Hot Topic - Global warming, climate change and cars...

[supercharged]

Yes, we all heard that before, that burning fuel causes greenhouse gasses to bulid up and warming the earth...To some of you it don't matter, but I personally hate temperatures over 90 degrees...

back to the topic, cars...

I don't know how others feel about old cars, but I really hate them. you are in a stop and go traffic, and there is this old piece of sh#t burning fuel (and it stinks so bad), polluting the atmosphere, paying much less to DMV, driving without smog (in California you can, if a car is 30+ years old). If we are all concerned about global warming and gasses bulding up, why are those crapppy cars still on the road? They are not paying for the crappy damage they are doing...

Doing some reaserch I've found out that in Europe (in Germany in this case) the older your car gets - the more you pay (after 13 years it is so much, it's not worth keeping the vehicle). In America it's the other way around. This really needs to be fixed. The older it get - the more you pay, for a few reasons:

#1) if your sh#t stinks, pay for it, and the worse - more.
#2) you are polluting the atmosphere more, think of how many trees need to me planted just to absorb from one of those Mustangs, or Chevelles.
#3) you seriously need to consider buying a newer car, sales helps the economy.

I trully think that those older cars from 60's-70's need to pay a minimum of $5-10k per year just to cover the difference in a damage they are doing...
you can't get rid of them completely, but let's just make them affordable to millionaires.

I've noticed that when prurchasing a new car, DMV literally rips you off with their fees every year. I was paying over $300 when first purchased my RL, and then every year those fees were falling down, as the car gets older.

As technology evolves, human need to adopt to it.

There are still a lot of popcorns (heard this term back at highschool, a popcorn is a person that want popcorn to eat, dog to leak their face, sport to watch, and ald old car with a shifter on a steering column, and does not want/care about anything else in life, and thought it's funny), and it's time to evolve (not into pokemons)

Anyone has different thoughts?

Please share...

[killrwheels@autogeek]

I dont necessarily agree. The mom is her Escalade that drives 25k miles a year at 9 miles to the gallon is polluting more than a muscle car owner (70's) that takes it out twice a year for show.

lets start where more pollution is emitted daily, and thats those factories with heavy lobbist and lots of money to keep the laws from being past that would reduce their emissions by huge factors in a smaller amount of time.

[_M_]

i dont think s/c'd is necessarily referring to well maintained classics.

what should happen is people should be held accountible for maintianing their vehicles..but in all honesty the amount that vehicle is polluting is probably pretty small in the bigger picture.

regardless of all the expert opinions out there, its pretty hard to beat the combustible engine. especially with a little modern tech thrown in there like multi-displacement engines, turbos, etc. to get horsepower and fuel economy.

[makdaddy626]

My humble opinion...

I appreciate the OPs concern about the environment and the damage that may occur from burning fossil fuels, but, I also think it's to narrow of a view to isolate the environmental factor into a vacuum while trying to reach a solution. In particular, I don't think it's good to ignore the economic realities that his proposed solution would effect. Most drivers of older cars that are poorly maintained are doing so not due to a willing disregard for the environement, they're driving their POS because it's what the can afford... If you start taxing a $2000.00 auto at $5000.00 a year, what is the person who can only afford to drive the $2000 vehicle suppose to do? How are they suppose to get to work, take kids to school, etc.? And remember, the majority of people in the US don't live where public transportation is an option.

I'm also opposed at almost every level to the idea of using taxes to modify behavior... don't tax something just to discourage it, if the practice "costs" society as whole something monitary, tax away in order to cover thoses costs, but not just to get people to behave the way you want them to.

[supercharged]

Originally Posted by killrwheels@autogeek

I dont necessarily agree. The mom is her Escalade that drives 25k miles a year at 9 miles to the gallon is polluting more than a muscle car owner (70's) that takes it out twice a year for show.

lets start where more pollution is emitted daily, and thats those factories with heavy lobbist and lots of money to keep the laws from being past that would reduce their emissions by huge factors in a smaller amount of time.

Notice that gas coming out of tailpipe out of older cars stink, where newer (even Escalade) have catalycs, and are able to burn cleaner.

Bush already said he is not going to accept options that will hurt economy (not a whole lot can be done about factories), so I personally think that taxing olders cars with higher taxes will keep them off the road polluting.

Perhaps another solution will be to modify them with newer catalycs and other necessary accesories so they won't stink.

[supercharged]

Originally Posted by makdaddy626

My humble opinion...

I appreciate the OPs concern about the environment and the damage that may occur from burning fossil fuels, but, I also think it's to narrow of a view to isolate the environmental factor into a vacuum while trying to reach a solution. In particular, I don't think it's good to ignore the economic realities that his proposed solution would effect. Most drivers of older cars that are poorly maintained are doing so not due to a willing disregard for the environement, they're driving their POS because it's what the can afford... If you start taxing a $2000.00 auto at $5000.00 a year, what is the person who can only afford to drive the $2000 vehicle suppose to do? How are they suppose to get to work, take kids to school, etc.? And remember, the majority of people in the US don't live where public transportation is an option.

I'm also opposed at almost every level to the idea of using taxes to modify behavior... don't tax something just to discourage it, if the practice "costs" society as whole something monitary, tax away in order to cover thoses costs, but not just to get people to behave the way you want them to.

If someone is after a $2000 vehicle, I think a better solution will be to make it a small engine vehicle. There are plenty of vehicle from 90's and newer that will cost $2000 and won't pollute like the ones from 60's-70's.

[wytstang]

You can't force someone to install smog parts that it never came with. Thats really unfair to the owner of the car. Also despite the fact the a 90's car is around the same price to purchase, the maintenance parts may be more then what the person can afford. Older technology is cheaper to replace/repair and thats what some folks want/need. Also it's easier for folks to do there own repairs (saving money or can't afford to pay some one) to a carburated motor then todays EFI motors. Your basically picking on the lower class (not on purpose) for not being able to afford better or afford to fix there car.

[wytstang]

Now taxing the dog crap out of the rich for using limos, personal jets, and Hummers by all means

[Gary Sword]

When Mt. St. Helen erupted it but out more greenhouse gasses the all cars have since the creation of the automobile. We should outlaw volcanoes IMO and don't worry about the cars.

[supercharged]

Originally Posted by wytstang

Now taxing the dog crap out of the rich for using limos, personal jets, and Hummers by all means

there is Gaz Guzzler tax on Hummers...it's just I got so pissed on those stinky cars, I started this topic...
perpaps that can be done just in California...that is if we care about environment...and maybe government could help for the ones that can't afford it...