I don’t know why you would assume that a small car is driving 5x, that is an absurd assumption. Driving less is good… driving a smaller, more efficient vehicle less is even better.
I disagree that 20 is not that bad. Maybe compared to all the other monstrous and overbuilt vehicles Americans tend to drive but there are numerous affordable models nowadays that get 2-3x that mileage. For most people, these vehicles would be far more practical but they don’t sell as well because of the status symbol of the fancy new truck. And because some drivers don’t feel safe sharing the road with a monster truck without driving one of their own. This ends up being a race to the bottom that hurts everyone.
It wasn’t an assumption, it was an example. Basically if your tiny car is so fuel efficient you drive it 50,000km yearly, that’s worse than someone with a large truck that only drives 10,000km yearly. Hence, 5x more. That’s not even talking about driving habits which are huge factors in maximizing fuel efficiency.
As I said before, it’s much less about the vehicle and more about how it’s used. High mileage fuel efficient cars are worse than non-fuel efficient trucks that don’t get driven much. Fuel efficient cars can give the driver a false sense of helping the environment so they think they can drive more without impacting the environment, which is wrong.
20mph in the city is decent. 30mpg on the highway is better than most if not all sportscars on the market. Planes are 2x worse but again, no one removed because they want to fly to their vacation vs. not going anywhere to save the planet.
But if you are concerned about your impact why would you not do both? Try to reduce driving, but also drive a lower impact vehicle?
The reason trucks get dunked on is because they’re really impractical as passenger vehicles in cities yet they are extremely popular. Reducing driving and flying, while good things, do have significant costs for people who are trying to lessen their impacts. Especially the newer huge trucks like the one pictured here—I have to use one for work and it’s not even good at transporting things because the bed is way too high and the cab is huge—because people buy these not as work vehicles, but as passenger vehicles. But they are so expensive and bad as passenger vehicles that you are much better off not driving one.
I already addressed the sports car thing—they are also bad and there are dozens of better vehicles. An elephant is not small because a whale is bigger.
But if you are concerned about your impact why would you not do both? Try to reduce driving, but also drive a lower impact vehicle?
Maybe I am, but no is asking. The mere fact that I own a truck is a problem for these people. How much I drive, how I drive aren’t factors. I’m simply wrong for choosing a truck, regardless of reasons. If someone has a fuel efficient car and drives all the time, you give that a pass but if I barely drive a truck, I’m a monster.
The anti-truck crowd is just too annoying to listen to.
Well if you are driving a gas-guzzler you are definitionally not doing both, so there’s no real need to ask.
I acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons to drive a pickup, it’s just that those reasons are far more rare than the number of pickups clogging the roads of my city or nearly running me over. So something has to give here.
PS: I also shame people who drive too much so that’s not accurate.
> I acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons to drive a pickup, it’s just that those reasons are far more rare than the number of pickups clogging the roads of my city or nearly running me over. So something has to give here.
Rare according to your experience? Sorry, that’s not how real life works. Your fear of trucks doesn’t mean the rest of us have to cater to those fears.
Shaming people is a dick move. You’re not perfect so why judge others? Glass houses etc.
Public shaming is good when you’re doing things that hurt people. I also do those things sometimes and I would not mind being shamed a bit for them. It makes it easier to do the right thing.
![Gas prices [...] starter kit.](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/92af75ee-a48b-472d-9260-981c6cbde83a.webp){kind=link}
I don’t know why you would assume that a small car is driving 5x, that is an absurd assumption. Driving less is good… driving a smaller, more efficient vehicle less is even better.
I disagree that 20 is not that bad. Maybe compared to all the other monstrous and overbuilt vehicles Americans tend to drive but there are numerous affordable models nowadays that get 2-3x that mileage. For most people, these vehicles would be far more practical but they don’t sell as well because of the status symbol of the fancy new truck. And because some drivers don’t feel safe sharing the road with a monster truck without driving one of their own. This ends up being a race to the bottom that hurts everyone.
It wasn’t an assumption, it was an example. Basically if your tiny car is so fuel efficient you drive it 50,000km yearly, that’s worse than someone with a large truck that only drives 10,000km yearly. Hence, 5x more. That’s not even talking about driving habits which are huge factors in maximizing fuel efficiency.
As I said before, it’s much less about the vehicle and more about how it’s used. High mileage fuel efficient cars are worse than non-fuel efficient trucks that don’t get driven much. Fuel efficient cars can give the driver a false sense of helping the environment so they think they can drive more without impacting the environment, which is wrong.
20mph in the city is decent. 30mpg on the highway is better than most if not all sportscars on the market. Planes are 2x worse but again, no one removed because they want to fly to their vacation vs. not going anywhere to save the planet.
But if you are concerned about your impact why would you not do both? Try to reduce driving, but also drive a lower impact vehicle?
The reason trucks get dunked on is because they’re really impractical as passenger vehicles in cities yet they are extremely popular. Reducing driving and flying, while good things, do have significant costs for people who are trying to lessen their impacts. Especially the newer huge trucks like the one pictured here—I have to use one for work and it’s not even good at transporting things because the bed is way too high and the cab is huge—because people buy these not as work vehicles, but as passenger vehicles. But they are so expensive and bad as passenger vehicles that you are much better off not driving one.
I already addressed the sports car thing—they are also bad and there are dozens of better vehicles. An elephant is not small because a whale is bigger.
Maybe I am, but no is asking. The mere fact that I own a truck is a problem for these people. How much I drive, how I drive aren’t factors. I’m simply wrong for choosing a truck, regardless of reasons. If someone has a fuel efficient car and drives all the time, you give that a pass but if I barely drive a truck, I’m a monster.
The anti-truck crowd is just too annoying to listen to.
Well if you are driving a gas-guzzler you are definitionally not doing both, so there’s no real need to ask.
I acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons to drive a pickup, it’s just that those reasons are far more rare than the number of pickups clogging the roads of my city or nearly running me over. So something has to give here.
PS: I also shame people who drive too much so that’s not accurate.
> I acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons to drive a pickup, it’s just that those reasons are far more rare than the number of pickups clogging the roads of my city or nearly running me over. So something has to give here.
Rare according to your experience? Sorry, that’s not how real life works. Your fear of trucks doesn’t mean the rest of us have to cater to those fears.
Shaming people is a dick move. You’re not perfect so why judge others? Glass houses etc.
Public shaming is good when you’re doing things that hurt people. I also do those things sometimes and I would not mind being shamed a bit for them. It makes it easier to do the right thing.