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

supercharged

supercharged

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
7,305
Reaction score
0
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:D)

Anyone has different thoughts?

Please share...
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
 
killrwheels@autogeek said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
makdaddy626 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
Now taxing the dog crap out of the rich for using limos, personal jets, and Hummers by all means :D
 
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.
 
wytstang said:
Now taxing the dog crap out of the rich for using limos, personal jets, and Hummers by all means :D
Click to expand...
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...
 
Last edited:
I don't think it's fair to tell someone they can't own an older car but letting them drive it around isn't a good option ether. I think a better solution to taxing someone with a dirty car (the kind that can't be cleaned with a good detailing, lol) would be to offer tax incentives to people who keep their older cars up to reasonable emission standards by the way tax deductions or cheaper registration. I understand that older cars may pollute more but it's still important to keep them on the road because there are some people who can only afford those kind of cars and the manufacturing of new cars isn't as environmentally friendly as you might hope. I share your concern on this issue but I think there a better ways to go about solving it.
 
supercharged said:
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:D)

Anyone has different thoughts?

Please share...
Click to expand...


Dude-there are WAY worse things then a few older cars causing global warming. Huge factories pumping out clouds of pollution for one.
 
Honestly, the amount of time and brain power it would take to come up with a solution to this "problem" would be far better suited finding alternate energy sources or means of fully implementing cleaner ones.
 
Ya'll are all drinkin that "global warming" koolaid. I guess it was warmer in the 1500"s cause those damn Vikings and their SUV's. IF you bother to read the other side, the science papers not funded by Moveon.org or government "ear marks" ya'll find that there are thousands of leading scientests that say this whole thing is a crock. There were more - 4X the CO2 in the air during the period before we evolved than now, the Sahara was a lush green area full of life. Where were the factories and cars then? We - humans have a responsibility, but even with all we do, the fact is that the sun and climatic cycles are much, much more powerful.

Side note, I lost all respect for Carl Sagen after his prediction that nuclear war would destroy ALL life - his computer model was custom designed by him to take out the affect of the oceans, not a small thing to leave out! The Yale study afterwards that included the oceans refuted all his findings.

You have to watch those damn "chicken littles" like that hate America OwlGore
 
O Junebug I completely agree with you, all of this global warming hoopla I think takes a small grain of truth and tries to make the world's largest loaf of bread. For starters, if the world is heating up so much, why are Boston and New York constantly hitting record LOWS during winter nowadays.

It's hard to refute that we are consuming too much and polluting too much, but all the global warming hoopla and Gore showing ice caps melting and Florida going underwater before the next Detail Fest is bologna.
 
lethalxls1 said:
Dude-there are WAY worse things then a few older cars causing global warming. Huge factories pumping out clouds of pollution for one.
Click to expand...
I know that. The only thing you can do about huge factories is find alternative ("green") fuel.
 
supercharged said:
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...
Click to expand...
By the "government" helping them means the rest of us pay for it with our taxes. I would loooooove to go with e85 it's cleaner with no loss in power/tq and way cheaper then petro. But it's not available to me (yet), and Cali will find a way to find something to blame you know like #16 and Paste Glaz :(. They need to make e85 more available this would definitely help out and the late 70's-todays cars would be just fine.
 
wytstang said:
By the "government" helping them means the rest of us pay for it with our taxes. I would loooooove to go with e85 it's cleaner with no loss in power/tq and way cheaper then petro. But it's not available to me (yet), and Cali will find a way to find something to blame you know like #16 and Paste Glaz :(. They need to make e85 more available this would definitely help out and the late 70's-todays cars would be just fine.
Click to expand...
See P.M.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top