Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Will Green Cars Be Exciting To Drive And Enjoyable To Own?
312 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 1:15 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: lemko (Jan 30, 2009 10:13 am)  In general, cars are already headed towards being merely A-to-B transports, with or without the green movement: witness the DOT's excitement over its plan to eventually robotize freeway traffic so that it can travel much closer to together at high speeds, reducing congestion. At that point, the "driver" won't be driving at all any more! Maybe we can start to call them "participants" instead. You will need a participant's license to get behind the wheel. Even the "exciting" cars of today leave the driver so removed from the drive that you wonder how they can be called "enthusiast cars". The ever-present march of increasing technology and computerization under the hood and inside the cabin ensures that "driving" as we know it will be all but dead and buried within the next 40 years. We don't need the greenies help to do that, and I say that as a "greenie" myself. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 30, 2009 9:24 am) I was 19 and traveling 20 miles each way to work on the freeway. Most of the time speeding. They did not have points back then or I would have been in trouble. I got a 1955 Commander after that and it was not as good a mileage as the 1952 4 door Champion. My boss had a 1951 Studebaker Land Cruiser. He was still driving that car when I quit and took the job in Alaska in 1970. My point is good mileage has been around a long time. By contrast my 1947 Pontiac was lucky to get 9 MPG. So the Studebaker was a real money saver for me. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 30, 2009 9:24 am) What happens when they eliminate every car you would like to own using goofy science to pass laws? By saying what you cannot drive is narrowing the field as to what you can drive. The current trend with CARB is to narrow down our choices to a few they feel are adequate. Except for the very wealthy. If you can afford a Bentley it is OK to guzzle gas and spew lots of pollution. If you want a Toyota PU with a 4 cylinder diesel you have to install it yourself. I see this crazy move by CA as opening up the door for every kind of aftermarket you can imagine. Only a few eco nerds will bow down to the Prius or Insight push. CA should be able to put the final nail in the Domestic automaker's coffin with their lawsuits and mandates.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 30, 2009 11:22 am) Then you ADAPT and become a less-picky shopper. Hey, the era of wasteful fossil fuel vehicles will eventually end. People need to get their heads wrapped around it sooner than later. When green becomes the norm, then there will be only a very small portion of the populace who cannot find what they want in a car.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 30, 2009 11:34 am) Fine with me. Just give my a big roomy SUV that gets 40 MPG and I am a happy camper. Though maybe CA has a new way to eliminate cars. This is the kind of flawed science CA uses to force people to do as they see fit. Mandate could force gas stations out of business ARCADIA - Dozens, and potentially hundreds, of gas stations around California are choosing to shut down rather than comply with a state mandate that would require owners to purchase new equipment to reduce vapor emissions at the pump. The requirement, known as Phase II in the state's Enhanced Vapor Recovery Program, is set to go into effect in April. It requires gas station owners to individually purchase tens of thousands of dollars of equipment designed to prevent harmful vapors from escaping into the air when gasoline is pumped. Among them is George Fasching, who after 31 years of selling gasoline at Fasching's Car Wash in Arcadia, stopped in December. "I came to the decision that I was too small a volume operator to continue on with the expenses imposed by the bureaucracy of the state," Fasching said. April's requirements would have cost him $35,000, he said. Fasching used to sell the gasoline as a convenience for his car wash customers, and blames the new regulations for forcing him to stop. "It will have some effect on my business, but at least I have the relief that I don't have to deal with these people anymore," he said. As of the end of December 2008, the South Coast Air Quality Management District had heard back from 3,109 of its 4,500 sites about EVR Phase II. Seventy-six - or 2.4 percent - indicated they will be shutting down on April 1, 2009 rather than upgrade their sites, said Dimitri Stanich, public information officer for the California Air Resources Board. Some 1,400 of the SCAQMD's sites have not yet responded. About 12,000 dispensing facilities will be affected statewide. April's regulations promise to cut what are known as reactive organic gas emissions by 7 tons per day statewide, but opponents point to the fact that California produces 2,322 tons of such gases per day. http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_11563313
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 30, 2009 11:42 am) Were you not complaining somewhere on these forums about a gas station on every corner? I can't see how things could be worse off if we had a smaller number of gas stations.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 30, 2009 11:45 am) It will mostly affect the small station owners that keep the prices competitive. I guess you missed the drift of what that will really accomplish. Your nothing is clean enough mentality is coming through loud and clear. People are not important in your world. Only government regulations. For me the longer I live in CA the more I feel out of place. I don't like worthless laws that make life tough for the working class. They are the ones that pay for such foolishness.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 30, 2009 11:54 am) Its not that, Larsb is a socialist. Its a deep political belief. The good of any one individual is dependent on the good of all individuals. Your individual rights are not of great consequence, nor are person freedoms. It is all about the collective. I don't think that is going to fly in the US. In fact, one of my friends in CA is complaining that the new laws are going to screw California as they are going to get a limited selection of small, possibly undesirable cars, while the 43 states not tagging along will get whatever they like. I am also amused by the number of people out west with a Pirus and a BMW, so they do have something that is actually fun to drive in addition to their commuter pod. You also see a lot of driveways with a Prius and a large SUV. Maybe they are trying to balance out? I appreciate those that drive a Prius and are willing to make that sacrifice. To them, driving might not be anything pleasant to them anyway, so they might not see it as a sacrifice. I am thankful for them. 
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 30, 2009 11:54 am) Gary, "people" are the MAIN reason for environmental caretaking !!! We need to take care of the world and keep the air clean so the people can live healthy and happy lives !!! |
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Jan 30, 2009 12:18 pm) I have voted Republican my whole life. I just realize that sometimes, people, when left of their own accord, are not smart enough or capable enough or willful enough to do the CORRECT, unselfish thing. That's where guvmint and laws and mandates need to step in and help people take care of themselves. How dirty would the air be if leaded fuel had not been outlawed? DDT? What if the EPA had never been formed? Can you imagine the wasteland we'd be living if if the Guvmint did not force private industry to clean up after themselves !!?!?!?!?!?
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Will Green Cars Be Exciting To Drive And Enjoyable To Own?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
