It seems that the most vocal anti-global warming, anti-green types really love cars. Their cars. Enthralled with the happy motoring culture. For women to avoid being preyed on by men walking down the street, I understand the safety of the steel and glass cage. I totally get it. But men?
Is there an opportunity we are missing here?
Even senior General Motors engineers have said that ICE (internal combustion engine) technology will be on its way out within 20 years or less.
So why the angst?
I understand nostalgia and convenience. Is there something else to it?
What would America be without cars? This can also be phrased in the present tense. (electric, gas, biodiesel, algae, cold fusion powered or otherwise)
I am not writing here to say I am for or against cars, but this is a valid question.
Your thoughts?
Jordana G. says:
You know, Ken, I was thinking just the other day how much I love driving my car. I don't drive my car very often -- I bike, walk, or take public transit most places because I can't justify spewing fumes into the air over getting a little exercise. I don't know why I love driving my own car -- comfort? familiarity? power? ... As to your question, I think America without cars would be a much bigger place for a lot of people.
Ken O. says:
Other possibilities....If you don't have a car in America, you can't pretend to be "middle class."
Cars are marketed by automakers who spend lots of dough to psychoanalyze car buyers and owners. For example, the SUV market targets people who are insecure and or vain. Hey, it works.
As for the USA, it's true this country would become much bigger. I was also contemplating how the national psychology would change post-car. What is America about?
Gross generalizations.for example's sake-
Italy is about food, wine, the Rennaisance and Roman Empire, mafia, romantic honeymoons...
China is also about pasta-like food, various apocalypses, national unity and who can hold the fort down...
Russia is about suffering/surviving/winning, drinking, good ballet and sportsmen, a real state security apparatus, caviar, lots of snow...
America has been a melting pot like yugoslavia and the balkans, apple pie, basketball baseball football, fields of corn and wheat, frozen pizza and huge Texas steaks, fastfood, music, movies and connecting it all, DRIVING AROUND.
Interesting to imagine the American national identity without cars.
Michael F. says:
This is a valid question only for the increasing population of wussified/feminized males in the US. The rest of us with normal testosterone levels understand why we love our cars - especially ones with powerful combustion engines. I'd try to enlighten you, but like the Harley Davidson saying goes "if you have to ask you wouldn't understand."
James E. says:
Michael, I'd recommend the new Tesla to you...one of the fastest cars on the planet, and should pass your testosterone test. It's runs on electricity. Fisker Automotive is also bringing to market a gorgeous and fast electric sports car next year. But I'm sure some of the modern day and past autos that run on just gas will be around for a while longer...and then in museums. After all, combustion engines are a 100 year old technology. Imagine using a computer today that is even more than 10 years old.
Elli A. says:
How do you get an adrenalin rush from a Harley? I used to ride sports bikes and motocross for a rush, never figured out what’s the point of a Harley. High on the looks, low on performance. I guess Harleys are for people that care about looks. Tesla looks good enough for that.
Funny that I actually still have a two stroke bike with a “green sticker”. I just said “two stroke” and green in one sentence.
Patrick S. says:
I love cars. Fast cars, old cars, weird cars. I like the fact that I can throw my kayak and bike on the roof, drive for 12 hours, and be at the beach. I also like my bike, skis, and kayak for transportation. All have their specific purpose. Sure, they take up a lot of space to park, burn way too much fuel (even the hybrids), take a lot of roads which eat green space, etc. But I can't imagine a country like the US without them. Sure, I could ride my bike everywhere but a lot of the places I tend to go would take hours to ride to. And pulling a bike trailer full of lumber and paint from The Home Depot wouldn't be easy in the very hilly area where I live. And my little kids might want to come along. I'd rather use my car for that purpose.
What I would rather see is a debate about why it is going to take so long to end the dominance of the internal combustion engine. I know that the average useful life of a car in the US is 15 years or so (a lot more in less affluent countries) but I will be very disappointed if we can't figure out a way to get rid of all new mainstream passenger cars (except for possibly low volume sports cars) running on liquid fuels in the next 10 year or so.
Elli A. says:
Well the technical problem today is energy storage. Electric cars use batteries that do not have energy density as good as fossil fuels. That’s the short story. How you solve that? That’s the long story. Quick answer is money from the government for R&D. This is a very high risk development. Its a hot investment area for venture capital, but the risks are very high and venture money is not really running wild nowadays.
The government has to step in. Pure billions into R&D and investments, until electricity is cheaper than petroleum/coal by a very large margin and energy storage in electric vehicles is comparable to petroleum. That is also a good step towards national security.
Defending Energy consumes too much of our foreign policy and defense activities. Energy independence will eventually allow the government to focus more on the state's internal affairs rather than manage the world in order to ensure gas supply. It also seems to me that it will be cheaper in the long run to get to an energy independence status than to keep managing the entire planet which sucks huge part of the countries budget.
Another thing to do is to strategically change the country’s landscape to be less automobile oriented. Think east coast and Europe. Its great to put the Kayak on the roof and go on a trip, its not so great to drive to work. I still do own a car and use it only for recreation and errands.
James E. says:
It's pathetic how low the MPG stats are on autos in the US. Even if we kept the combustion engine but improved weight ratios and efficiencies, we'd be way better off. If the US had the same average fuel efficiency as cars in Europe have today, we would not need to import any oil from Saudi Arabia in a given year. New cars are rolling off assembly lines today that get 20 MPG. I used to have an old Honda, which drove great, that clocked around 35 MPG...and that was over 10 years ago. I'm not an auto manufacturing expert, but I do know that auto assembly plants have huge tooling costs that take years, if not decades to recoup costs, so there is huge economic incentives for auto manufacturers to NOT innovate too quickly. But we have seen the result in the US of keeping the status quo in terms of stagnant product development. Ultimately, manufacturers will shift their offerings when consumers shift their dollars in larger numbers to cars with better technology and MPG ratings. Of course the biggest prizes go to the first movers, as Prius has seen, but we're just at the very beginning of the shift...lots of opportunities left to be had. It's hard for me to imagine that our current 100 year-old combustion engine technology will be around in another 100 years...so I guess that is some progress.