Got a blog tip? Contact us
« Very Proffessional | Main | No Fare Hike? Thank Mickey Mouse. »
An SUV experiment
For those of you in New York, WNYC's Brian Lehrer show is looking for people to participate in a crowdsourcing experiment, By Thursday, they want you to count the SUVs on your block and to report back to them with your findings. In order to use your info, they'll need the following:
1. Your neighborhood
2. Your block (street and cross streets)
3. The number of SUVs parked
4. The total number of cars parked.
I plan on participating myself, though I'm not quite sure what the point is. According to the website:
We’re trying to find out just how much gas-guzzling SUV use there is throughout the New York area, with all the talk of environmental sustainability in the city.
If they think people are hypocritical about driving SUVs while professing a love of the environment, they would do well to read James Surowiecki's column in a recent New Yorker.
As Surowiecki points out, Americans overwhelming support fuel-economy standards, even though they continue to buy gas-guzzling SUVs. But what looks like a contradiction makes sense when you realize that Americans associate big cars with safety (erroneously, but with reason). So while they'd prefer that gas-guzzling tanks not be on the road, they don't want to be dwarfed by these vehicles if they are.
Surowiecki compares the situation to the National Hockey League in the 70s, when hockey players voted for the league to require helmets, even though most players personally chose not to wear them. Helmets protected players from head injuries, but gave them a competitive disadvantage: it was harder to see in them, for example. As long as some players wore helmets and others didn't, the players who didn't had an advantage. But if rules required everyone to wear the helmets (which they eventually did), everyone benefited from greater safety and a level playing field.
So, while owning an SUV in the city may seem to make no sense whatsoever, a healthy percentage of SUV drivers would probably welcome SUVs eradication. (The rest, we can presume, are self-centered, delusional pricks.)
(Via Streetsblog)
Posted by Carrie McLaren on 07/30/2007 | Permalink
Comments
Can we also say, that just because an SUV is parked doesn't mean it's being driven. My roommmate has an SUV and the only times he drives it is to comply with parking regulations (moving it across the street) and to pick his girlfriend up from the airport twice a year.
Posted by: Rachael | Jul 30, 2007 5:14:03 PM
Insuring a car in Brooklyn is about $140-$200 per month. How does it make sense to keep a car here if you're only using it twice a year?
Posted by: carrie | Jul 30, 2007 5:53:02 PM
Rachael,
Seriously? That sounds pretty unusual. Sounds like it's time to sell the car and give the girlfriend some cab money.
Posted by: Steve Lambert | Jul 30, 2007 6:21:39 PM
i think people buy/have suvs for more reasons than just the "they're safer!" nonsense. i think a lot of people (including my previous landlords in park slope) have suvs so they can "carry the whole family and all of our stuff comfortably on our trips". my previous landlords almost never drove their beast during the week, but most weekends they'd pack it up and head for their house in connecticut. not that i think this is any more valid a justification, but it is one that wouldn't be effected by no one else having an suv to feel threatened by. also, my previous landlords were totally nice, park slope liberals who diligently recycled and were eco-friendly in all other ways... so i cannot explain their horrible car-buying choices any better than anyone else. perhaps brian lehrer can get to the bottom of it!
Posted by: daniel | Jul 31, 2007 1:48:43 PM
My roommate's SUV is not registered with the state of NY, as illegal as that might be, so I'm doubting he is paying those high insurance premiums. His car is also at least ten years old, if not older. This leads me to believe it's paid for and since he doesn't know when and if he's going to move back west or somewhere else I guess he's keeping the car.
But even if he did drive it more frequently than a couple times a year, my overall point is cars you see parked on NYC streets aren't necessarily driven everyday or even everyweek. I agree that people might by SUV's for other reasons than safety, such as hauling stuff. I don't think a van gets better mileage than an SUV (though I could be wrong on that one.) and so if one might opted for an SUV over a van depending on the stuff you're hauling.
The other problem with Lehrer's survey is that it only counts cars parked on the street. Many people keep a car in a garage.
Posted by: Rachael | Aug 1, 2007 10:05:34 AM
Rachael, I still think your roommate is in the minority in that they park on the street only drive their car but twice a year. Also, the choice isn't limited between SUV and van. A station wagon could compete with being able to move as many people or the same amount of stuff on a car's frame instead of a truck. A station wagon sits lower, is less likely to roll, the bumper height is that of other cars on the road, lighter, often more fuel efficient etc. etc.
I haven't looked into the cost, but hopefully a Zip Car or City Car Share would be less expensive and make more sense for Rachael and for Daniel's landlords.
Posted by: Steve Lambert | Aug 9, 2007 12:40:22 AM
Perhaps it's also worth pointing out that SUVs are not only gas hogs - they emit more pollutants as well...
Posted by: carrie | Aug 9, 2007 11:23:36 AM
