Megan McArdle shows at least four hands:
The supply of used cars is pretty well fixed–they have to be in pretty horrible condition before they’re junked rather than resold for a pittance. So the correct calculation is not how much you will emit by driving one, but how much you will emit compared to the person who would have bought the car.
But then, that person would probably have bought another car. If they would have bought a Prius, you’ve simply swapped places. If they would have bought another car, you’ve increased demand for a less fuel-efficient option.
On the third hand, as far as I know most industry analysts still believe that Toyota breaks even, or loses money, on the Prius, and so the normal price signal sent by buying a car–"increase supply of that model"–may not operate. If the person who would have bought a used Corolla instead buys a new Corolla–or someone far down the purchase chain does–you’ve probably done more for the environment than you would by buying a Prius, because you’ve actually increased the supply of fuel-efficient cars.
In fact, it seems to me that the best option is to buy a used SUV and drive it very little. But I have a feeling that this would not give a potential Prius owner everything they are looking for in a car.
You can buy “HYBRID” emblems for your S.U.V.
Hi!
I own a 1990 Isuzu Trooper, which in the last three months was driven less then 200 miles. The reason you state is exactly why I do not bother to own a new car.
Cheers,
-Brian
I seem to remember a story about power plants buying cars more than 15 years old and then trashing them as an environmental offset (this was 15 years ago or so, before ‘carbon footprints’).
Buy the new car and then push for higher emission standards.
The use of opportunity cost here is genius. But it’s unrealistic to say that if a person chooses not to buy the used car, then they will buy a Prius. They are far more likely to go to another used car that emits the same amount. I like the idea of buying an SUV and driving it less. How about the government buying up high GHG emitting vehicles and scrapping them?
You people are crazy. Don’t worry about whether to buy a Prius v. used car, just stop eating meat:
Vegetarian is the new prius
Rethinking the Meat Guzzler
But wait! If you stop eating meat and end up living longer, you’ll end up using even more carbon in your old age.
Why is the supply of used cars fixed? People sell or trade their old cars constantly. Lots of cars come into the used market every day.
If you fancifully imagine taking a random 5-year-old 2003 SUV out of someone’s hands and then asking them to make a purchase again, will they buy a more efficient vehicle? Perhaps, since SUV’s cost more to own than they did in 2003 (due to higher gas prices), and because on average the 2004-2008 vehicles are more fuel efficient due to technology improvements.
In this reasoning by following Megan’s advice you add to the liquidity of the market at the bottom end, and hasten the replacement of high-pollution cars by people who to some degree must regret owning such a high-cost vehicle.
By the same token if it becomes very cheap to own an SUV (gas prices sink), you should flood the market with used cars to make it impossible for people to trade in their current car for a higher-polluting replacement.
Seems to me the strategic issue here is to replace old cars with new hybrid (or other environmentally friendly) cars. The goal is to upgrade the national car fleet. Therefore, what individual actions accomplish that?
It’s a given that the old cars will stay in the fleet for a long time because of the used car market. While there are things one can do to reduce that cycle and take out these used cars, there is no guarantee that the replacement car will be more environmentally friendly. In other words, at this time the used car market is immaterial.
What’s important is that the new cars coming into the fleet have a greater percentage of hybrids than the old cars. Only if that number is increasing will it matter if a used car is taken off the market because it’s replacement will increasingly be a hybrid. So the critical step here is that new cars should be increasingly hybrid. Therefore, you should buy the hybird. Not only have you decreased emissions by your choice of a new car, you have de facto also reduced the possibility of a future used car buyer from being able to buy a non-hybrid car.
Over time, you eventually replace the old fleet of used cars with hybrids as well as having new cars be hybrids as well.
If you buy a used car with old technology, you just perpetuate the old cars being on the market. No shift occurs over time.
McArdle seems to be missing a basic point that by increasing the resale value of SUVs, your purchase of a used SUV would encourage people to buy new ones.
Person, in the future, if you are going to ridicule and paraphrase my views on something, please at least provide a link so others can judge for themselves. Thank you.
@Bob Murphy: My apologies, I didn’t want to make your position look any worse than it already does by showing everyone the things you actually end up saying to defend it. But if you’re going to link to the full discussion, link to my longest critique of social pressure on carbon emitters instead.
For everyone here: My characterization of Bob’s position is an accurate one and I defy anyone to show me where he gave further substantiation for or clarification of that idea.
I also strongly encourage everyone to follow the links on my blog, get familiar with the deficiencies of Bob’s position, so that you know how messed up Bob’s position is any time he posts anywhere.
If you want to drastically reduce your carbon footprint, do like I do: eat out of dumpsters. That way, transportation companies only burn oil bringing food across the country to the people whose waste I feed off of. Now that’s what I call being a free rider!
I was watching Jay Leno one night, and his guest actress (can’t remember who it was) was talking about how she was wanting to help the environment so she sold her porsche for a hybrid vehicle. But, it was okay because “she didn’t drive it that much anyway”. I can’t remember if Jay pointed out the flaw in her logic, but we should just remember that when it comes to politics, economics, and the environment, Hollywood knows best!
I think it takes something like 0.6 of a ton of coke (carbon) to make a ton of steel. As a very rough guess I would say making a car releases about as much carbon into the atmosphere as the car weighs. Around here the average car emits about 1.5 tons of carbon a year.
you should buy a used car because you are being ripped off when you buy a new one
I find it very ironic that there are two posts on this blog about Global Climate Change at about the same time that there’s a post about favoring cars over other forms of transportation.
In my state autos are the HIGHEST cause of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide).
From now on every time there’s a major natural disaster like the California wildfires, the midwest floods, the east coast hurricane, etc. go outside and look at your car, then look in the mirror.
Excellent discussion, it certainly is the hot topic lately. A year or two ago it was a new car or possibly a hybrid, but with the quick rise in gas prices, people are starting to opt for the immediate savings.
Used cars are thousands less, can get you 5-8 years of use and puts some money back in the pocket now.
So unfortunately, people might be pushed to save now and put their care about the total carbon footprint on the back burner for now.
That’s oversimplifying, Ronald. What about the energy used in mining the coke, transporting the coke, the parts, putting the parts together…
Not all the used cars are in “horrible conditions”. Some of them are actually working much better than others on the streets.
used car dealerships Delaware
In my opinion, if you really want to be carbon friendly, don’t drive a car, ride a bicycle or use public transportation. We were asked this question here at used cars West Palm Beach and we couldn’t come up with any definitive answer, probably because there isn’t one yet.
Comments on this entry are closed.