|
What is Wrong With SUVs?
SUVs represent a paradox to consumers - television advertisements
present them as a way to return to nature, yet they actually accelerate
existing environmental problems. Commercials often depict happy
families driving on mountain roads, avoiding falling rocks and enjoying
the flowered wilderness in leather-seated comfort. The sad truth
is that these vehicles are contributing to the destruction of our
natural resources.
In reality, only 5 percent of SUVs are ever taken off-road (1),
and the vast majority of these vehicles are used for everyday driving.
And there are a lot of them on the roads. In 1985, SUVs accounted
for only 2 percent of new vehicle sales. (2). SUVs now account for
one in four new vehicles sold(3), and sales continue to climb.
Driving an SUV has a much greater impact on the environment than
driving other passenger cars. In large part, this is due to double
standards set by law and government regulations. For example, current
federal regulations allow SUVs to have far worse fuel economy than
other vehicles. The federal corporate average fuel economy (CAFE)
standards set the fuel economy goals for new passenger cars at 27.5
miles per gallon (mpg). But under the law, SUVs are not considered
cars - they are characterized as light trucks. Light trucks only
have to achieve 20.7 mpg. It should be noted that this is an average
for all light trucks, which is why it is possible to have SUVs on
the road that only achieve 12 mpg. In fact, some SUV, like the massive
Ford Excursion, are so large that they no longer qualify as "light
trucks," and are not subject to any kind of fuel economy standards.
When CAFE was instituted in the 1970s, there were few SUVs and light
trucks on the road, and they were primarily used for farm and commercial
work. Today, however, the demographics of an SUV buyer are quite
different. The amount of gasoline burned by a vehicle is important
for several reasons. The most crucial is the threat of global warming.
The Threat from Global Warming
Contrary to some rhetoric you may have heard, global warming has
been extremely well studied. In 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a report on global warming with
many dire predictions. The World Meteorological Organization and
the United Nations Environment Programme created the IPCC in 1988
to study the risks associated with global climate change. The IPCC
found that about three quarters of the anthropogenic (caused by
humans) emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere during the
past 20 years is due to fossil fuel burning. The IPCC anticipates
higher temperatures and heat waves over the next century, as well
as more intense and dangerous storms. (4)
The EPA seconds these concerns. According to the EPA, "increasing
concentrations of greenhouse gases are likely to accelerate the
rate of climate change. Scientists expect that the average global
surface temperature could rise 1-4.5°F (0.6-2.5°C) in the next fifty
years, and 2.2-10°F (1.4-5.8°C) in the next century, with significant
regional variation. Evaporation will increase as the climate warms,
which will increase average global precipitation. Soil moisture
is likely to decline in many regions, and intense rainstorms are
likely to become more frequent. Sea level is likely to rise two
feet along most of the U.S. coast." (5)
According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), one of
the most important things you can do to reduce global warming pollution
is to buy a vehicle with higher fuel economy. This is because every
gallon of gasoline your vehicle burns puts 20 pounds of carbon dioxide
(CO2) into the atmosphere. Scientific evidence strongly suggests
that the rapid buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere is raising the earth's temperature and changing the earth's
climate with potentially serious consequences. Choosing a vehicle
that gets 25 rather than 20 miles per gallon will prevent 10 tons
of CO2 from being released over the lifetime of your vehicle. (6)
Passenger cars and trucks account for about 20 percent of all US
CO2 emissions. (7)
Today a car that gets approximately 27.5 mpg, like a Volkswagen
New Beetle, will emit 54 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the burning
of gasoline over its lifetime. An SUV that gets 14 mpg, like a Lincoln
Navigator, will emit over 100 tons of CO2 over its lifetime. (8)
A Harper's Magazine writer took the massive Ford Excursion, the
biggest of all SUVs for a test drive. During a drive around a city,
the mighty Excursion was only getting 3.7 miles per gallon. It is
estimated the Excursion will produce 134 tons of carbon dioxide
during its lifetime. (9) The National Academy of Sciences estimates
that if fuel economy had not been improved in the late 1970s, US
fuel consumption would be about 2.8 million barrels of oil per day
higher than it is. This is about 14 percent of today's oil consumption.
(10) However, all of the major fleet-wide improvements in vehicle
fuel economy occurred from the middle 1970s through the late 1980s,
but it has been consistently falling since then. In fact, average
new vehicle fuel economy fell in 2000 to 24 mpg, its lowest level
20 years. The increasing market share of light trucks and SUVs accounts
for much of the decline in fuel economy of the overall new light
vehicle fleet. (11) Source: Heavenrich and Hellman. (12)
Global warming is a real danger that cannot be ignored. However,
automakers continue to build fuel-inefficient vehicles. The vehicles
we drive are contributing to this problem, but automakers don't
seem particularly concerned.
The EPA has an excellent website devoted to global warming, which
answers many of the common questions about the problem. You can
visit the site here: http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/.
SUV's Smog Forming Emissions
SUV's have a significant environmental impact even beyond the problem
of global warming. Federal law gives heavy sport utility vehicles
permission to emit higher levels of toxic and noxious pollution
- carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides. Sport utility
vehicles can spew 30 percent more carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons
and 75 percent more nitrogen oxides than passenger cars. (13) These
combustion pollutants contribute to eye and throat irritation, coughing,
nausea, dizziness, fatigue, confusion and headaches. Hydrocarbons
and nitrogen oxides are precursors to ground level ozone, which
causes asthma and lung damage. (14)
These pollutants are regulated under the Clean Air Act of 1990.
If a region is unable to reduce their emissions these pollutants
for these pollutants, the EPA may impose penalties. This is known
as reaching "attainment." Many of the large urban areas
in the US are in "serious nonattainment."
The US EPA and the Department of Energy have teamed up to create
a website that lists vehicles fuel economy, and compares vehicles
to each other. It also goes a step further by giving each vehicle
a score of zero to ten for the amount of smog producing pollution
the vehicle emits. Ten is considered a perfect score. Unfortunately,
many popular SUVs only rate four or below, with many at zero. This
rating system is an excellent tool to help people see the impact
of their vehicle choice, and it is a great help for people interested
in purchasing a new vehicle. The chart below [Go to website, chart
couldn't be copied. Sally] at the fuel economy and emissions scores
of some of the most popular 4-wheel drive SUVs. All data is from
the US EPA and the Department of Energy. The website can be found
here: www.fueleconomy.gov
|
Unfortunately, increasing numbers of Americans are living in areas
with poor air quality from ozone pollution, according to the American
Lung Association (ALA). The ALA found that 141 million Americans
lived in areas with poor air quality during 1997-1999. This is nine
million more people than in the previous two-year period. (15)
The Washington, D.C. region has a non-attainment ranking of serious
for ozone pollution. As mentioned above, ground level ozone can
be a serious problem for many areas. When a region has a "bad
air day," it is usually because the levels of ozone in the
air have created an unhealthy situation. In the case of Washington,
DC, the EPA is considering cutting off the region's road building
funds until the region can come up with a viable solution to the
pollution problem. However, standing in the way of any solution
is the number of SUVs on the road.
The amount of nitrogen oxide in the DC region's air is expected
to be eight tons per day over the limit of 162 tons by 2005, according
to Ronald Kirby of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
In July, Mr. Kirby told the Washington Post that the growth of SUVs
on the roads in the past few years has been tremendous, jumping
from 15 percent of all vehicles to 25 percent in just three years.
(16) In fact, Marsha Kaiser, planning director for the Maryland
Department of Transportation said that her agency predicts the "huge
increase" in SUVs on the road will tip the region beyond it's
limits. (17) All passenger vehicles pollute, but SUVs produce so
much more pollution than the average car. In terms of air pollution,
one SUV is like two or three cars on the road.
This is a very significant development, and it shows the kind of
impact that a large amount of polluting SUVs can have on air quality.
The Fairfax County government, in Northern Virginia, is concerned
enough about this problem to halt purchases of SUVs for official
business and replace some of the ones they already own. This step
is "more than just symbolic," according to County Supervisor
Gerald Connolly, who believes the county needs to change how it
approaches car purchases. (18)
Many regions still haven't gotten the message, however. Governors
attending the National Governors Association meeting in Rhode Island
in August 2001 drove SUVs provided free of charge by General Motors.
Sixty-five GMC Yukon's were shipped up to Rhode Island for the event.
Governor Lincoln Almond said the state was appreciative. "We
don't take a gesture by GM and tell them what to do,'' he said.
(19) According to the US EPA, various models of the Yukon get between
12 and 17 miles per gallon, and most receive a zero out of ten on
the pollution scale. (20)
US Dependency on Oil
Finally, it is important to note that SUVs are contributing to our
dependence on imported oil. The more gasoline we use, the more oil
we have to import from other countries. Currently, more than half
of the oil we use is imported. This level of dependence on imports
is the highest in our history, and will only increase unless we
do a better job with conservation and alternative fuels. (21)
If current rates of consumption were to continue, the world's remaining
resources of conventional oil would be used up in 40 years. The
United States uses more than 3 billion barrels of oil per year just
on passenger cars and light trucks. (22)
Clearly, there are significant problems with SUVs that need to be
remedied. The good news is that SUVs can be improved without much
effort.
What Can Be Done?
In July 2001, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a
study on fuel economy standards. The NAS found that light trucks,
SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks could reach 28-30 mpg for an additional
cost of $1,200-$1,300. (23) Automakers make an average of $10,000
in pure profit on each SUV sold. (24) It shouldn't be too much to
ask automakers to sacrifice a small amount of their profits to clean
up these vehicles. The NAS study specifically pointed out that safety
would not be sacrificed, and actually assumes an increase in vehicle
weight, which is associated with certain safety-enhancing features.
(25) However, the NAS points out that reducing the weight of the
largest SUVs on the roads would make all drivers safer, since the
biggest SUVs tend to do the most damage in an accident. (26)
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has also looked at this
issue, and found similar results. The UCS report concluded similar
fuel economy levels were achievable at nearly identical consumer
cost - all using existing technologies that automakers could implement
quickly. The excellent UCS report is called "Drilling in Detroit,"
and it can be found at http://www.ucsusa.org/vehicles/drill_detroit-exec.html.
We may wish people who don't need giant vehicles won't buy them,
but people will buy whatever they want. The best thing we can do
is to ensure prospective vehicle purchasers are educated on their
choices, and encourage them to make the most environmentally sound
decisions.
The good news is that SUVs can be improved without much effort,
and without sacrificing safety. Automakers have made some baby steps,
but they have so far been unwilling to make a serious effort to
improve these vehicles.
In the meantime, we must work to change the federal standards governing
these vehicles. SUV drivers are not to blame for the lower fuel
economy and emissions standards that these vehicles enjoy, and SUV
drivers are not to blame for automaker's lack of innovation and
improvement. Automakers have shown a strong unwillingness over the
years to clean up their products, or even to make them safer without
a push from the federal government - or from consumers. Therefore,
people who are concerned about these issues must work to educate
the public while working to improve the federal regulations governing
SUVs. Only education and improved environmental standards will push
automakers into cleaning up these vehicles.
In 2000, Ford Motor Company announced plans to improve their SUV
fleet fuel economy by 25 percent by 2005. This is a great first
step, and it shows that automakers are capable of improving their
vehicles. It also shows that a concerned public can influence a
company like Ford. This is why educated consumers must demand better
vehicles, and demand that Congress and the president finally address
the problem with today's fuel economy standards.
But automakers are unlikely to make significant improvements unless
they are pushed. William Clay Ford, the chairman of Ford Motor Company,
put it best. "The best way to get the auto industry to stop
dragging its feet is to have us race against each other. We love
to do that, and we're good at it." The race will begin as soon
as fuel economy standards are improved to a realistic level.
|
|
* * * * *
Endnotes:
1 "The Unstoppable SUV," Keith Naughton. Newsweek, July
2, 2001
2 "Bad Sports", Paul Roberts. Harper's Magazine. April
2001
3 Newsweek
4 "Summary for Policymakers: A Report of Working Group I of
the IPCC, 2001" (http://www.ipcc.ch/)
5 Environmental Protection Agency's Global Warming website. http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/climate/index.html
6 Fuel Economy website. Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
Agency (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/climate.shtml)
7 Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends 1975
Through 2000.
8 Union of Concerned Scientists. Policy Framework "Federal
Fuel Economy Standards -- Past, Present, and Future" (www.ucsusa.org)
9 Harper's Magazine.
10 Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Board on Energy and
Environmental Systems, Transportation Resource Board. National Research
Council, July 2001. Page ES-4
11 Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends 1975
Through 2000. Executive Summary. Robert M. Heavenrich and Karl H.
Hellman. Advanced Technology Division, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality. US Environmental Protection Agency. Air and Radiation
EPA420-S-00-003 (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fetrends.htm
06 Jan 2001)
12 Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends 1975
Through 2000.
13 Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures, 1997. American Automobile Manufacturers
Association. Page 84.
14 Wagner, Travis. In Our Backyard: A guide to understanding pollution
and its effects. Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York. 1994. Pages 88-103.
15 "More Americans Breathing Dirty Air, Lung Association Says
in 2001 Report," Steve Cook. Daily Report for Executives, Bureau
of National Affairs. May 2, 2001. Page A-11
16 "SUVs Drive Area to Pollution Violations," Katherine
Shaver, Washington Post. July 8, 2001
17 "Increase in Trucks Threatens Road Work; Poor Air Quality
Could Halt Projects," Katherine Shaver, Washington Post. June
23, 2001
18 "Fairfax to Stop Buying SUVs; Supervisors Set an Example
to Help Clean Region's Air," David Cho, Washington Post. July
24, 2001
19 "Governors Get Free SUVs, Gas Money," Ken Maguire,
Associated Press. August 3, 2001
20 Fuel Economy website. Department of Energy and Environmental
Protection Agency (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm)
21 Fuel Economy website. Department of Energy and Environmental
Protection Agency (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/oildep.shtml)
22 Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2000.
(http://www.eia.doe.gov)
23 Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.
Pages 3-29 to 3-34.
24 Harpers Magazine.
25 Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.
Page 3-16.
26 Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.
Page ES-8
|
