Do you think every household should be limited to one car in an effort to cut harmful emissions?
by 
denise
ANSWERS: 14
-
No because it is not practical. Suppose a husband & wife team need to work at other sides of town at the same time on top of it all. The better solution is that they do not get gas hogs such as SUVs especially if they are not necessary. Carpooling is always encouraged. Suppose the teenage son has a job that requires driving, and you know he wants a car. Bottom line sensible cars, but one sounds like communism to me, even though I have progressive beliefs.
-
I like your way of thinking but practically, it wouldn't work for me. I live in a very rural area where buses are very few and far between. My partner work 15 miles away from home in the opposte direction from where I work and I travel 10 miles to work. Ban gas guzzling 4x4's unless you can prove that you NEED them.
-
If you have a household where there are 2 or more drivers...it is impratical. to many conflictswith jobs and even within the household...
-
No. Factories and other large buildings owned by corporations/businesses produce the bulk of greenhouse gases, and they are much more regulated than the ordinary household, so they should be the primary focus of environmental measures.
-
Methane is a far more environmentally damaging gas than Co2, so perhaps we should be looking into a way of making cows, pigs and sheep all round the world break wind less often. Sounds silly, but it's a serious point, and one I've yet to see any government address. If governments are avoiding this issue for fear of ridicule, they should see themselves from where I see them, and see it's too late.
-
No.
-
Why not go one step further, and say it's electric trains for travel, walking, or nothing? How about making anything that emits carbon illegal worldwide? Anything at all that emits carbon should be banned and removed from the earth. Maybe that would satisfy the whole global warming believer minority.
-
Depends on the area. In the area I live in it wouldn't work with having one car for my household. The suburbs aren't jam packed with public transportation. I could just imagine how it is more rural areas. No, the solution lies with making better cars. Back in the early 80's there was a car that got 64 miles to the gallon. Now Bush signed something stating that all cars have to get 35 mpg by 2020. We have certainly taken steps backwards.
-
No way! That would make my life miserable since I have 3 teenagers in the house.
-
Sure, while we are at it how about we also limit people to one T.V., computer, and telephone? This would surely put a dent in the carcinogens and other pollutants emitted by electronics manufacturers. Let's limit each person or household to one book, roll of toilet paper or one paper towel per week to help fend off deforestation! In fact, isn't living in separate quarters a huge waste? Let’s herd people together in groups of 40 or 50 to live in single dwellings, how efficient would that be? We could call them ''communes''! Sound good to you?.... STOP!
-
No -- it's none of your damn business how many cars I own; and besides, I can only drive one at a time anyway...
-
I don't think you have to limit the number of cars per household if you have better regulations on emissions in the U.S. The U.S. falls way behind other countries because the big oil and auto companies have their representatives sitting in high positions in Washington. What do you think happened to the electric car? U.S. auto emissions are responsible for about 6% of total global emissions. Out of all developed countries (the EU, China, Japan etc), the US has the lowest fuel economy standards. Even California, the most actively “green” state, has lower standards than China.
-
Cars don't cause pollution. Driving cars causes pollution. If I own 100 cars, I would still drive exactly 23 miles to work every day. Now if we planned cities with more flexible housing options close to the workplaces, then I might drive only 3 miles to work instead! Or just walk that distance. A self-contained community or neighborhood doesn't rely on large freeways and thoroughfares. If there was a light-rail system nearby, I would consider taking that instead of driving. If they had larger, safer bicycle paths, I would consider biking instead. If telecommuters got even half of the government subsidies given to oil companies, then I wouldn't drive to work at all.
-
Nope. Government should provide every citizen with an electric or hybrid car... OOPS, wait, the oil companies aren't interested in alternative energy and have lobbied against such, oh well. In that case, the government should at least provide newer, more fuel-efficient cars to those people still driving around in gas guzzlers gouting foul oily smoke.
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC