Could the Sierra Club be wrong about SUVs?
I love animals, pretty much all animals. Ask my wife. She knows that a picture of an animal will brighten my day, and that a documentary about animals living in peace and harmony will pretty much guarantee a good mood for the evening. I even love the outdoors, and I value our environment. I'm sure that you do, too.
Why do I feel like I have to defend myself, just because I drive an SUV? Well, articles like this one on the Sierra Club's website have backed me into a corner.
The Sierra Club, according to their site, is "America's oldest, largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization." They hate SUVs, and by extension, the people who drive them.
Their article states, in no uncertain terms, that "When it comes to wasting energy, SUVs are unrivaled."
Really? I can think of about a hundred things that rival SUVs for wasted energy -- for instance, how about gas-powered lawn mowers and leaf blowers? How about idling buses and trucks? How about private jet usage by the ultra-rich?
How can you account for the energy expended trying to convince a Sierra Club member that you might have a good reason to drive your SUV?
Photo © Jason Fogelson
Comments
There is quite a difference in the amount of fuel used in an hour by a 5 hp lawn mower and your SUV.
When I was in college, I drove a school bus to help pay my costs of education. We are talking early 1960’s here and a 66 passenger school bus. I got 5 mpg hauling 66 kids to and from school in heavy city traffic. A Hummer can’t beat that today by more than a couple of miles per gallon. Question, have you ever seen a Hummer loaded, that is, all seats were occupied?
I rest my case … they are nothing more than status symbols and I have to subsidize the cost of their fuel.
If you are going to enjoy the REAL outdoors, you have to be able to get there!! How may prius can go even 500 feet off a black top? I was thinking of getting a Highlander Hybrid, with 2 electric motors, to help save the inviro, but the manufacture clearly states, “no off-roading”. When asked they state, stay on the black top, or you’ll burn up the electric motors. Here in Wyoming there are 10 times more dirt roads than black top, so I guess we have to use an ICE everywhere.
I like and use the outdoors more than most, and use my 15 mpg land rover to get there. I don’t need an excuse nor appoligize to any one.
I’m always amused by sanctimonious green types who criticize SUV drivers and claim that outdoor activities such as cycling or kayaking are more ecologically-friendly. Yet a recent visit to a put-in site by a local river that was also on a rails-to-trails bicycle route showed a parking lot full of–yes–SUVs. How do they get all those earth-friendly toys to the country? It’s either big vehicles like an SUV, or grossly overloaded cars that are top-veavy and unsafe and are getting lousy fuel mileage, probably as bad as an SUV, thanks to the wind resistance of thier toys. And because the roof racks don’t come off between weekends, the weekday mileage isn’t much better. Can anyone spell “hypocracy?”
SUVs have unfortunately become scapegoats for what is essentially a much larger problem. It’s easier to make blanket statements that brand something as “bad” than it is to make an informed decision about a product’s form, function, and interaction with the environment.
I recently spent a week driving a GMC Yukon Denali, and the looks of disdain I received when I pulled up at a trendy neighborhood restaurant were reprehensible– and these were probably folks whose Toyota Priuses will someday pollute the earth with their nickel-metal hydride batteries!
Someday, the witch hunt will end and common sense will prevail. I hope.