SUVs: A Troubling New Trend

“If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.” Lyndon B. Johnson said these words in 1964 upon signing the Wilderness Act, but this concept applies to our time more than ever. As we charge forthright into the thirtieth century, backed by decades of incredible technological advancements, we Americans now favor our internet fast, our cell phones small, and our cars big. Actually, we don’t just want big cars. We want mammoth cars, as evidenced by the fact that one out of every four vehicles being sold in the United States is an SUV (“Before You Buy”). Unfortunately, SUVs are challenging Lyndon Johnson’s plea to conserve the world “as it was in the beginning.” These monolithic vehicles present destructive environmental threats, in addition to dangerous hazards posed to both other drivers on the road and even to the drivers of the SUVs themselves.

The Environmental Protection Agency has categorized SUVs into four categories: small, medium, large, and largest. The most troublesome are the “largest” SUVs, which include models such as the Chevrolet Suburban, Toyota Land Cruiser, Dodge Durango, and Ford Expedition. According to the EPA, none of these SUVs achieve more than 15 miles per gallon in the city, nor 20 miles per gallon on the highway. Some of these SUVs net considerably less, as low as 10 miles per gallon in the city and 13 on the highway (“Green Vehicle Guide: SUVs”). Contrast this with the most efficient overall car, the two-seater Honda Insight gasoline/electric hybrid, which obtains around 60 miles per gallon in both the city and on the highway. Or consider the Toyota Prius or Honda Civic Hybrid, two hybrid sedans which both net between 45 to 50 miles per gallon in both the city and on the highway (“Green Vehicle Guide: Small Cars”).

The Environmental Protection Agency also ranks each vehicle on emissions and air pollutants on a scale from zero to ten, with “10” being the cleanest. This number can be used to compare any vehicle to any other vehicle, regardless of model, year, or class. “For instance, a truck receiving a score of 8 is designed to be cleaner than any car receiving a score of 7” (“Emission/Air Pollution”). Twenty-nine SUVs warranted a score of zero; all 29 were in the “largest” category. No SUV in the “largest” category got a score higher than 3 (“Green Vehicle Guide: SUVs”). Compare once again to the Honda Insight or Toyota Prius hybrid models, which both earned a score of 10 on the EPA’s scale (“Green Vehicle Guide: Small Cars”).

How are SUVs allowed to get away with such low emission standards? SUVs, as well as pickup trucks and minivans are all categorized as “light trucks,” which is in an entirely different regulatory category than regular cars. Light trucks “are allowed to emit up to five and a half times more smog-forming pollution than cars” (“The Plain English Guide”). When poor gas mileage is tied in with high emissions, the results are catastrophic. As an anti-SUV organization, I Don’t Care About the Air, put it, “The more you guzzle, the more you pollute” (“Emissions”).

The problems of needlessly wasting gas and emitting toxins into the air have already manifested itself. Global warming is becoming a dire problem, being made only worse by the swarms of SUVs on the road. Global warming is primarily caused by carbon dioxide gas. The Ford Explorer emits almost six times as much carbon dioxide in the air than the Honda Insight (“Emissions”).

So SUVs negatively impact the environment twofold: they burn gas at a much faster rate than regular cars, and emit many more pollutants into the air. It would be bad enough if the problems ended there. Perhaps even closer to home, however, is the misconception that SUVs are “safe” vehicles, when indeed they are hazards on the road to not only other drivers, but even the people themselves behind the wheels of the SUVs.

New York Times reporter Keith Bradsher, who has written a book on the dangers of SUVs, feels unambiguously “that driving an SUV is a deeply immoral act that places the driver's own ego above the health and safety of those around him” (Mencimer). A Ford Explorer, which is the most popular SUV in the world, is 16 times as likely as a typical family sedan to kill the occupants of another vehicle in a collision (“Before you Buy”). Bradsher has dubbed the term “kill rate” to describe the five lives taken for every one life saved by driving an SUV (Mencimer).

Perhaps more ironic are the risks that SUVs present to the very occupants of these vehicles, the people who buy SUVs primarily to provide “safety” for their families. The occupant death rate in SUVs is six percent higher than that for cars (Mencimer). This is primarily due to the high incidence of rollovers in SUVs. Because the relative height versus width of SUVs is much higher than for that of cars, SUVs have a higher center of gravity. This makes it much easier for an SUV to roll over in a crash. Over one-third of SUV rollovers result in occupant fatality. Also resulting from their high center of gravity, SUVs are more prone to become unbalanced and hence “trip” over guardrails and curbs (“SUV Safety”).

In addition to rollovers, another tragic consequence has claimed many young lives. Because of their enormous size, SUVs have a significantly larger blind spot than the typical family sedan. This is what caused the death of 2-year-old Cameron Gulbransen. His father, a pediatrician, backed up over his son in the driveway, even after checking his mirrors. Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. Over one child a week dies this way (“SUVs: Blind to the Danger”).

What are the alternatives? It depends on what one’s motives are for considering an SUV. For most transportation needs, any small sedan or two-seater would suffice. The Honda Insight is the most efficient vehicle on the road, is only around $20,000, and will save considerable gas money over the lifetime of the car because of its high mileage. If one desires a vehicle with lots of seating capacity for a family, consider a large car or minivan. As Bradsher said during a Frontline interview on PBS, “Even the largest sport utility vehicles don't really make you appreciably more safe than you would be in a large car or minivan, and you will get much better gas mileage [in a car or minivan], you will produce a tiny amount of the air pollution, and you will not be putting your neighbors at an enormous risk” (“Interview”). If one absolutely desires the image of an SUV, then consider a more modest model such as the small, electrically run Toyota RAV4 EV, which earned a “10” on the EPA’s emission standards scale. Or consider any Volvo SUV, almost all of which are reasonably fuel efficient, and all but one model earning between a 7 and a 9 on the EPA’s fuel emission’s scale (“Green Vehicle Guide: SUVs”).

Between the negative environmental impacts and the dangers SUVs present to drivers, to choose knowledgeably to buy an SUV would be an unequivocal act of recklessness. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, “The choice of vehicle that you drive has a greater effect on the environment than any other choice you make as a consumer.” With such a hefty responsibility to choose a vehicle wisely, it is imperative that consumers are well informed as to the harmful outcomes of driving SUVs. The way to prevent further onset of global warming and depleted natural resources, as well as unnecessary deaths and injuries, is to change the world, one vehicle at a time.

Works Cited

"Before You Buy an SUV..." Rollover: The Hidden History of the SUV. 2002. PBS Online. 11 Feb. 2003. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/rollover/etc/before.html>

"Emission/Air Pollution." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/rating.htm>

"Emissions." I Don’t Care About the Air. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.idontcareaboutair.com/facts/emissions.shtml>

"Green Vehicle Guide: Small Cars" 24 Mar. 2003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/smcar-03.htm>

"Green Vehicle Guide: SUVs" 24 Mar. 2003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/suv-03.htm>

"Interview: Keith Bradsher." Rollover: The Hidden History of the SUV. 2002. PBS Online. 11 Feb. 2003. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/rollover/interviews/bradsher.html>

Mencimer, Stephanie. "Bumper Mentality." Washington Monthly. 20 Dec. 2002. Independent Media Institute. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14839>

"Most and Least Fuel Efficient Cars." U.S. Department of Energy. 11 Feb, 2003. <http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bestworst.shtml>

"The Plain English Guide To Tailpipe Standards." 24 Feb. 2003. Union of Concerned Scientists. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/archive/page.cfm?pageID=247>

"SUV Safety." I Don’t Care About the Air. 27 Mar. 2003. <http://www.idontcareaboutair.com/facts/safety.shtml>

"SUVs: Blind to the Danger." 4 Dec. 2003. CBS News. 11 Feb. 2003. <http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/04/eveningnews/main531708.shtml>