Cash for Clunkers: What Will They Do with all Those Old Cars?
Two years ago when we bought our Prius, my then second grader had an idea. He thought that everyone should have to give up their old cars and buy a hybrid. That, he believed, would solve the global warming problem that he was so worried about. Someone in Washington has stolen my son’s idea.
The New York Times reported last week that President Obama embraces “cash for clunkers” a government sponsored incentive program that would offer Americans cash for trading in their old, inefficient vehicles for new fuel efficient cars. The program would help both the environment and the ailing auto industry.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that one of the reasons that we bought our Prius was because my husband’s company was offering a $5000 bonus to anyone who bought a vehicle that got 35 miles a gallon or better at the time. There was also a tax rebate - I believe it was $1800, don’t quote me on that figure, but we didn’t know about that when we made the decision.
- » See also: Organic Farming Would Be Better In Terms of Climate Change Impact. Right?
- » Get Sustainablog by RSS or sign up by email.
The cash incentive went a long way in helping us to make the decision to trade in our Jeep Grand Cherokee for a Prius. The things is, we knew that when we traded in that Jeep, we might have been doing something to reduce our day to day personal impact on the environment, but the Jeep would still be out there. Someone would buy it, and it would keep on getting very low gas mileage.
This is what we needed to explain to our 7-year-old. Although his idea of everyone getting rid of their cars seemed like a good idea, in reality it would cause a lot of problems. We asked him, “If tomorrow everyone woke up with a brand new hybrid gift wrapped in their drive-way, what would they do with their old cars?”
He’s a pretty smart kid and it didn’t take long for him to figure out that gazillions of old cars rusting away, leaking motor oil into the soil was just about as big of a problem as their inefficiency when being used.
So my question to those who are proposing what has been dubbed the “cash for clunkers” bill is, “Are you as smart as my 7-year-old?”
According to MSNBC, Senator Susan Collins said that taking gas guzzlers off the road
would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, decrease greenhouse gas emissions and stimulate the economy.
So it seems as if the cars being turned in would be trashed, not reused. The bill being proposed in Congress estimates that up to one million vehicles will be taken off the road with a savings of up to “80,000 barrels of motor fuel a day by the end of the fourth year.”
According to the bill the cars must still be in driving condition to be turned in. So now my question is “What will they do with all those old cars?” One million old cars that still have many usable parts. Where will they go? Will the cars be stripped? Will their usable parts be reused? Will the metal be recycled? It seems these questions are unanswered in the bill.
There are other questions I have, too.
What’s to keep people from driving more now that it will cost less to drive their cars?
Will people who take public transportation to work start driving their high efficiency vehicles because it’s now much more reasonable to do it financially?
As someone who took advantage of cash incentives to buy a fuel efficient vehicle, it may seem hypocritical for me to ask these questions. But I’m asking them anyway. This program seems much more like a program to give the failing automobile industry even more money than a program intended to help the environment.
If improving the environment is really a major part of “cash for clunkers” then the disposal of the vehicles needs to be outlined in the bill. Without specifics, perfectly good materials that could be stripped from these vehicles will most likely end up in a landfill or worse yet, the cars could end up back on the road - maybe in another country - because the bill isn’t specific about the turned in cars.
Image: Danillo Prates under a creative commons license
hey - that’s an absolutely idiotic idea. What if I do not want to drive around in a go-kart powered by a rubber band?
I am glad you are so concerned with personal liberty here in the US of A.
Eco-facist!
Maybe instead of paying cash to get “clunkers” off the road we should be paying cash to restore some of them to “like new” condition. If high mileage is the answer to the problem, the riddle was solved nearly thirty years ago. I had an 1983 Datsun/Nissan Pulsar that averaged 40 mpg city / 45 mgp highway. It still ranks as my personal favorite among the cars (not trucks) that I have owned. However, it was far from topping the high mileage lists of that era. I urge you to follow these links:
http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/10/18/super-cheap-high-mpg-cars-1983/
http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/10/09/1982-a-banner-year-for-high-mpg-cars/
http://www.egmcartech.com/2007/12/26/57mpg-that-was-so-20-years-ago-the-1987-honda-crx/
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/pdfs/1983_feg.pdf
Maybe you should be asking yourself why high mileage cars fell out of vogue in the first place. It seems that fuel sipping vehicles only sell during hard economic times. Do we really want a tougher economy? Whether or not you bought your Prius out of desire or guilt is of no consequence to me. What bothers me is that so many people now feel that they have a right to dictate to others what they are allowed to drive, eat, drink, smoke, etc. and so on. What’s happening to liberty?
BTW, if Obama was justified in demanding that GM’s Rick Wagoner step down, why not ask the same of Ron Gettelfinger?
[...] GreenOptions.com’s Sustainablog, a feature on the government’s drive to get people to trade in their old clunky cars for [...]
No doubt that any “Cash for Clunkers” program needs to be carefully planned–something Washington isn’t exactly great at doing. But auto-trade-in programs have done well in Europe and there is a worldwide demand for the scrap metal and other materials that can be recycled from old cars. It just needs to be specified in any government mandate.
I agree the bill needs to be more thorough with outlining that these cars must be recycled, not scrapped, but fixing the gas mileage is also the same as buying new cars. Instead of taking the old car and recycling it, boosting the need for recycling jobs, instead we are strengthening the auto repair business. It costs more to uphold an old car than to buy a new one. My 6 cylinder Grand Am would need quite a bit of work to attain the 33 mpg highway that (for example) a Ford Focus can attain. Not only that, but you need to count the fact that the cars break in other areas, so why invest money in a breaking car? If you take the good parts and recycle them, not only will you create more jobs that will make up for the loss in car repair but you will also boost auto sales in the US, which will in turn stop the Auto companies’ begging for Federal dollars to hold them up. I’d rather pay taxes to get an incentive for a new car than just pay taxes to watch the companies struggle. Shouldn’t the consumer benefit, not just the companies? I think so.
I like the idea of the program (and may use it myself since my car is dying), but I agree that it would make more sense from an environmental standpoint to have some purpose or plan for the discarded cars.
Thanks for bringing this up.
Mostly well thought out comments here.
Robert - no one’s personal liberties are at stake here - no one is being forced to trade in their car
Bobby - I think you have a good point with the fact that existing cars could be made to have better gas mileage (add that to the fact that you actually liked one of my posts a few weeks ago, and I’m in danger of having my “you green” card taken away, dontcha think?) If a car is on its last legs, getting rid of it not a bad idea, but cars in good condition can certainly be “retrofitted”
Birch - specifics are key here, and it would be good if Congress learned quickly from the mistakes made with past bailout money
Chris P - I think it can be a mixture of both. As I said above - there are some cars that are ready for recycling; others are still in good enough condition to be tweaked if possible
Stephanie- yes, a plan would be good
As fas as i could think this is not going to force anyone to buy a new car. if you want to continue rolling in a gas guzzler, you are free to do it. if you want to change to new model and have a rebate, you could do that.
Robin – Critiquing a post has very little to do with my personal likes or dislikes about its topic or its author. Usually, my opposition to most of what “you greens” have to say is based upon ideological, political, economic, scientific, and/or religious differences. Ideologically, I am a staunch conservative whereas most greens are far-left liberals; many even hold to socialistic or communistic doctrines. Politically, I am a registered republican who has been considering a move to a party with beliefs even farther to the right, because today’s RINO’s have embraced left-of-center doctrines. I also believe that the Democratic Party’s drive towards another Great Society or New Deal is a misdirection ploy to transfer even greater power to D.C. Economically, I think that my money is mine (and the Lord’s) and your money is yours, and believe that it is wrong to levee punitive taxes on those who create and work jobs in the private sector to support others who are just as capable and programs that are foolhardy. Scientifically, the engineer in me cannot help but pick apart green “technology” that ignores the laws of nature, chemistry, physics, thermodynamics, etc. Religiously, I am a Bible believing Christian, which contrary to the beliefs of anti-Christians produces free societies instead of enslaved tyrannies. Granted that’s a short list and like all personalities there is a bit more complexity involved. Nonetheless, I hope that even when I am taking a contrary view to whatever “you greens” are saying that you do not take it personally or view it as impolite.
To close, there are a few problems with cash for clunkers and/or cash for retrofitting new cars to work like old ones. First, the cash must come from the private sector in the form of punitive taxation, be laundered by the government, and distributed unevenly in the public sector. Second, many will contend that retrofitting a later model car to get 1983 mileage would mean sacrificing safety, performance, and emissions improvements. Third, the price of scrap metals is currently very low, which removes the profit incentive from the recyclable side of the plan. BTW, do you ever wonder why the largest buyers of our scrap metals are countries that do not like us? What are they building with all that iron? Fourth, there are other considerations but I will digress to give others their say.
To really close, I doubt your “green card” is at risk.
Bobby - my boys and I rented a movie once - a retelling of The Tortoise and the Hare which was really bad, but there was one part that made me laugh. The kids of the Tortoise and Hare were being forced to race by their fathers, but learned to cooperate with each other. One wrote a note to the other which could have been interpreted two ways and caused much confusion. Once the confusion was sorted out, one of them said , “Man, how is it possible to communicate without emoticons.” Long story to say, I was kidding about the “you greens” card.
I don’t take your comments personally because you disagree with my ideas. You don’t call me names or attack me personally so all is cool. Keep it comin’.