Do you own a SUV?

[Dozernut]

Wife has an SUV and it is not for a status symbol. We live far out in the country, on a gravel road. When it snows you had better have four wheel drive because the county and township most likely will not plow the roads, unless there is significant snow fall. With fuel prices this will simply get worse. She is a school teacher and teaches at a school on the other side of the county and needs that awful SUV at times to simply get home. She needs the cargo room to haul books and supplies, as she travels between school buildings. Not everyone who has an SUV is evil or an energy waster (btw her suv gets over 20mpg). Don't go into a gun fight armed with a knife!

 

[SkyPup]

We haven't owned a vehicle in the last ten years that gets less than 45 miles per gallon, except for our Z-71 farm truck...

SUVs are great for plugging holes in dikes, metal recycling, or for RPG target practice. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Dargo]

It's a good thing Al Gore invented the internet so we can hear about such things. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I like SUV's, my '62 Chevy gets about 3 mpg with it's 500+ cubic inch engine, and my diesel pickup has just under 400hp with over 1000 ft. lbs. of torque. But, my wife's pick for her car; a new Honda Civic. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

I suppose the next poll will indicate that my house is too big, I should keep my thermostadt at 50 in the winter and 90 in the summer, I shouldn't heat or A/C my barn, and I shouldn't use my pool heater.

 

[riptides]

Don't own one, lease one.

The class of vehicle offers features that are not easily found in other class vehicles.

For my personally owned autos, they are a min-van and a pickup truck, a 4 banger at that.

But getting back to the SUV, it is LARGE and IN CHARGE.
I fit in it.
My family fits in it.
My customers fit in it.
It hauls my business needs.
It is an all weather vehicle. (I even USE 4X4).

The SUV fits into my life, it has a place. Now if I am running around by myself, the 4 banger does the job, just fine.

Yes, gas sucks in the SUV, but that is the price we pay for those features offered.

-Mike Z. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[getut]

I am almost a greenie when it comes to land and trees, but when it comes to fuel and vehicles I am a realist. I wish the people that talk about gas dependence and try to push public transportation and small tin can vehicles would just take a hike. Especially the ones who talk about artificially raising prices or taxing gas even more to force people off of gas. Come on.

99.9999% of the time, the people that are trying to push mass transit, eliminate larger vehicles, or artificially inflate prices are either people that live in big cites or people from countries OTHER than the US complaining about our gas consumption. City dwellers think their form of existence is what it is like everywhere and can't understand why people don't just ride the bus or train. Frankly I couldn't exist in a city because that is all it is, is existence... nothing more.

Fact: 90% of the nation is NOT in a city where mass transit is a viable option. I live CLOSE to Charlotte, NC. It has mass transit, but even if I worked there, I would pay $15 a gallon in gas before I would get up, drive to a mass transit pickup location, ride that to Charlotte, get off, transfer to another form of transportation such as a bus or taxi to finally get to my workplace. 90% of the nation fits this mold.

Fact: People in the US commonly have to drive far enough to work to drive halfway across an average country in Europe where most of the overseas gripes of US oil consumption come from.

I FULLY agree that we need to find other forms of fuel and use it. But it isn't here yet and gas would have to get MUCH MUCH more expensive for me to justify having a third gas efficient car. I MUST have a vehicle that can work so a gas friendly vehicle that is useful for a single purpose would always be a third vehicle for quite a large proportion of rural America.

 

[jwstewar]

Yep, I do. We have 3 vehicles - a '97 Honda Accord (32 MPG), a '99 Silverado ext. cab 4x4 (19+ MPG), and '05 Trailblazer EXT LT w/ 4.2 inline 6 (guessing around 17/18 MPG - haven't really checked it yet). I drive the car back and forth to work (54 miles each way). Prior to buying the Trailblazer, it also served as the family car. But we found it never had enough room for everything w/ the kids & their car seats. Usually ended up taking the truck because of more interior room + the bed. The truck at that time was also my wife's daily driver. Now the truck has been reduced to occasional use - hauling stuff and as a back-up for the Honda when it needs work done. She now drives the Trailblazer almost exclusively. It is so nice to have enough room that 7 people can ride comfortably and still have room for additional supplies. Which makes more sense, driving 1 SUV w/ 7 people and getting 18 MPG or taking 2 cars each getting around 25 - 30 MPG. Since you have to cut that in half, you are down to 15 MPG. Now my Trailblazer is beating your 2 cars by 3 MPG. Do we always have 7 people? No, but we do it often enough that it turns out to be a wash for us. An added bonus is the 4wd - gives me 3 vehicles (if you include the tractor) to pull the Honda back up on the driveway after it slides off in the winter. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[jwstewar]

One thing I wanted to add. I watched a program on the History Channel the other night about sugar (bet you are wondering where this is headed aren't ya and how it is related /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif). They started talking about the cost of oil and the price of gas. They then started talking about Brazil. Seems in '73 Brazil was hit just like the US and other countries w/ the oil embargo - they were then about 80% dependant on forgeign oil. Instead of whining about it like we did (or are I guess /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif) , they did something about it. They started working more on Ethanol - or as they call it alcohol. Now here is where I was intrigued. They don't get it from corn like we typcially think of it - they get it from sugar. They also take fibers leftover from the sugar cane and burn it in steam generators to make electricity. They then started talking about Flexible Fuel Vehicles (I know Ford w/ the Taurus have some of these here in the US) including a car by Chevrolet w/ a 1.8 l engine. Produced 105 horsepower on dino and 109 on sugar. Gas there was 2.499 but alcohol was only .999 (not sure what denomination or even quanitity - doesn't matter). Now Brazil only needs to import about 10% of their energy needs. Now if Brazil can do this with Sugar Cane, why can't we do this w/ corn and the sugar beats that are raised in the US? I'm sure Chevrolet can make my Trailblazer run on sweets - afterall I run on chocolate /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif.

 

[Highbeam]

"I also think we should build more nuclear plants. Having been a radiation safety professional I do not understand the irrational fears people have about things nuclear. Most of it is ignorance."

Yep, ignorance. Add that nearly all the submarines, air craft carriers, and cruisers in the US Navy have at least one nuclear reactor inside of them providing power and propulsion. We're talking battleships sent into harms way with the dreaded nuclear reactors humming away inside of them. But heaven forbid we build a huge complex with immensely thick concrete walls to protect a single, stationary nuclear reactor to provide clean, efficient, oil free power to our citizens.

Off topic, I know but jeesh.

We intend to replace the wife's camry with a smaller SUV very soon. The MPG won't be much worse and the comfort/safety aspect is worth a fuel penalty. I daily drive my 1/2 ton chevy pickup which is more SUV than many SUVs. The pickups nowadays are quite comfortable.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

One SUV, 2 BIG 'ol honkin' diesel pick-ups. And the SUV sets 90% of the time.

It's the "sunday-go-to-meet'n" vehicle. The wife and I both drive 3/4 ton 4-door diesel pick-ups. Kinda hard to load 1000lbs of feed bags in a Durango.

Somewhere along the dusty trail, fuel economy and functionality part company.

 

[slowrev]

Yep, ignorance. Add that nearly all the submarines, air craft carriers, and cruisers in the US Navy have at least one nuclear reactor inside of them providing power and propulsion. We're talking battleships sent into harms way with the dreaded nuclear reactors humming away inside of them. But heaven forbid we build a huge complex with immensely thick concrete walls to protect a single, stationary nuclear reactor to provide clean, efficient, oil free power to our citizens.
//

What about the waste ? Ships with reactors do not spend their entire existence next to a large city full of people, but in the ocean.

I do agree that most of our problems and perceptions about nuclear power came from the industry building plants before the technology was up to a supportive / safe level.
ie Chernobal.
Remember, Plutonium is probably the most deadly substance on this planet. And keeps killing for tens of thousands of years.

Ah but if I just had a reactor in my subaru......

Ben