Copyright 1999 The Washington Post
The Washington
Post
View Related Topics
May 22, 1999, Saturday, Final Edition
SECTION: OP-ED; Pg. A17; FREE FOR ALL
LENGTH: 416 words
HEADLINE:
Better Living With SUVs
BODY:
As Ellen
Goodman correctly points out ["SUVs: Killer Cars," op-ed, May 15], most people
buy SUVs not to climb mountains but for shopping and hauling kids to soccer
games. Is this really so surprising or so horrible?
Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards were designed to
kill the large gas-guzzlers, and the traditional, car-based station wagon was
one of the first casualties due to its larger size. True, auto makers did an end
run around CAFE by marketing the so-called SUVs on truck chassis, but only after
consumer demand for them (primarily the Chevy Suburban) demonstrated that a huge
market for station wagons still exists. If the truck-based SUVs are a nuisance
to drivers, it is due to CAFE, not some plot by Detroit to foist behemoths upon
an unsuspecting populace. Besides, modern computer-controlled, fuel-injected
engines have rendered CAFE standards obsolete.
It is fitting that
Goodman's article appeared the same day as front-page headlines noted the EPA's
1997 air quality regulations were struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals. The
1995 Pope study, on which the regulations were based, has also been used by EPA
to justify stricter emission controls on SUVs. To this day, the agency has not
made public its data from this federally funded study. EPA's secrecy in its
rule-making process casts a large shadow over its pronouncements that SUVs are
somehow responsible for excessive pollution.
Comparing the fuel economy
of a Taurus and a large SUV is completely absurd. If such factors as size,
weight and towing capacity are accounted for, today's SUVs get comparatively
good gas mileage and pollute more only inasmuch as they consume more fuel, not
because their engines are somehow dirtier. Should a Mack truck also be required
to match the Taurus's mileage?
As for crash survivability, an SUV would
probably always do better vs. a Geo Metro in any situation. However, Goodman
conveniently omits the fact that compact cars do not fare well in any crash
situation, even with another compact car. Are SUV owners to blame for wanting to
improve their chances of living through a collision, or are compact car divers
to blame for risking their safety in exchange for economic advantage?
SUVs may become "politically incorrect" cars to Goodman and those who
share her sentiments, but a visit to your local car dealer this weekend will
show how little most people really care what labels some would apply to them or
their cars.
-- Eric Voytko
GRAPHIC:
Illustration, barrie maguire
LOAD-DATE: May 22, 1999
