to rebuild the engine again, but it's not that hard.
The reason the likes ofthe prius get comparatively bad milage, is that they have a big HEAVY batter packs in the back. The first rule of fuel economy is 'take out weight'
Oh, and you forgot to mention that the prius batteries will have to be replaced, and thats MORe energy, and more nastyness for the enviroment. I seem to recal some studies that showed the total enviromental impact of a prius was te same as that of a hummer H2 at 5,000 miles a year.
The biggest difference, though, is driving style. that can make a 20 EPAMPG car do 7mpg, or 35mpg. (and don't forget, the EPA figures are UTTERLY meaningless, as they're done on a treadmill, and some cars have been found with special EPA-profile engine management.
Posted by: Andrew Norton | May 19, 2008 5:54:04 PM
Part of the equation is keeping the car you have for many years. As we become a poorer nation I expect that people will keep their cars longer just out of necessity. Alas, newer cars jam-packed full of electronic widgetry aren't likely to last as many years simply because the gadgets will eventually fail and the parts will either be prohibitively expensive to replace or won't be available at all. The key is to build smaller, lighter, cheaper and simpler cars. Forget BlueTooth and power windows.
Posted by: Sean | May 19, 2008 5:58:44 PM
@Scott: We're assuming that the main goal for these people is to reduce their carbon emissions, which buying a used car would do.
Also, Derek is right.
Posted by: Daniel Reeves | May 19, 2008 5:59:32 PM
Great point. It shows that the car industry has had every reason to support the environmental hysteria. People are so sadly stupid sometimes. Take another example: do you know how anti-environmental is it to build a solar panel? If you take all the energy and poisonous waste that goes with it, you might think twice before going 'sustainable'.
Posted by: hschmidt | May 19, 2008 5:59:35 PM
oh, and i did forget to mention that if you want to look at green, look at Europe.
I grew up there, drivng european cars. My favourite is an old volvo 340 - used to get at least 35mpg from that, and it wasn't exactly a small car. in fact, i had a strip stateside and was driving a buick century, on the way tot he airport, it was crammed with the wife, my eldest and me on the front bench, and all our luggage in the trunk and back row - got the the UK, it all fit in my volvo easily. still got 35+mpg. That car was used to tow cars out of ditches and those stuck in mud. It could kick the tail out at 30mph with 4 passengers. It had a (safely tested) top speed of 110mph, and all that from a 1.4l engine.
Minivans in europe, have a 2l diesel sometimes - a V6 is a rarity. small cars aren't slow either - plenty of uk cop shows that crush that myth. One that springs to mind is of a kid in a VW lupo (now the fox) - a car two models SMALLER than the golf, doing 120ish MPH on a motorway. on the other scale, BBC's top gear took a Audi A8, with a 4litre twin-turbo diesel, 800 miles on a 20 gallon tank - thats 40mpg frm a high-end luxury car (and one that could do 0-60 in 6 seconds).
The problem eith euroean cars, is the dependance on automatic transmissions (smaller car engines don't do so well with the standard type) and the much lower octane standards in the US (regular UK fuel is 95RON, about the same as the 93 'premium' in the US)
I should point out, I did a lot of research on this topic a few years ago, as I was looking at starting a company doing euro-spec police cars for the US (a UK police spec volvo V70 t5/R gets the same economy as a crown vic, has a better equipment capacity, 4WD, and a top speed of 155-limited, better than the 122ish of the crown vic, or he 140-ish of the hemi charger, or impala - source MSP vehicle eval)
Of course, the biggest differences you'll see is if you go to a new car website, and look at the EU, and US versions of the cars. Chrysler sells 4 grand voyagers in the UK - 3 with a 2.8l diesel. how many diesel minivans do you see stateside?
gone on a bit long here, but things to really avoid are plug-ins - they're heavy, and whilst the car's not making any emissiosn, the coal-fired power station is, and don't forget all the energy you've wasted in all the converting of the power.
hydrogen is similarly, another battery service, since we have to use more energy to make the hydrogen than we get out - just like charging a battery.
Until that time, buying older, fuel-sippers is the way to go. And for those saying 'but they need work, and are more polluting' the more old cars people buy, the more viable it will be for companies to make improvement kits for them. Buying ecologically unsound vehicles, like a prius, only encourages the likes of toyota to work on cosmetically green vehicles, and not ACTUALLY green ones.
Posted by: Andrew Norton | May 19, 2008 6:33:00 PM
Just find someone with a manual transmission Saturn SC-1, which was last produced in 2002. These things average in the mid-30s for combined MPG and over 40 on the highway. Plus, the body panels are made of of polymer, so the panels do not rust out.
Posted by: Jim Bovinet | May 19, 2008 6:48:39 PM
I got 40.7 MPG in my 2001 Civic sedan on my last tank, and that's with the A/C on half the time. I'm on target to get 42-43 on this tank of gas. Just slow on the gas pedal and 55-60 MPH on the freeway and gas mileage improves dramatically...
Posted by: Ruslan | May 19, 2008 6:50:46 PM
Get over yourselves! We are swimming in plenty of oil! Think of all the headaches and energy going into fixing a used car! Plus, how do you expect there be used cars on the market, unless someone buys a new car?!! DUMB DUMB DUMB!!
Posted by: Brian | May 19, 2008 6:54:16 PM
I drove a 94 Geo Metro for a month and loved how little gas she took. However, you better use the money you save to buy a good life insurance policy. Sure, the environment is great, but one slick patch of pavement and you become part of it for good. A Prius will last well over 100k miles (how's that for mixing units) and isn't it nice to know you'll win in a picket fence accident?
Posted by: Luke Lorenz | May 19, 2008 7:07:38 PM
BTU isnt a good way to measure energy consumption as a BTU can come from a renewably energy source, thus, in the case of the prius, its 1.3 million BTU's could mean absolutey nothing at all, if they came from green energy
Posted by: john | May 19, 2008 7:26:41 PM
I don't care about Global Warming so much. A volcanic eruption puts out more carbon than man kind and nature cleans it all up in a few years. I just want the lowest DPM, dollar per mile. Hybrids can do that.
Posted by: Artema | May 19, 2008 7:33:32 PM
That sounds great until your beater starts consuming oil. Unless you have the cash to fix it or buy a refurb engine you're just going to start polluting the air up.
Posted by: Pat | May 19, 2008 7:36:56 PM
vw's diesels might get a listed combined mileage of low 30's mpg, but they get much better than that in the real world where most people have a bit more highway than city miles on their cars (depending on where you live). i live in SLC, UT and stay almost entirely in the city but i still manage 40-50mpg average on my '98 beetle TDI- which btw i bought used. and run biodiesel year-round.
Posted by: devin | May 19, 2008 7:45:31 PM
@Ed
I don't care what they say, I agree with you buddy. That's why I compute my fuel economy in furlongs per hogshead.
Posted by: chickenwing | May 19, 2008 7:55:00 PM
What about the raw materials it takes to create an new car today. I understand it takes about 10,000 lbs in materials to create a new average vehicle.
Now thats what I call waste.
Posted by: Alex | May 19, 2008 7:59:32 PM
I have a '96 VW Passat TDI (manual) and it gets 50mpg... not the 30 stated in the article.
Posted by: Megan | May 19, 2008 8:24:47 PM
The "cost" of creating the car shouldn't be borne by the person who drives it off the lot, but should be amortized over the lifetime of the vehicle.
The question of whether to get a new car to a used car is completely orthogonal to the question of what kind of engine to get in the car. One might, for example, buy a used hybrid.
New cars are awesome. You can almost feel the car depreciating as you drive off the lot while you inhale the sweet odor of the VOCs outgassing from the shiny new upholstery.
Posted by: fletc3her | May 19, 2008 8:50:58 PM
> Ford Festiva or Aspire
Using the term "car" a little loosely, aren't we?
Besides..where are you going to get parts when there is no more "Ford?"
Posted by: Darcy McGee | May 19, 2008 8:52:57 PM
Global warming is coming on so fast and requires such immediate and drastic action to fix that talking about whether to buy a new car or a used car is tantamount to talking about which type of umbrella to use to stop a hurricane. Stop driving your car to work every day and walk, ride a bike, or use public transport instead.
Posted by: Rupster | May 19, 2008 8:55:05 PM
> The reason the likes ofthe prius get comparatively bad
> milage, is that they have a big HEAVY batter packs in
> the back.
Yeah, but dude the pancakes are TOTALLY worth it!
Posted by: Darcy McGee | May 19, 2008 8:57:10 PM
My Yamaha sport bike gets great mileage, and it's faster than 99% of the cars on the road. Speed and gas mileage, how can you go wrong?
Posted by: Josh | May 19, 2008 9:21:43 PM
If you want to get miles per kilo you should go Nuclear.
Posted by: ben | May 19, 2008 9:37:32 PM
Buyers moving wholesale to small cars is a major shift for the American consumer, with more shifts to come….
http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/05/small-cars-pardigm-shift-for-america.html
N.A.’s big three weren’t ready.
Posted by: PacificGatePost | May 19, 2008 10:27:56 PM
my '91 Honda gets between 36-42Mpg - and that's with over 200-thousand miles on the hobbs.
If Rupster is correct, we could help heal the world by stopping rampant, out-of-control procreation.
More people + diminshing resources = more problems for everyone down the road.
Need interaction? Get a Roomba.
Posted by: mike | May 19, 2008 10:30:29 PM
Or, you could skip all of that and buy a used bicycle (or even splurge on a new one), mine gets me everywhere on breakfast, lunch, and dinner, which are basically sunk costs themselves.
Posted by: John | May 19, 2008 10:33:16 PM
"Motorcycles get better gas milage and cost a ton less to build which equates to a smaller carbon footprint to start with."
This is all true, but motorcycles are MUCH worse with respect to reactive hydrocarbon and nitrogen compound emissions. In fact, typical 50mpg motorcycles emit 10 times as much reactive pollution as a modern mid-size SUV. If you replaced all the 4-wheelers on the road with motorcycles, the average American city would find itself breathing circa-1980 levels of pollution.
There's no real way to correct this; even with a catalytic converter, motorcycles will still emit more reactive pollution than cars, because their engine and exhaust temperatures are so much lower there is not enough heat to break down the polluting chemicals.
So my Honda Helix is good for the carbon footprint, but not so good for the environment. Even the new EURO 3 compliant 400cc Suzuki Burgmans emit 3-4 times as much reactive pollution as a typical car.
Posted by: RickRussellTX | May 19, 2008 11:08:48 PM
I totally agree with Andrew Norton, European cars are so much better and more fuel efficient. It's not just because we use an increased number of diesel cars either, the small petrol hatchbacks that are around (Honda Jazz, Toyota Aygo and Yaris etc.) hit 50mpg no problem. When you stick a diesel engine in a car that size, the fuel economy is incredible. A current 1.4l VW Polo can get 74 mpg, and I could get 450 miles per £25 tank in my old Peugeot 106 1.5l diesel - worked out somewhere in the high 50s!
However I do think the Prius is a good idea, or at least a start. The next stage should be the downsizing of American cars!
Posted by: Moses Hoyt | May 20, 2008 12:33:14 AM
good luck finding a '98 toyota anything for less than 10 grand. and the geo's mileage is about it's only redeemable quality. might as well buy a motorcyle.
Posted by: Ibrahim | May 20, 2008 2:31:22 AM
As the others here are saying, European cars are incredible for gas mileage. I just picked up an 8 year old Opel Corsa that gets over 50 MPG on average. If I'm cruising down the autobahn at a sedate 60 MPH, it'll manage close to 60 MPG instead.
Posted by: Gahread | May 20, 2008 2:39:37 AM
Wii Fit feels very much like a version 1.0 trial run that's going to be made obsolete by a better sequel in six months."
Funny, that's what they said about Wii Sports. Still no sequel. =(
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
a beautiful woman from New York. Internet is a quite good place to meet friends and even find whatever your need. i am just in the beginning of my career and want to find a rich man, maybe to be my sugar daddy.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!========================*****************************i came here for a sugar daddy who likes to spoil me, a young sex and hot woman. i also created an account CuteNPetite on the Sugar Daddy seeking place "【【【【http://www.sugarmatchmaker.com.】】】"recently. you may want to check out my hot photos there.。。。。。。。。。。。。。。
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: lucy | May 20, 2008 3:04:50 AM
Please stop the misinformation campaign against EV Solar Panels. They DO NOT consume more energy to produce than the energy that they produce during their lifetime. In 2 to 4 years they produce MORE energy than what was used to make them.
Posted by: Alex | May 20, 2008 4:12:43 AM
I drive a $100 1990 rebuilt Ford Aerostar XLT van.Gets in the low 20s locally and after reprogramming the simple minded computer onboard,low 30s on the open road. The old beast,after I got it,has provided 210,000 trouble free miles.
I remove the rear bench seat when it is not needed and saves some weight.
Now working on a newer Aerostar for my daughter(rare 4WD model),replacing the 4 liter engine with the smaller 3 liter.
Doing your maintenance will help the mileage on any vehicle. Most of the cars quoted are too small (leg wise) for me to get into.
Posted by: Keith Smith | May 20, 2008 4:50:56 AM
i very much agree on buying used - for nostalgic reasons too. though it may be very much like a two-edged sword playing here. less sells of today's automotive industry won't necessarily translate into investments in future green technologies. on the bottom line, consumer behaviours need to change and public transport take a more prominent step. saving the current ecosystem from the impending environmental catastrophe will have to play a role to the bottom of all of todays's philosophies of our society.
Posted by: antron | May 20, 2008 5:12:40 AM
@Andrew Norton, Right on brother.
Posted by: Mike | May 20, 2008 5:29:32 AM
maybe one day the US will use cars like in europe. ford fiesta, bmw 1 series, toyota aygo. all are more efficient than a toyota prius hitting numbers north of 55mpg. Incidentally toyota aint exactly a green company. lobbied against Senate energy bill, and the lexus hybrid does less mpg than then normal one. (and pls 35mpg by 2020- not exactly a stretch target is it).
i'm all for being efficient (inefficient energy use is a <100 yr old issue anyway), but please get some perspective on this global warming. windmills, hybrids and solar panels aint going to change anything (and probably use more co2 than is ever saved).
Posted by: supersceptic | May 20, 2008 5:30:04 AM
One more reason not to buy a Prius that no one seems to be mentioning: They are ugly as hell. As are the rest of the 'green' cars being made today.
If we could easily get 35 mpg with 'old' technology why can't we do it now? Why don't we just increase the mileage on regular production cars?
Posted by: unbias | May 20, 2008 6:16:21 AM
What hasn't been mentioned yet is that the battery component of a hybrid has a limited lifetime. It is very expensive to replace. Replacing it negates any savings, both carbon or $'s to the owner. Yes, a used econobox makes a lot of sense.
Posted by: S attack | May 20, 2008 6:17:41 AM
Got to be a careful when comparing mpg in Europe and the US.
UK gallon is 20% bigger than the US gallon therefore european mpg will appear better than US consumption.
40 mpg in Europe is same as 32mpg in the US.
Posted by: Paul_Tim | May 20, 2008 6:22:54 AM
Does anybody wonder why the new small cars get such lousy mileage compared to older small cars? It's thanks to various "interest groups" and bureaucrats. The interest groups are the safety nuts. The result is cars that weigh far more than earlier cars of the same size and need bigger engines to move them.
A 1975 Rabbit weighed 1900 lbs. and had a 71 HP engine. It was really fast with a manual. It got about 28 city and 41 highway. A new Rabbit weighs exactly 1000 lbs more and gets 22 city and 29 highway. By the way that '75 Rabbit did use a catalytic converter.
Take a look at the new small cars like Yaris and Fit. They only get in the mid 30s on the highway. They require engines of over 100 HP to move them.
The weight increase are caused by both added safety stuff AND al the increased controls for emissions.
We suffer from a war between interest groups for "green" and interest groups for "safety". Both have supporting DC bureaucracies to support them.
Safety, good mileage, room: pick any two but you cannot have all three.
Posted by: John | May 20, 2008 7:02:22 AM
Just drop the lead-foot to get better mpg.
I highway drive and would regularly do 73 mph for most of the trip, netting me just over 20 mpg.
Same car, cut it down to 60 mph for a tank and got 30 mpg.
The price of gas these days makes this a no-brainer. - j
Posted by: jbird | May 20, 2008 7:03:00 AM
This idea is flawed on so many levels. A Hummer is a used car the moment it drives off the lot. The same with a Prius. This article suggests that we consider used cars a commodity in comparison to new cars, when in fact the new/used dichotomy is a bookkeeping excercise in vehicle amortization. We can't just go out and "build" a few hundred thousand 5 year old Civics. It does make sense amortize the carbon costs of a vehicle before scrapping it. But the market for new and used cars are different. A new car buyer is looking for the worry free experience of a new vehicle under warranty, and /or the status provided by such a vehicle. a used car buyer is typically more value driven. The fact remains the American used car fleet is oversized, and some of my reading suggests that this is leading to a drop in the value of used SUV's and similar vehicles. As much as you may want to own a used 5 year old Prius or Metro, they may be thin on the ground.My thoughts? Buy the smallest, most fuel efficient car you can afford(whether new or used)- or better yet, move to the city and take transit and bike as often as possible(which is what I did 15 years ago).
Posted by: Lloyd | May 20, 2008 7:07:47 AM
I got a used '05 Scion xA and I'm getting low 30s in all city driving. It cost me $10k, about half of what a Prius would cost me. But it's in such high demand that I had to buy it without test driving it because three other people were interested in it.
And every used car lot I went to had dozens of huge SUVs and trucks.
Posted by: Icelander | May 20, 2008 7:08:14 AM
I have a 96 vw jetta. Its falling apart . I plan on getting a new car. Either a Mazda 3 or Corolla. Gas mileage and fun to drive are a factor. And while I agree a motorcycle is a great choice(im practicing for my license) not everyone can get one. They are far more dangerous to ride (mostly cause of idiot car drivers) and weather will keep some folks off it for the better part of the year.
Posted by: Flassh81 | May 20, 2008 7:11:54 AM
Great article, this concept is called embodied energy, and it can be correlated to many different fields of view for environmentalism. Try preservation for the building industry, instead of buying new, buy old.
http://www.aia.org/nwsltr_cote.cfm?pagename=cote_a_200608_preservation
Posted by: ethan | May 20, 2008 7:28:52 AM
I agree, embodied energy is a great argument for historic preservation, considering how harmful the construction and demolition industries are to the environment. The link below is a fascinating article discussing this.
http://www.preservationnation.org/magazine/2008/january-february/cautionary-tale.html
Posted by: elizabeth | May 20, 2008 7:36:00 AM
with the 30 percent price differential of diesel over regular, my 93 buick roadmaster at 24 mpg is on a par for cost per mile with much smaller diesel cars and a family of 5 or even 6 can travel in comfort with a full set of luggage on a 4 hour trip to the coast. If you are wanting to improve the carbon footprint just share a ride, go with a neighbor or 2 to the grocery store and find a person or two at work to carpool with. with these simple steps your old big american car will beat out all the new hybrids and econoboxes on the road with single occupants.
Posted by: mike | May 20, 2008 7:45:22 AM
My 2000 Echo, still gets 38-42 MPG. This is a great little car with a nice amount of pep and a lot of room inside. It's very infrequently that my long torso'd 6'4" body can fit in in compact car, let alone be comfortable and have room to spare.
Posted by: Mr.Thomas | May 20, 2008 7:56:31 AM
I agree with what many have said in that I don't think the whole picture is being show here as far as the full footprint of older cars, but I also see the logic in tight times that if you have to get a new car, if it's cheaper to get an older car with better gas mileage, than do it. If you can afford to upgrade the emissions because you saved money by buying used with better gm, than all the better.
There are so many measures that can be taken, that I personally am not comfortable outright naysaying options that do have validity when reality factors such as finances must be considered.
None of us are carbon perfect--we do the best we can because we choose to. To me, that's better than living with blinders on and not giving a damn.
Me personally? I bought my 2000 Honda Insight brand new in early 2001 for less than it was worth because the dealer was having a difficult time moving the two seater, three cylinder coup. (Unlike ejoy's car, it has AC, and although the seats aren't comfortble on long trips with my boney butt, the car handles them just fine.) It's averaged 58.6 mpg so far.
I don't know if there are still as many tax breaks available as there were then, but at least the insurance companies finally understand that two seater doesn't automatically mean sportscar. (A statement by one agent in 2001: "It can't possibly have three cylinders--it's a sportscar.")
My husband and I are a one car family, which we can do with the two seater because we chose not to have kids. Does it make it a bit socially awkward when going out with friends because we can't always offer to carpool? Not really. We pay for gas, tolls, a meal, or what have you to help balance out, and for those few times when we just have to have something bigger--we rent. (And you'd be amazed what can and does fit in that little car--8 foot 2x4s? No problem, even with the hatch closed.)
Posted by: lilyleftthevalley | May 20, 2008 8:31:51 AM
Instead of buying a used car, just get a private jet and be like Al Gore or John Travolta, those bastions of the Global Warming Panic Parade.
Posted by: SolarFlared | May 20, 2008 8:54:35 AM
A note about motorcycles-
I work in the ER and we call motorcyclists "Organ Donors."
I want to be fuel efficient, not dead.
Posted by: Lily | May 20, 2008 9:01:49 AM
Our absolutely great 1993 Geo Metro
Convertible has over 245,000 miles on her, uses very little oil, and likes to be filled with fuel after running beutifully at 44 mpg. Of course, I haven't over-tested her by driving at high speeds, (Over 65) and I believe she'll be around for another 250,000 miles. This car is undoubtely the finest auto I've ever owned, and I've been driving for over 65 years starting with the ol'indomitable Model A Ford. Sure beats waking!! EBN
Posted by: Gene Nelson | May 20, 2008 9:10:17 AM
Older cars aren't up to the emissions standards that todays vehicles are though. Also, the 113 million BTUs it takes to build the Pruis, is more efficient (carbon wise) than the equivalent amount of gas burned.
Posted by: Troy | May 20, 2008 9:30:32 AM
Just as buying a Prius is too simplistic, just buying a used car with good gas milage is too simplistic.
The facts are every vehicle is different. Stick shifts get better gas milage unless you have a CVT or DSG. Even a 6 speed closes the gap. A hybrid is good, but many other cars can be as good and not use as many resources.
Motorcycles are the ultimate in gas efficiancy, but are much less safe. Many times you will see this relationship. If it's environmental, it isn't safe. You have to make a choice. A Tahoe is inefficiant unless you load it up. But, it's pretty safe. So is a Bently Flying Spur. So, purchasing a used Tercel may be carbon efficient, but it's alot less safe. Of course, you can get a hybrid Tahoe.
If you get a hybrid Tahoe the prejudice against SUVs will still persist. Already, people are saying that it's a rediculous idea. But, if you were going to get a new SUV anyway, and the Prius guy was going to get an economy car anyway, the Tahoe Hybrid saves at least 3 TIMES THE GAS!!!!
So, hybrid SUVs and luxury cars have the potential of saving alot of gasoline.
Fuzzy headed thinking and generalities are not going to get us anywhere. Hard decisions and people doing their homework are necessary.
Oh, and that motorcycle? Walking is even more efficient. But, if you drive 45 minutes or more, you may not be able to make a living without faster transport.
People also don't get how efficient gas is at storing energy. Or that one of this country's strengths is it's transportation system.
Try and live without them.
Posted by: hameiri | May 20, 2008 9:46:42 AM
"Think of it as a carbon debt -- one you won't pay off until the Prius has turned over 46,000 miles or so." Am I the only person to like to get 100k miles on a car before I get a new one?
Also, I think in the long run it's waaaay better for people to buy hybrids. Face it, it's going to take a while to change the market, and hybrids are a step in the right direction.
But then, I guess that's obvious, and it makes for better press for wired to go contrarian.
Posted by: | May 20, 2008 10:03:23 AM
A note about motorcycles-
I work in the ER and we call motorcyclists "Organ Donors."
I want to be fuel efficient, not dead.
==========================
I am lucy. A beautiful woman from New York. Internet is a quite good place to meet friends and even find whatever your need.
i am just in the beginning of my career and want to find a rich man, maybe to be my sugar daddy. so i uploaded my hot sexy
even nude photos on . http://www.seekingsugar.com ★★★!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! maybe you want to check out my photos firstly!
!★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★
Posted by: lcuy | May 20, 2008 10:21:59 AM
we should just walk. it would do the planet a lot of good.
Posted by: Addictor | May 20, 2008 10:28:45 AM
For christs sake
its called carbon dioxide.
Releasing carbon particulates would reflect light so reducing your "carbon footprint" is exactly what wired does not want us to do.
Posted by: james | May 20, 2008 10:37:50 AM
I love the Hypermiling comments near the top!
This is a great entry, and like many others I'm doing my best to convince my wife that getting rid of the SUV to go buy a NEW car isn't as good as just not driving it as much, and keeping it forever... Very Smart tips: http://www.greenmywallet.com I'm going to include this article...
Posted by: Andrew | May 20, 2008 11:06:26 AM
people + hybird = SMUG.
We know owning a hybird saves gas.
You don't have to be so gay when you remind us twise a day.
Posted by: edgar | May 20, 2008 11:07:06 AM
Or, you could ride a bike. In most cities you'll get around at the same speed as a car after a few months of riding, you'll be in better shape, happier, be able to skip the gym...
Posted by: Jim | May 20, 2008 11:37:06 AM
Ride a bike is better than driving cars in cities as you rarely get stuck in traffic and saves your time.
Get fast cash for your vacations
http://www.advancecashloan.com.au
Posted by: sam | May 20, 2008 11:45:04 AM
Ummm. Factor you forgot.
People want to drive a new car. Once they decide on a new car, the hybrid makes sense.
How many BTUs does it take to replace the transmission? How about the suspension? How many BTUS does it take to scrape my children off the pavement when I get in 5 mile per hour crash in a Chevy GEO?
Let's be realistic folks.
Posted by: duh | May 20, 2008 11:56:50 AM
I want to echo the comments regarding VW diesels. I have an '05 Jetta TDI, and it get 50 mpg highway, and averages 45.
Posted by: chopit | May 20, 2008 12:21:49 PM
Some of the high mileage cars I've owned.
85 Honda CRX HF 52MPG avg 60 MPG on a good run. 2 passenger Weight 1800lbs
96 Geo Metro 42MPG avg 4 passenger Weight 1800lbs
01 VW Golf Diesel 49MPG avg 5 passenger Weight 2400lbs
Weight and emissions are the enemies of high mileage. The more mass you move the more energy it takes to move it. Better emissions require lower cylinder temperatures thus reducing fuel efficientcy. Todays cars are 30% to 40% heavier than equivalent cars of 20 to 30 years ago. They are also safer, provide more amenties, require less service, and produce less emissions as well.
All the advances in engine efficientcy over the past 30 years have been offset by the increase in vehicle weight.
A light car with a modern engine should provide great mileage. However, safty and emmisions standards preclude that option.
Automakers build what we as consumers are willing to buy. And apparently we want safe, luxurious, emission friendly cars. Fuel mileage has not been our primary concern. With the rise of fuel costs this may change.
Posted by: Ken | May 20, 2008 12:59:25 PM
Old car produce a lot more pollution than new cars. Cities are buying old cars and junking them to reduce pollution. That reduces health problems and early death rates. Buying old cars for some reduction in CO2 is a really bad idea.
Posted by: Jack May | May 20, 2008 1:01:35 PM
This whole discussion treats fuel economy as the only issue to consider in a car. But in the real world, it's only one factor. Buying an older car means forgoing the safety features on new cars--stability control, side curtain airbags, side-impact protection, etc. Personally, I'm willing to pay more for safety and I'm willing to pollute a bit more for safety.
Posted by: robbo | May 20, 2008 1:20:02 PM
You can run a plugin on wind, wave, or solar. Plugins could be made locally with wind, wave, or solar energy. Solar power emissions vs. an old Civic? The old Civic was once in a showroom as well. If you compare the lifetime of both cars, which technology is overall better for us to breathe, drink, eat, and be healthy?
Posted by: Solar power emissions? | May 20, 2008 2:31:01 PM
You can also easily modify many of the old cars to run with HHO in addition to fuel. That sort of modification reviewed at http://WaterCarReport.com can increase your fuel economy even further.
Posted by: Elliot Jensen | May 20, 2008 2:53:35 PM
Honda odometers have been proven to read high so that the car warranty expires prematurely. Their mpg is good, but not as good as some owners think.
Posted by: ezbreezer | May 20, 2008 2:56:39 PM
I always bought used cars. Why would I buy a car and in the same moment it leaves the superstore its value decrease by 10%?
If you want to sell your used car, just anounce in my blog, it is free.
http://generalities.opiniaoweb.com/free-advertising-of-your-used-car/
Posted by: Rafael Luiz | May 20, 2008 6:06:30 PM
None of the used cars listed are midsize 5-passenger vehicles like the Prius. Nor do any approach the urban driving fuel economy of the Prius. I guess the assumption here is that one would rarely drive in city traffic.
Why would someone pay a premium price for a high mileage vehicle. Reliability is a crap shoot at best even for the Hondas. Geos and Chevettes had notoriously poor reliability.
Posted by: Mark Gutting-Kilzer | May 20, 2008 8:13:22 PM
If you want a car that won't need any repair for over 100.000 miles, that has enough room for 5 big adults, that is capable of doing 100 mph, that would retain its value well, that is best in crash tests in its category, that has best fuel economy and CO2 emissions, then you have no choice but getting a Prius (at least until Toyota or Honda makes a better hybrid). And yes, even with its big heavy body it can make 55 mpg both in city and on highway if driven like an mid 90's manual economy car.
One last thing. Although its warranty is good for 100.000 miles, I now that there are already some Prius batteries around, that function perfectly after 200.000 miles. And even if you ever have a malfunctioning battery, you only need to change the defected cell, not the whole unit and it's much cheaper than you would imagine.
If you want to go green and also a new car, go for a prius (or civic hybrid). If you don't need a new car, get a second hand hybrid. Regardless of the mileage, it will certainly make less pollution than an old economy car.
Posted by: Esat Can | May 21, 2008 2:39:30 AM
Take the bus! Ride the train! get a Bike! Walk! Or a ride freakin' horse for that matter. Whats this obsession with cars? Some of these alternatives might even save u a few hours of workout!
Posted by: AG | May 21, 2008 2:45:51 AM
One thing the hybrid fans always fail to remember is what happens to all the batteries in 8 or 9 years when they all have to be replaced? As hybrids gain in popularity you're just trading one environmental problem for another - landfills full of toxic batteries. You're all following the Pied Piper who's playing the 'green' tune...
Posted by: MT | May 21, 2008 6:03:36 AM
MT - Toyota pays a $200 bounty for the battery pack and they get recycled. That 's what happens to them.
Posted by: SH | May 21, 2008 6:44:03 AM
Good argument on getting a used car vs the energy to build a new car.
I'm not sure I'd compare a Geo Metro to a Hybrid Prius. 2 completely different animals even though they get the same mileage
Posted by: Sam | May 21, 2008 11:39:47 AM
At first this sounded like a stupid idea. Then it dawned on me - Hey, the underlying idea here is to not buy a new car until the auto makers start making all of their cars get at a minimum 50MPG. Until then, boycott them by buying only used cars. When they are stuck with huge lots of gas guzzling cars they will finally get the message. Auto makers are really just yanking our chain by not giving us fuel efficient cars. Think about this - there is nothing stopping the oil cartels from going to $500.00 a barrel or any price they choose. YOU will pay the price.
-
Boycott new cars until they all get a minimum of 50MPG.
Posted by: George | May 21, 2008 11:48:21 AM
Manual transmissions offer better fuel economy for a variety of reasons, not JUST that you have more control.
1) More gears, so a more ideal ratio (typical manual is 5 or 6 speed, typical auto is 4 or 5 speed)
2) no torque converter; this is a fluid coupling (though almost all lock-up now in high gear) meaning that the engine is not solidly linked to the wheels, wiki it. A clutch transfers power more efficiently.
3) small bonus, but they weigh less too.
Posted by: Bob | May 22, 2008 12:27:23 AM
Why the insistence on tiny cars? Why hate on families so much?
My 1996 Toyota Camry with the 4-cylinder engine (the 5SFE, if you care) and 4-speed automatic transmission(**) moves itself around just fine, and gets 31.5 mpg highway, at 70 mph, on 87 octane 10% ethanol fuel. In town, it still gets 25+ mpg. I'm not sure I'd want to move to a super-compact for 1-2 mpg. I can recover that with a little less enthusiasm behind the wheel.
(**) I prefer a manual tranmission. But, when buying a used car (as I did this Camry 3 years ago), an automatic transmission is a safer bet, reliability-wise. They're harder to abuse, assuming the fluid level is maintained.
Posted by: BB | May 22, 2008 8:00:53 AM
You want good mileage and low cost? I had a 1997 Nissan Sentra GXE with the 1.6 Litre engine and 5 speed manual tranny. I used a K&N air filter and a conventional/synthetic blend oil. I got 32 to 36 MPG city and a Whopping 44 to 45 MPG HIGHWAY. Everything else on the car was stock.
Posted by: badjrmo | May 23, 2008 12:07:28 PM
Of course a used car has less of an impact than a new car. But comparing the carbon emissions per pound in the manufacture of an 8600 pound Hummer H2 and a 2932 Hybrid is not a fair comparison because a Hummer H2 weighs 2.93 times the weight of a Prius. You'd have to compare each pound of each Prius to 2.93 pounds of each Hummer.
Posted by: LJF | May 23, 2008 3:50:48 PM
Of course a used car has less of an impact than a new car. But comparing the carbon emissions per pound in the manufacture of an 8600 pound Hummer H2 and a 2932 Hybrid is not a fair comparison because a Hummer H2 weighs 2.93 times the weight of a Prius. You'd have to compare each pound of each Prius to 2.93 pounds of each Hummer.
Posted by: LJF | May 23, 2008 3:52:17 PM
How come noone is talking about the adverse health effects of the EMF's (Electro-magnetic Frequencies) that hybrids and SMART cars have? Let's sustain the environment but also stay alive while doing it. I've used a 60 herz AC meter from www.lessemf.com to test cars and there's an issue with them. Let's get into this topic.
Posted by: EMF Man | May 26, 2008 2:19:28 PM
older "used" cars are less safe. Safety standards increase each year.
Posted by: | May 27, 2008 10:52:19 AM
i get 50 plus mpg in my prius. so it works for me. Gas prices apparently arent high enough as people blow by me doing 75 plus mph. Eventually people will get serious about it.In the long run, maybe these high gas prices will drive alternative technology and we can stop the oil use for cars, let the arabs and hugo chavez sell the oil to the chinese and the indians,by the way, the worst polluters, or maybe they can drink it or something, who cares?
Posted by: mike | May 27, 2008 11:57:54 AM
45 miles to a gallon as a high mileage car is HORSE HOCKEY! I drove a circa 1985 Isuzu I Mark for years. It got 54 mpg routinely. My parents owned a circa 1983 Subaru that did an HONEST 65 mpg highway. What lousey memories many have. These were 4 bangers, 4 passenger AC vehicles.
Posted by: Ed | May 28, 2008 1:57:24 PM
What the author seems to be suggesting is that we should all buy used cars. Where does he think used cars come from ?
Maybe somebody should buy the Prius so that we have a future source of used cars with the carbon already paid off ? Or is he suggesting we should keep that Geo Metro on the road forever ?
I don't think he's thought this out very well.
Posted by: Rob Kleinschmidt | May 29, 2008 10:40:14 AM
This article is shockingly ignorant. First, a Prius is a low emissions vehicle which means it would emit less CO2 then a used vehicle with 100,000 miles on it. Second, what does the author propose you do once that vehicle with 150,000 + miles on it not longer runs. Buying a used car is a short-term bandaid solution.
Posted by: S. | May 29, 2008 11:32:48 AM
An interesting question:
What percentage of a car's initial energy cost is recovered when the car is recycled and is this already figured into a net cost when calculating it's sunken energy ?
Regardless of the answer, we obviously can't all drive used cars though.
Posted by: Rob Kleinschmidt | May 29, 2008 6:50:26 PM
I really dont know what to think anymore, because there is no shortage in oil, just greedy fucking people. Second of all, Metros look like cool little cars, but I would not really want to be driving around on the highway in a soapbox. My 96 Geo Prizm gets anywhere between 35 and 40 miles per gallon on the highway (and I feel safe in it). And on a good day, my 92 Chevrolet Lumina coupe with a V6 can get 30 miles per gallon on highway. So, yeah. My opinion is that people can do what they want to do, because they are going to anyways. But I do think that someone with not a lot of money would benefit from buying a Metro or something along the lines of that, because as long as you take care of a vehicle and no abuse it, it can stay in proper running condition for a long time, and is probably an acceptable alternative to a hybrid. At least until the government and the oil companies pull their heads out of their asses and do something about the high gas prices so we can return to a normal lifestyle.
Posted by: Ross | May 30, 2008 8:37:26 AM
What a silly article. People are buying used high MPG vehicle because it's all they can afford to buy. In so many of the accounts one reads of people scouring eBay for Geo Metros, one consistently finds them saying, "I'd love a Prius, but I cannot afford one."
Older, used vehicles are more likely to be in less than ideal running condition and the emissions from them might not be ideal.
Once a vehicle is built and delivered to the showroom, whether it's a Prius or an H1 Hummer or anything in between, the carbon debt is already there. Done. Over. Nothing one can do to change it.
Each person's situation is different so each must weigh the costs and decide for themselves. But to seriously believe that we should halt production of all new vehicles and buy older used vehicles because of the carbon debt is just goofy.
We need Congressional mandates that all ICEs be hybrid by 2012, all ICEs be hybrid plugins by 2015, and an electric vehicle mandate.
Posted by: Ken Grubb | May 30, 2008 10:01:04 AM
Or you can drive a standard and narrow the gap between highway and city mileage, which no one on the interwebs seems to admit is an option...