While fuel economy standards are a good strategy in fighting global warming, they cannot be the sole strategy in fighting global warming. Reducing one's carbon footprint by reducing the emissions that one's car emits is always a good thing, an individual must also be aware of other ways in which they are contributing to global warming, such as wasting electricity, using non-recyclable goods and other means.
There is a great deal of debate as to how much emissions actually contribute to global warming. But, it is undeniable that they do contribute. If any steps can be taken to reduce global warming at all, they should be taken.
It is cheaper for car companies to make vehicles that are less fuel efficient, than it is to spend money on research and technology to make cars more fuel efficient. If the government doesn't intervene, then they will continue to do what is in the best interest of the company, versus what is in the best interest of the company and the environment. Furthermore, it will help to influence other companies to be more environmentally conscious.
I don't know a great deal about this topic. But, I do know that if we don't get stricter standards, we are going to live to see the destruction of the earth, by our own hands.
As a result of vehicle fuel economy standards, car manufacturers must produce new cars that give off lower emissions. As time goes on, older cars get junked and more and more of these lower emission cars are on the road. The less emissions these cars give off, the less the ozone is effected and eroded.
By standardizing fuel economy standards we would be reducing our carbon footprint, thus reducing carbon and aiding in fighting global warming. It would also help us by saving money, because we would be getting better gas mileage, and it also would reduce the amount of fuel we would have to draw from the earth.
Setting standards for vehicle fuel economy does not address the core issue: the fact that we are releasing the emissions in the first place. The concentration on fuel efficiency actually detracts from the real focus: the development of vehicles that use alternative, non-polluting fuels. We have the technology, but "big oil" is so powerful that it is difficult to make any progress on cleaner vehicles. In other words, fuel economy standards put the emphasis on the wrong part of the problem.
Almost all Americans commute for work and pleasure on their time off. In rural areas, driving our car is the only option for routine errands such as grocery shopping, visiting friends, and medical appointments. It's too far to walk or ride a bike. Better fuel economy would help everyone cut back on emissions since almost all Americans who are old enough drive. It would also greatly cut back on the amount of gas need to be refined and delivered to gas stations buy gas guzzling tanker trucks.
The copious consumption of automobile fuel must be curtailed to fight against global warming. By requiring automobiles to be more fuel efficient, emissions will correspondingly decrease, leading to lessened impacts of global warming.
Setting up of vehicle fuel economy standards is definitely a good strategy in fighting global warming. Most of the damage in the atmosphere is due to vehicles and the smoke they create. Use of environmentally-friendly fuel will certainly lessen the damage that is currently being done. A standard fuel economy status will ensure that use of fuel is optimum in quantity. It will also regulate the quality of the fuel which will be beneficial to the environment.
People cant afford it. He prices for gas are insane. If we do this the numbers of family's living in poverty will increase a lot. The is even a possibility it wont help at all. The people who say it help may be lying. Think of the possibility's. Who cares what they think its your choice.
Cars should certainly have emissions standards to prevent and minimize pollution, but fuel economy standards mean that automakers have to spend research and development dollars on developing higher miles-per-gallon engines. Car makers should be encouraged, instead, to use those resources on developing petroleum alternatives, leading to national energy independence. Fuel economy standards prolong the problem, when we should focus on a solution.
Much of the Earth's CO2 output comes from natural things, like animals and other natural elements. Placing restrictions on vehicles only hurts the economy, without much of a benefit to the environment.
Fuel economy does nothing to wean people off of fossil fuels, which is the real problem. Having good fuel economy in a vehicle is great. However, people will still be using products that require burning of fossil fuels. It might even be possible that people rely even more on fossil fuels, since their fuel costs will go down with better fuel economy. There are other pollutants playing their parts, such as transportation of goods, which creates tremendous amounts of CO2, which end up in the atmosphere.
While economy standards may help a little in the fight against global warming, it isn't ultimately the answer. Those who refuse to drive in the most efficient manner in their gas powered vehicles will continue to pollute the planet at a little bit lesser rate, but still more than we would like. Rather, let's turn to more efficient ways of running engines, especially those that require no emissions whatsoever. Solar is the best way to go!
I firmly believe that global warming is a theory that time and time again has been disproven by scientific evidence. That being said I believe that working on the improvement of fuel economy is a worthwhile endeavor provided safety is not compromised. presently the most economic vehicles on the road are incredibly small and dangerous. They offer little protection to the driver and passengers and are underpowered making freeway driving difficult.
First of all, I believe global warming is the biggest hoax ever created by man. I'm all for improved fuel economy. I just don't see what this has to do with the warming of the earth? Why do people want to weaken America by limiting the productivity of her people? We should not be limiting a persons ability to be productive.