MARC GUNTHER, who writes prolifically about corporate social responsibility and environmental issues for Fortune Magazine and his own blog, just posted an item about how he went about choosing a new car -- all the while trying to do right by his pocketbook and the environment.
What with all the talk these days about global climate change and what each of us must do to slow it down, Marc conducted exhaustive research on the "greener" alternatives. When he calculated the additional cost for most of the hybrid cars against the expected savings he will see by burning less fuel, he figured that, given how relatively little he drives, "it would take, oh, about 28.9 years to pay back the extra cost of the hybrid."
"I couldn’t see spending the extra money for the hybrid," he wrote. "Does this make me less of an environmentalist and more of a cheapskate? I’m afraid it does, but so be it.
"I think my car-buying demonstrates that even 'conscious consumers' can’t be counted on to put environmental or social issues at the top of list when buying stuff...," Gunter adds. "I don’t think we can wait for consumers to drive us closer to a sustainable economy. Companies are likely to lead the way. And (we can hope) governments."
Marc's posting reminds me of my own recent purchase of a new car, about which I ruminated for well over a year (my old car was behaving well during that time, as if it knew how much I hated driving it). Concerned about the environment and the rising cost of fuel, I, too, tried to learn as much as I could about the hybrid choices. If you go to Edmunds.com, a great online source of car information for consumers, you'll see that there are only 22 models of hybrid cars available in the market right now -- really nothing when you consider how vast and diverse the market is.
Those cars range from about $21,000 for the basic Prius, which gets spectacular gas mileage, to about $50,000 for a Chevy Tahoe -- a big, six-cylinder car whose miles-per-gallon rating is still only at about 21 in the city and 28 and the highway. (There is also a $104,000 hybrid made by Lexus, but that's fantasyland for most of us.)
The more affordable of these like the Prius were just too small for me and my family of five, I decided. And the more expensive ones -- like Marc, I just can't bring myself to shell out (even if I could) $30,000 to $40,000 for a car.
So I went with the Honda CR-V. I was very conscious of the mileage, which in the CR-V was supposed to range from the low to mid 20s. I love the car, if one can actually feel love for an inanimate object. But to my disappointment I've only been getting about 17 mpg so far. That's probably because 90 percent of the time I'm doing city driving, but come on. Shouldn't I be doing better? Still, it's a big improvement over my previous car, an old minivan that was probably getting about 10 mpg on a good week. So I guess I'm better than I was.
Marc's right that industry and the government will have to do better than to give us 22 fairly narrow choices of highly fuel-efficient cars. And I suppose he's also right when he says, "I don’t think we can wait for consumers to drive us closer to a sustainable economy."
That's true in part because we Americans have grown so accustomed to many of the conveniences that we enjoy -- conveniences that others around the world seem to do well without. Like big cars. Americans like me feel that it's just not humane to ask three kids to sit in the back seat of a car, hips touching hips -- at least that's the calculation I made when I decided against the Prius. And we like our power, don't we? We don't want to have to feel like we're just barely making it up hills on the strength of a 4-cylinder engine.
But Europeans, whose standard of living in most other ways looks like ours and who also tend to drive smaller cars than we, seem to get along just fine without the power and the leg room.
Consumers here could be a major agent of change, but we're naturally afraid of backsliding, of giving up a good thing for fear we will never get it back.
With gas at record prices, we're starting to see that change in consumer behavior. We hear that sales of big cars are flagging and that some people are even taking the step of moving closer to their places of work. But, I'm with Marc: I don't yet feel that we've reached the tipping point of profound change.
Most people, like me, will only be taking incremental steps, like going from 10 mpg to 17, and maybe driving a bit less.
Or, like last year, when my gas-powered lawn mower broke, I bought a non-motorized "reel" mower -- you know, the old-fashioned kind with the double-helix blade and a rolling in the back. I've truly enjoyed it, even though it doesn't make my grass look as nice at the power mower (but I'm not running a golf course), and it frustratingly jams every time it catches a twig -- which is like every 30 seconds.
No doubt, I've given up some of the conveniences I've become accustomed to, but I've noticed other benefits. It's not noisy, there's less maintenance, no fuel costs, and I feel a little, shall we say, closer to the land than I did, as hokey as that sounds. And I'm saving gas -- though, lest I start sounding smug, it's surely not nearly as much as I would have saved had I bought the Prius.
So while environmental sustainability is something that many more of us are conscious of and acting upon, weaning us off of our conveniences will take some game changing event -- like, God forbid, a cataclysm -- or a new technology -- like, hard as this is to conceive, a true non-carbon producing alternative to the internal combustion engine.
Most of us, myself included, like the idea of making such environmentally conscious choices, but the reality is much different.
Jeff
global warming is very "inconvenient". i think the earth should stop inconveniencing us. why cant hurricanes and tornadoes just go somewhere else? and what is with acid rain anyway? its really just inconveniencing my way of life. i dont want to give up on my consumption because i am entitled to all this. its my right, dammit!
i think if all the "bloggers" got together and united we could probably put an end to the pressure being put on us to be more conscious in doing our part to extend our ability to live on this planet. its clear that we don't want to give up on these "necessities" of consumption because saving humanity is just not convenient.
it is clear by this blog and Marc Gunther's blog that we are not going to do anything about sustainability unless the government and corporations help us more.
unfortunately, with this passive type of attitude we are in a bad situation.
not sure where we are left when the storytellers such as yourself take such a passive role in change.
turn it around Jeff! instead of complaining that the "powers that be" have to do more for you to change, start demanding they do. the consumer have a say. corporations want to change and want to be more sustainable but there needs to be a market demand for it. what you are telling them instead (and all those who read your blog) is that you are complacent and are complaining that you wont change unless they do. what you are missing is that there needs to be a revolution (not a violent one but a consumer one)and the revolution is necessary. and it wont happen with your rant on you needing it to be "easier" for you. have you forgotten where you come from? what your ancestors were doing to get you here?
this is no joke. we have to demand change.
i beg of you. use your blog to inspire not to commiserate with the equally passive people out there who need sustainable choices to be less convenient.
was it inconvenient for our forefathers to build us sewers and water lines and help us live the life we are living?
as a society, we are fat and lazy and lost all connection with the idea that we have to WORK for our sustainability.
i have an ongoing “debate” with my co-workers everyday about the use of the air conditioner. they always need it on but are unaware that if they just learned to live with a warmer office temperature (its not that bad and the air conditioner can be used more sparingly) then we can do that small part on reducing our carbon footprint. Its not because they want top destroy the world its just that they are used to the comfort of an air conditioner. I can successfully say that through practice we now work comfortable without the air conditioner blasting all day and is only used sparingly. The transition though “uncomfortable” at first, with some effort and commitment turned out to be just fine.
your post has further confirmed to me how far off the path we have become. Most people reading your blog will agree with you. and then they will be inspired to keep on leading the life they are leading because you have told them that it’s ok to be complacent and wait for "the powers that be" to make it easier for us.
writing this response to your blog was completely inconvenient but it was necessary.
read "the necessary revolution" by Peter Snge to see what corporations ARE doing. But they need us to continue advocating the message that we DEMAND them to save our world. This is no laughing matter and if not “convenient” now for us to change, just wait and see how inconvenient your children’s life will be in the future.
Final diagnosis: wake up.
Posted by: Billie Mintz | July 14, 2008 at 06:38 AM
I had a feeling I'd be misunderstood here. That's my fault, of course, for not being clearer. I pretty much agree with your overall message, Billie, which is that we have to do more to step out of our zone of convenience if we're to see any progress on the environment. I'm lamenting the current state of affairs, not encouraging them, confessing that I, too, have not stepped outside that zone as much as I should.
Posted by: Jeff Weintraub | July 14, 2008 at 06:56 AM
yeah i figured that. my comment was more to your readers and myself. we all need to be kicked in the butt. its not going to be fun but there are ways we can get our message out. i'm just writing a post on it and your post inspired me to do it. zerofootprint has a great tool that you can monitor your water use and reduce your carbon footprint. if anything its good to use to just be aware of what you are doing. the link shows one of the calculators but it is a fun site to explore (you have to sign up to use most of them)
http://travelonly.zerofootprint.net/
Posted by: Billie Mintz | July 14, 2008 at 07:18 AM
Thanks for the kick in the butt, which I, for one, need.
Posted by: Jeff Weintraub | July 14, 2008 at 07:20 AM
Good post, Jeff, and thanks for the plug. I think your CRV is a good choice and the mower even better. Change is incremental! Don't be too hard on yourself.
I just posted about another way we can make incremental but meaningful change for the earth--by eating less meat. Or check out www.pbjcampaign.org.
Posted by: Marc Gunther | July 14, 2008 at 09:53 AM
Marc's right ,Jeff--you have made many steps to conserve ..and I wouldn't apologize to anyone for the efforts you have made so far. One or two steps at a time is what it takes for each person. I personally have done nothing--and I'm glad I'm not in Billie's office.
Posted by: rinky | July 14, 2008 at 02:28 PM
It's unfortunate that people are made to feel guilty for enjoying good large automobiles. I like big cars, and I will always drive them because I enjoy the spaciousness and I don't feel guilty about it at all. Long live the land yacht.
Posted by: Jamie O | July 29, 2008 at 05:55 PM