SUV v. Compact Car

Is a standard SUV really worse for the environment than a fuel efficient compact car? Depends on who you ask. Depends on what you do. If you don’t like to get your hands dirty, or are a minimalist, or a bum who mooches rides from your friends, and you still own an SUV, then you are exactly what are causing this planet to become Venus. If you are constantly on the go, moving for friends, moving yourself, or making your place an IKEA showroom, chances are you make more than one trip anywhere. This really does not cut down on fuel emissions, save at the tank, or cut down on traffic anywhere.

If you look at the pattern of growth in real estate and auto purchases, SUVs have gone up in sales consistently with the housing market. Home Depot, Lowe’s, Crafty Beaver, and others have seen their lots fill up with both hatchbacks and SUVs since their inceptions, and have probably noticed the same cars returning to fill up with bricks for retaining walls, closet rods, and bathroom tiles, that would normally take just one trip in even a Jeep Liberty. What’s more, these compact cars have less horsepower and power than the SUVs do, and use up even more fuel and energy because of the excess weight. Carrying 300lbs. in a Rodeo does not have the same impact as it would in an Accord or Camry. Distance traveled has similar factors, not counting the weight. An SUV with an average city rate of 17 MPG that has to go that same distance to and from Point B has used up one gallon. A compact car with an average city rate of 30 MPG that may have to go at least twice to and from Point B has used up more fuel than the SUV. If it has to go a third time, that is almost one gallon more.

Rather than pushing for people to drive smaller, more fragile cars in an effort to conserve gas, automakers, government officials, and the cast of Grey’s Anatomy should push for more energy efficient SUVs. We have the Mariner hybrid, as well as the Escape hybrid, but what about the Hummers? The Jeeps? The Land Rovers?