Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Earth

SUVs Second Biggest Cause of Emissions Rise, Figures Reveal (theguardian.com) 188

Posted by BeauHD from the bigger-isn't-always-better dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Growing demand for SUVs was the second largest contributor to the increase in global CO2 emissions from 2010 to 2018, an analysis has found. In that period, SUVs doubled their global market share from 17% to 39% and their annual emissions rose to more than 700 megatons of CO2, more than the yearly total emissions of the UK and the Netherlands combined. No energy sector except power drove a larger increase in carbon emissions, putting SUVs ahead of heavy industry (including iron, steel, cement and aluminum), aviation and shipping.

The recent dramatic shift towards heavier SUVs has offset both efficiency improvements in smaller cars and carbon savings from electric vehicles. As the global fleet of SUVs has grown, emissions from the vehicles have increased more than fourfold in eight years. If SUV drivers were a nation, they would rank seventh in the world for carbon emissions. T&E figures show the average mass of new cars rose 10% between 2000 and 2016, which the group suggested could be down to a trend towards SUVs, heavier automatic and dual-clutch gearboxes and the inclusion of other equipment including cameras and sensors.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SUVs Second Biggest Cause of Emissions Rise, Figures Reveal More

SUVs Second Biggest Cause of Emissions Rise, Figures Reveal

Comments Filter:

  • But People Need Them (Score:5, Insightful)

    by theshowmecanuck ( 703852 ) on Friday October 25, 2019 @11:55PM (#59349098) Journal
    How else will they get their groceries up the driveway when it's snowing? It just can't be done without a 3 or 4 ton SUV with AWD or 4WD and locking hubs. Look I get it if you have to drive in winter in Minnesota, Montana, the Canadian Prairie or the Mountains from the Rockies to the Cascades. But outside of those places who the fuck really needs one? It boggles my mind. I had someone tell me once in Saint Louis that they needed their SUV because they lived in the suburbs. WTF? And really AWD sedans work just great, too, and are way better on gas. I just bought one (six cylinder to boot) because I drive the Coquihalla regularly (that's where the show Highway Through Hell is filmed). I was very glad to not have to buy an SUV. Especially because of the price of gas.

    • The IEA figures show that SUVs steadily increased their share across major markets all around the world, from Europe and the US to China and India.

      Your comment would be more understandable if it were only a US phenomenon. So there's something else driving this shift to bigger vehicles. Maybe blame the advertisers trying to sell big cars and Big Macs as a sign of prosperity?

      • Ha ha, you bought an economy car! What's it like to be POOR?

        That's about how some people are.

      • Re:But People Need Them (Score:4, Interesting)

        by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Saturday October 26, 2019 @03:55AM (#59349506) Journal

        Your comment would be more understandable if it were only a US phenomenon. So there's something else driving this shift to bigger vehicles.

        I live in London and own no car. Many of the people on my road own two SUVs. This is great because the houses don't have driveways and aren't all that much more than a car-length wide. Some fuckwit went even more overboard bought a bloated monster that's too wide to park on the road without serious risks of getting bashed up so the arseholes solves that by parking partly on the pavement.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Same thing happened here and people just started ramming them. People buy cars designed for ramming, often cheap and already dented or sometimes another SUV with big bumpers and maybe a spare tyre on the back.

          Then when they park or need to turn in the road they can just ram the nearest SUV at low speed rather than trying to carefully maneuver around it.

          Folding wing mirrors are essential if you want them to last more than a week or two.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          There are so many utterly dysfunctional people, it is staggering. I don't own a car either. No need for it.

      • Maybe blame the advertisers trying to sell big cars and Big Macs as a sign of prosperity?

        Only a tiny percentage of people need a SUV and an even lower percentage of people need a Mac Pro.

    • Re:But People Need Them (Score:5, Interesting)

      by blindseer ( 891256 ) <blindseer@@@earthlink...net> on Saturday October 26, 2019 @12:57AM (#59349220)

      How else will they get their groceries up the driveway when it's snowing? It just can't be done without a 3 or 4 ton SUV with AWD or 4WD and locking hubs.

      Have you seen my driveway? I had a front wheel drive sedan when I moved in and it was far too often I had to park in the street, or two blocks away at the bottom of the hill. I thought it odd when I moved that so many of my neighbors had 4WD vehicles. It was everyone up and down the street except the retired couple.

      And really AWD sedans work just great, too, and are way better on gas.

      Not all AWD sedans are equal. Many cars with all wheel drive don't provide full power to all wheels. I recall seeing a demonstration of this where on a car that supposedly had all wheel drive the front wheels would spin but the rear wheels did nothing, then they'd show that the shaft driving the rear wheels was about the size of a pencil and it had a clutch to keep this from snapping off. Well, perhaps being as small as a pencil is a bit of hyperbole but the rear wheels lacked the power to move the car up a hill at any speed if the front wheels had no grip. This seemed quite typical with all wheel drive being an afterthought bolt on to models that were originally front wheel drive.

      Look I get it if you have to drive in winter in Minnesota, Montana, the Canadian Prairie or the Mountains from the Rockies to the Cascades.

      I live in a decent sized Midwest city. The major roads are kept clear by the city but the side streets can be neglected for days in heavy snow. They'll keep the bus routes open for the metro and school buses but for those off the main routes it's 4WD.

      After a few winters of having my car get stuck in the street in front of my house I gave in and got a 4WD SUV. Since then I had only two times I couldn't park in my garage. One night after coming home from a Christmas party I had all four wheels spinning on ice. I made the mistake of clearing off the snow before a light freezing rain. The roads were fine because they had snow to soak up the rain, or enough salt to melt it. After the sun came up to melt the ice I had no problem. The second time was I came home from work to find the street was finally plowed and the mound of packed snow across my driveway was too much to drive over.

      I had someone tell me once in Saint Louis that they needed their SUV because they lived in the suburbs. WTF?

      I believe it. You seem to have no idea.

      • Really? You let a little snow stop you? How embarrassing [youtube.com]!

      • If you put snow tires on your FWD vehicle it would have no problem whatsoever with your driveway.
        I drive a light, high power, RWD sports car year round. I put snow tires on it and I have zero issues in up to ~6" of snow. Once the snow gets deeper than that the front end of the car acts more like a plow than I'm comfortable with.

        But I'm sure you're happy carting another half ton of shitty SUV around while having a poorer driving experience as well as dumping 15%-30% more money into your gas tank year round

        • Re:But People Need Them (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jmccue ( 834797 ) on Saturday October 26, 2019 @09:52AM (#59349882) Homepage

          If you put snow tires on your FWD vehicle it would have no problem whatsoever with your driveway.

          And this is when I wish I had mod points, you would get them all.

          Believe it or not, before the mid 80's no one drove AWD and there where hardly any front wheel drive. Also where I live we got a lot more snow (4-6") regularly and snow/ice on the ground all winter long. People back then had no issues driving with rear wheel drive and snow tires, yes you would get stuck once in a while, but on every hill the cities/towns would have sand boxes where after a few minutes of work you could move on. Granted this cars were far worse on the environment then anything now.

          The point is, it is how you drive, not what you drive. In snow you drove a lot different. Now it is pedal to the metal no matter what the weather

          Best car back then for snow, a volkswagen bug. Those hardly ever got stuck and would ride on top of packed snow.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by quenda ( 644621 )

        Have you seen my driveway? I had a front wheel drive sedan when I moved in and it was far too often I had to park in the street,

        I hope you fix your driveway. Meanwhile there is a simple temporary solution for getting a front-wheel drive car up a steep, loose driveway. Just reverse it in!
        In snowy climates, AWD sedans make so much more sense the the cumbersome penis-substitute SUVs.

      • Except SUVs with 4WD are popular right now, but all of those places are much older. What did people do 20, 30 or 50 years ago?

        • What did people do 20, 30 or 50 years ago?

          Drove a pickup with 4WD, or got stuck and had to be pulled out by someone with a 4x4.

          More recently, drove a Subaru or an Audi. My '98 A8 Quattro has a torsen center diff, and though it has open diffs front and rear, it also has EBD. Up to about 25 MPH (40 kph actually) it will use the brakes to emulate having limited slip diffs. My '93 Impreza had a slush box with a manual mode, and a locking center diff (in first only). If you put it down to first gear and hit the manual button, it would go from AWD to 4WD

          • Drove a pickup with 4WD, or got stuck and had to be pulled out by someone with a 4x4.

            Those burbs are much less recent than the 4x4 craze. Were people really getting stuck on the regular every winter? I somehow doubt it otherwise ubiquitous 4x4 would have taken off decades ago, whereas station wagons (not typically 4x4) used to be all the rage.

      • What I'm hearing is that the driveways in your city are poorly designed and the roads are badly maintained. (That's a little unfair; I know most cities can't get to the side streets. Here in Montreal the snow is plowed, but not picked up until after the main streets are done. That means you might have to dig your car out of a metre high drift every few days in exchange for the roads being driveable.)

        But what did people in your neighbourhood do before SUVs? Was everyone just stuck all the time?

        Your point abo

      • I have no need for an SUV or even an AWD vehicle in NY state. I love passing SUVs and trucks in the snow with my Mustang. I always wonder what they think, that I am a lunatic or a great driver?
    • Hate to tell you, but you should have got a 4-cylinder or a V8. 6-cylinder has always been the worst of both worlds.

      • Hate to tell you, but you should have got a 4-cylinder or a V8. 6-cylinder has always been the worst of both worlds.

        I have a 6 cylinder SUV. Every once in a while I tell myself... I should've had a V-8!

        I remember talking to a mechanical engineer once on why so many vehicles had 6 cylinder engines. He said it had something to do with keeping the engine balanced, it's just easier to keep the noise and vibrations to a minimum with 6 cylinders. Apparently a lot of math was involved and he didn't want to take the time to explain it.

        • Sounds like he was bullshitting. I don't know why they don't make V4's. I had a 1985 Honda Magna for a long time, had a V4 700cc engine. Powerful as fuck. No reason you couldn't make a V4 automobile engine. Best of both worlds.
          Of course soon it won't matter, ICEs will go the way of the dinosaur, and a New Age of Musclecars will arrive, when anyone can have a 500+ horsepower electric car, with all the low-end starting torque you could ever want.

      • So very true.
        Who would want a lighter more naturally balanced engine that a V8, and higher specific output per l than I4 (given equivalent tech)...
        Do you pull everything straight out of your arse, or is this a special case?

        V12, I6, V6, V8 (european crank), I4, V8 (american crank) is pretty much the order of 'best layout' for engines (ignoring the more unusual combinations).

        This is because of harmonic stresses, ratio of piston size to capacity, and sensible cooling/external layout.

        Having said all that, these

        • Hey SupraMan...
          What do 400hp, 500hp, and 600hp Supras all have in common?
          They all run 12s at the track!

          My 300hp 240SX runs 13s :-(

        • I'd way rather have a L5 than a V6. The torque is awesome and the maintenance access is better.

          I know you said you were leaving out the more unusual examples but come on, they're not THAT rare. We've got two in our little fleet (OM617 and OM647)

          What are european and american crank supposed to mean, anyway? Americans have used all the firing orders over time.

    • They only look like jeeps. They only got their disadvantages. Like being slow/wasteful, unstable, ugly, expensive, fit no small parking spots, etc.

      But none of their advantages.
      They actually aren't AWD, and are totally useless off-road, or as trucks.

      Plus, due to their high mass, they are LESS safe. Killing the *entire* point why pussies with anxiety disorder buy them at all!

      They are a cornerstone of the idiocracy.

      • Due to their high mass, they are less safe _to other vehicles and pedestrians_. The larger frame and higher mass do offer some protection.

      • But none of their advantages.
        They actually aren't AWD, and are totally useless off-road, or as trucks.

        Most or at least many of them are offered either way. And some of them are fairly good off-road, if you define off-road as on dirt roads. None of them are good rock crawlers, but only a negligible percentage of vehicles are ever driven in that fashion. That crappy little Jeep thing actually has a phenomenal AWD system. If you don't exceed the limits of its ground clearance, it's perfectly capable.

        Plus, due to their high mass, they are LESS safe. Killing the *entire* point why pussies with anxiety disorder buy them at all!

        They're more likely to be in a single-vehicle accident, but in a multi-vehicle accident, he who has the most mas

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:But People Need Them (Score:5, Insightful)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Saturday October 26, 2019 @09:12AM (#59349836) Homepage Journal

        But then they jacked up the CAFE standards without bothering to take the state of the tech into account which caused station wagons and car based light trucks to lose so much power that they became not only unpleasant but in the case of some of the wagons downright dangerous thanks to the acceleration being so poor and response so sluggish.

        Bullshit. Cars have more power than they ever did before. Even a fucking Corolla will now outrun my Audi A8 Quattro.

        The real problem is contained in your explanation above, though: "car based light trucks". They permitted crossovers to have the same emissions standards as pickup trucks, which should not have different emissions standards to begin with. Only commercial trucks should have different standards, and even those standards are garbage everywhere but California. California is the only state serious about such things. We recently instituted a rule whereby all commercial diesels are going to have to be brought up to the CA 2010 spec, whether by vehicle replacement or by repower. And we're also finally regulating farm equipment emissions, too, which are surprisingly relevant.

        The whole idea that a vehicle that looks more like a truck should have a different emissions standard is stupid. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. And what did we win? More pollution.

        So did CAFE cause the problem, or just fail to address it? It seems like automakers and consumers caused the problem, by producing and buying these vehicles respectively, and the government didn't do enough to rein them in.

    • How else will they get their groceries up the driveway when it's snowing?

      You may have been trying to be sarcastic, but there is actually some truth to this.

      I sold my sedan and bought an SUV to tow a boat. My first year owning it, I found it wasteful for short trips around town. It was the year VW was doing some crazy deals for a lease on their e-Golf ($49/mo for 36 months, no money down after state and federal rebates). My house has a two-car garage with one of the spaces empty, so I seriously looke

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by indytx ( 825419 )

      How else will they get their groceries up the driveway when it's snowing? It just can't be done without a 3 or 4 ton SUV with AWD or 4WD and locking hubs. . . . I was very glad to not have to buy an SUV. Especially because of the price of gas.

      First, I don't think that there are any popular 4-ton SUVs. More importantly, you obviously are ignoring people with children. A sedan is not practical for most people with more than one child when you factor in friends, sports, and all the other things that go with parenting. You don't know that you need three rows until you need three rows. Moreover, there's not a lot of difference in terms of gas mileage between SUVs and minivans, and a lot of people prefer SUVs for any number of reasons. If you only nee

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      I grew up in northern Canada. Many people drove compact cars, and they worked just fine. The farmers all had pickups for on-farm work, but often had a minivan for runs into town because they're good on ice, let you put your groceries inside so they don't freeze solid before you get home and... are better on gas.

  • People buy a new EV (Score:4, Funny)

    by AHuxley ( 892839 ) on Friday October 25, 2019 @11:57PM (#59349100) Journal
    for the tax rate and city EV driving.
    Then get a new SUV for the freedom. They actually enjoy driving their own SUV over the gov backed "EV".
    People pushing the green cult of the EV did not expect SUV sales to go up with some EV sales.
    The "savings" on the new EV allowed for more SUV fun.

    • They actually enjoy driving their own SUV over the gov backed "EV".

      You have never driven a Tesla, have you.

      • You have never driven a Tesla, have you.

        This actually was a /. poll question awhile back. Like most of us are assholes who go to car dealerships to waste the salespeople's time (they're just trying to earn a living) test driving a car we obviously don't have the means to purchase.

        Either that, or Slashdot's readership demographic has become far more affluent as of late. Now, I'm sure someone is going to say Tesla's model 3 isn't that expensive compared to some big honkin' truck you typically see roaming the open suburbs, but a lot of us can't af

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          Re "that expensive compared to some big honkin' truck you typically see roaming the open suburbs, but a lot of us can't afford one of those, either."
          Thats the fun part of the EU numbers. The people pushing gov backed green EV tax plans did not expect the SUV to keep selling.
          Wealthy people buy both and SUV numbers are not going away. Car sales are not an all EV new car market due to EU tax considerations.
          Green govs are going to have to work harder to ensure only EV sales go up and new SUV sales stop.

    • ... that is slow, expensive, badly handling, an UNSAFE death trap (high mass), fits no small parking spot, can't actually go offroad, can't be used as a truck, and on top of it all is ugly as fuck?

      Oooo...kaaayyy?

      Might I suggest getting a new brain then? Or at least a therapy?

    • They actually enjoy driving their own SUV

      I know. My penis is small and I get a real sense of pleasure straddling a machine that makes me a more manly. That's what you meant right? I mean you couldn't mean actually "driving", because unless you're tearing up a sanddune SUVs are the single most horrible frigging driving experiences out there.

  • I've never really understood why people like SUVs so much. I mean, I know the reasons given and I thought it'd make sense when we got kids, but I've 3 now and there's still more leg room for them in our hatchback. We looked at some SUVs because we're going on a driving vacation next year. You get some extra luggage space and a worse drive.

    We drove around the US in a Dodge Dart with 2 kids and 3 cats for months. I think people vastly underestimate how much crap you can fit in a small car.

    I didn't know there

    • They're higher off the ground (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Saturday October 26, 2019 @12:57AM (#59349218)
      which lets you see around other cars. This can be useful when you're doing turns into traffic. And, well, for short people it's especially useful. I'm a bit over 6', so I can perk my head up and see over most things, but I can see wanting to be up higher.

      Also if you've got a bad back it can be hard to get in/out of a car that's lower to the ground.

      That said, I can't stand the things. Especially as a passenger in the back. There's way less room than there should be for such large vehicles. I'd much rather have a minivan. I drove a Mercedes one once that was fantastic. A rental, so I didn't have to deal with maintenance, but man it was fast, big enough without being too big and got amazing mileage.
      • My wife is short, 5'2" and she hates SUVs. Not philosophically but because of how they feel to drive. Shes never cared about being high to see more. So as with the other reasons, it sounds like it makes sense.

        I don't even think most people think about it. When asked they just blank usually, it's just a car. They buy what is available, 10 years ago it'd have been a station wagon, now it's all SUVs. Decisions have been driven as much by the manufacturers as the consumers imo.

        • In the US most people buy luxury by the pound.
          "Oh, it's bigger? It must be better!"

          The only way manufacturers can make large, heavy, high profit vehicles today with CAFE regulations is by bypassing the difficult bits by making "light trucks" which is how SUVs are classified.

          CAFE needs to be scrapped and replaced with sane classification regulations.

        • As has been mentioned elsewhere, it's CAFE that has made things like stations wagons underpowered, dangerous piles of trash that can't even get out of their own way.

          It's the government who has effectively forced the manufactures to, over time, stop making station wagons because of CAFE. Because nobody is going to buy a station wagon with a lawnmower engine that takes 2 minutes to get to interstate speed.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            I don't buy that. There isn't that much difference in wind resistance between a hatchback and a sedan. They dropped station wagons because everybody started buying SUVs instead.

      • People wouldn't need tall vehicles to see if every other vehicle wasn't a POS SUV.
        The trend of ever higher belt lines on cars and SUVs and blackout tint are making it increasingly difficult to see what the hell is in front of the car in front of you.

        People also feel safer in a vehicle that insulates them from everything around them. Tall cars with high belt lines "encase" the driver increasing their feeling of security. It's a lie as SUVs historically have been less safe than passenger cars although they'

      • I prefer driving my little car.

        However, because I live in BFE, I also have an older 4x4 ford explorer. I keep it around for high water and snowy/icy conditions.

        That said, parking stall parking stops are too tall for small cars. Bumpers scrape and catch on the tops of them, and often parking lots are designed with the minimum of clearance in the rear of the vehicle, meaning if you do not stop right on top of the damn parking stop, you run the risk of the distracted soccer mom ruining your day while she turns

      • which lets you see around other cars.

        Soon enough, most "other cars" will be SUVs too, so why wait, get an 18-wheeler now.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by natd ( 723818 )

        That said, I can't stand the things. Especially as a passenger in the back. There's way less room than there should be for such large vehicles. I'd much rather have a minivan. I drove a Mercedes one once that was fantastic. A rental, so I didn't have to deal with maintenance, but man it was fast, big enough without being too big and got amazing mileage.

        Hang on, you say you hate the things despite your experience being "fantastic", "fast", "big enought without being too big" and "got amazing mileage"?

        I don't have an MB but I can say the same for what i drive, and I chose it as a long time Sedan driver and was sort of surprised myself when I started realising that the SUVs had none of the downsides people parrot.

        Most people here are quoting from ignorance, or thinking that all SUVs are identical to some notion they got 15 years ago in a poor example of

      • If the car in front of u is also a gigantic SUV you'd still have visibility problems even though you sit higher. And the other argument about the bad back, a lot of people say SUVs are easier to get into and they compare them to something like a Miata. You know there's a middle ground right? Most sedans or smaller hatchbacks are not that low to the ground. Taller vehicles have poor driving dynamics. Too much body roll, terrible steering. Of course there must be a reason they are popular but most 'car guys'

      • Minivans are great. Not the Metris, though, it's got timing chain issues. That seems to be a common problem for Mercedes. The timing chain is the big weakness in the legendary OM617.951 motors, too. I'd far rather have gears. You can have timing gears with OHC, but chains are cheaper. Bastards.

        I drove a 2000 Astro for a while. Mechanically it was very good, quite reliable. But it was the most uncomfortable vehicle I've ever driven. The seat was a real ass beater. Supposedly they had better seats available b

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Luthair ( 847766 )
        Except that you can't see past everyone elses SUV, or a pickup, or a van....

      • 'higher than other cars' is an arms race, and with the massive popularity of SUVs you're right back where you started. And by the same amount you improve your own field of view, you're reducing it for the poor guy behind you. And all too often, that improved field of view translates into tailgating instead of keeping your distance.

  • Gasoline production in the US has been realtively flat for the past 13 years.

    https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/h... [eia.gov]

    Where is the increased gasoline coming from?

  • Getting an SUV doesn't have to mean bad gas mileage, there are plenty of Hybrid SUV's on the market getting up to 50 MPG.
    https://moneyinc.com/best-hybr... [moneyinc.com]
    In some ways it's an ideal match because there is lots of space to put the hybrid batteries.

    If you are over 6 feet tall, a lot of smaller cars aren't an option.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ahodgson ( 74077 )

      I'm 6'3 and have only ever owned hatchbacks. I wouldn't want to ride in the back seat but there's plenty of room in the front.

    • If you are over 6 feet tall, a lot of smaller cars aren't an option.

      I'm 6 feet and 5 inches tall, which puts me as taller than 99% of the population. When looking for a vehicle I have to "try them on" like someone might try on an overcoat. I went to one lot and specifically told the sales guy that I didn't want a sunroof, I always hit my head on a sun roof. He made a list of vehicles that met my general idea of what I was looking for and took me around the lot. On the third or fourth he presented I got in, hit my head on the edge of the sun roof immediately, I got back

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by natd ( 723818 )

      If you are over 6 feet tall, a lot of smaller cars aren't an option.

      Tell that to Basil Faulty.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Baki ( 72515 )

      If you are over 6 feet tall, a lot of smaller cars aren't an option.

      Hmm, I'm 6 feet and a bit, my father is 6.5 feet. Never had a SUV. A VW Polo fits nicely. You're exaggerating. I don't say that a SUV is not convenient. People are spoilt, which is why consumption of all kinds of resources keeps rising, and we're moving towards the cliff.

  • Um Power (Score:3)

    by nevermindme ( 912672 ) on Saturday October 26, 2019 @12:29AM (#59349182)
    Without Nuclear power and wind storage what are we really talking here. Just shifting the energy conversion point from place to place. Another communist revolution in China and getting all the city folks back on the farm is the proven solution.

    • Without Nuclear power and wind storage what are we really talking here. Just shifting the energy conversion point from place to place.

      Which still improves emissions [bloomberg.com], even in the worst case, because little ICEs are so terrible at energy conversion.

  • The article only shows a change in emissions, with no context, so what information that is there is completely useless.

    What is the total that SUV's contribute towards global emissions?
    What was the starting point of the graph? Before this "massive" increase, how much were they producing?

    So little information.

  • If the concern is CO2 emissions then we need carbon neutral fuels for the vehicles we have, not new vehicles. It's a good thing then that we know how to make such fuels.

    The basics of turning carbon and hydrogen into hydrocarbons useful for fuel is a technology that is a century old. A lot of work went into this during World War II, on both sides, because ships carrying fuel were prime targets. The Germans used coal for the carbon but it doesn't have to be coal.

    The ability to use nuclear power is a techno

    • You paid more, and it used more resources to be made.
      And for what? Because you were soo afraid of the world that you bought a civilian tank that is actually *less* safe (higher mass!), less stable, slower, uglier, and useless as a jeep or a truck.

      Great job there!

      I hate to speak like this ... but that factually makes you a moron.

      • What does anything you wrote have to do with carbon neutral fuels? Did you even read my post before you replied?

    • While not entirely carbon neutral there is E85, a blend of 85% ethanol (made from corn, sugarcane, and more) and 15% gasoline. In the current rush toward electric cars I hope this alternative is not forgotten.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      • While not entirely carbon neutral there is E85, a blend of 85% ethanol (made from corn, sugarcane, and more) and 15% gasoline. In the current rush toward electric cars I hope this alternative is not forgotten.

        E85 is shit in every way, and promoting it is idiotic.

        Fuel ethanol is barely energy-positive. Further, it is predicated upon the destruction of topsoil. Virtually 100% of corn fuel feedstocks are grown continuously, meaning without even letting fields lie fallow, let alone with crop rotation. The machine cultivation also creates hardpan which leads to anaerobic conditions. The combination of synthetic fertilizers, continuous production, and poor drainage destroys soil diversity. It's hydroponics in a dirt m

  • It sounds like everyone is doing their part to mitigate global climate change. Fuck people.

  • They lool like jeeps, but are useless as jeeps.
    They look safer, but their high mass makes them death traps.
    They use more fuel, cost more, are slower, fit fewer parking spots, look worse, are less stable, and can't even be used as trucks.

    People only buy SUVs because they think it makes them safer. Well, it doesn't. Get a therapy for your anxiety disorder. Or at least get something that is, you know, actually safer!

  • Diesel (Score:3)

    by natd ( 723818 ) on Saturday October 26, 2019 @02:51AM (#59349388)
    All these comments assuming all SUVs are "3 or 4 tons" when realistically most are under 2.

    Many are also 2WD only, less weight. People are buying these for a practical body shape, easier to load luggage, get into and a better driving perspective. The notion os showing off etc is way off the mark and a really tired idea. Almost as tired as the incorrect notion that the tip over. Please...modern SUVs can handle great and are statistically saver anyway.

    What doesn't seem to be mentioned so far is a misplaced shift from Diesel to Petrol/Gas which in real world driving pump out plenty more Co2 (ie the Petrol does). All that just because ONE manufacturer fiddled a test that wasn't related to CO2.

    When it comes to total CO2 reductions, at this exact time we could do with more Diesel while low emissions electricity production ramps up in preparation for mainstream EV.

    • I have not seen any SUVs under 4000lbs.
      Lots of CUVs are under 4k, but not any SUVs.
         

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by natd ( 723818 )
        Woops....Imperial v Metric / Ton v Tonne. My mistake. Although that also means little hatches are twice as heave as I thought ;)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Luthair ( 847766 )

      In North America diesel vehicles have been rare for a very long time. If anything there was an increase as bozos think they need pickup trucks with huge towing capacities. As the other poster points out diesel vehicles have their own emissions issues, hence Europe having worse air quality and smog.

      Something I have wondered - the real world experience with turbo gasoline engines is that they deliver considerably worse fuel economy than their official ratings, given that all (?) diesel engines are turbocharge

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        If anything there was an increase as bozos think they need pickup trucks with huge towing capacities.

        If anything there was an increase in people who wanted a diesel but found that the only thing available was a 4x4 with a 7 liter Cummins engine.

  • If your family vehicle is a SUV, and you have not yet been ostracized by your peers, it is merely because you have shitty peers.

  • All the car companies do to bypass EPA's stricter fuel economy standards for the car fleet, is start with a sedan, give it a wagon body, and then raise it a few inches. This new vehicle automatically becomes a "truck" according to EPA and now needs to meet much laxer economy standards. No wonder all the car companies want to build the SUVs, and the consumers bought into this scam too.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      The economics of trucks versus passenger vehicles is quite a bit different. Passenger vehicles are rated on fuel consumed per mile traveled. Whereas truck operators consider the fuel consumed per pound of cargo carried per mile traveled. Want a more economical truck? It will be bigger and consume more fuel per mile. But haul more cargo. Want more miles per gallon? The resulting trucks will be smaller and burn more fuel (collectively) for the cargo delivered. Not to mention the cost of more drivers. End resu

  • Oh shit, gas prices are ridiculously high! We should get rid of our clownishly huge SUV that gets 15mpg!
    *time passes, gas prices drop*
    Oh hey gas prices are ridiculously low and clownishly huge SUVs with all the bells and whistles are also ridiculously low priced, lets get rid of our clownishly tiny econo-car that gets 40mph and get one of these new instead!
    (then the spouse says) ..but honey, they get 15mpg, we'll spend so much more on gas!
    Oh don't worry gas is cheap now of course it'll stay that way forever what could possibly go wrong?

    This is how the majority of people think, apparently. They have the long-term memory and attention span of a ferret on bad biker meth.

Slashdot Top Deals

The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.

Close