We'll be getting an SUV or a pickup truck in the near future to pull a horse trailer. But not to use as a commuter to the grocery store. And not some $50,000 luxury-equipped eyesore with leather upholstery on which we'd be reluctant to throw a saddle or wet towels or hay bales or whatever.

 

SUVs really do have a comfortable driving/riding position. When I go skiing/snowboarding, SUVs are very nice cars to take. They're comfortable, hold a lot of people, and there's nothing like sitting on those nice comfy seats, high above the road, after a long day on the slopes. They're low on excitement but high on creature comforts.

As for electric and hybrid cars, Ubetit is right. They're not as environmentally friendly as people would like to think. Electricity production causes some of the worst environmental damage possible. It's just that today, the public is so focused on the fossil fuel issue that they don't realize electricity production is very damaging and polluting as well - out of sight, out of mind.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cyber_x
As for electric and hybrid cars, Ubetit is right.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tritium_pie

 

^ true, and I agree completely. the best thing to do for the environment is not to start your vehicle at all, and walk when you can. but to clarify my point, if one must use a vehicle, an electric vehicle is going to be more efficient.

of course, I'm in love with the source of my hypocracy; my S2000. I could've gotten an Insight, but... it wouldn't have put grins on my face quite like my S.

that said, I do drive a beater car to get around and run errands-- a far more fuel efficient '89 Honda CRX. if I had my druthers, I'd have an Insight as a beater, and my S as my weekend toy.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cyber_x

 

I recently traded in my S for a SUV. Women driving SUV's scare the hell out of me. But if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

They're here to stay.

 

My environmental chemistry professor in college was very adamant that electricity production produces some of the worst environmental damage possible. I have heard others disagree. Without hard evidence or more in-depth knowledge of the matter, I won't personally argue either way. Does anyone have hard facts showing relative environmental damage from electricity versus gas production?

 

You guys have to admit though you see only 1 person sometimes in a huge SUV. You are stuck in traffic and you see a big SUV up on you rear end or stuck next to you with just one driver. Half the time they can't even see the cars next to them. You guys have to admit there gas mileage are horrible on SUV. It cost 50 dollars to fill up and most of the time I see people use it for personal use or to commute to traffic. My neighbor does the same thing with his Chevrolet Silverado he put spinner and some other cosmetics. He told me that he should have go a sport S2000 or a M3 because the gas is horrible the truck. I just believe a lot of people buy a truck or SUV more for a status symbol but rather see them using a smaller maybe more expensive car. At least they can see you when you they drive and still be able to show off. For the title I meant to put "Time for me to go on my soap box."

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cyber_x
My environmental chemistry professor in college was very adamant that electricity production produces some of the worst environmental damage possible.