| Archive for calnetalk.com The place to find new friends and meet up with old ones |
| pimpdriver |
are old cars more environmentally friendly than new ones?One for Geddi here..... bear with me on this one.....OK, so where I work is 50 miles away, there is a train journey available, but it takes between 1h20 and 1h40 with 2 changes and the cheapest fare is... £73!!! And I'd have to get to Chippenham, and have a 5 mile journey from the station to work, so not really feasible. So, is it better to keep an old car running or drive a more modern car such as a Toyota Prius or Lupo TDI? My car is old and doesn't have a catalytic converter (which typically decreases fuel economy by 10%). It does 35-39mpg It isn't on a scrapheap. Newer cars use energy to make them, and have lots more "exotic" materials (batteries and more plastics). Which is better for the environment? Here is a brilliant website: http://bangernomics.tripod.com/ Discuss! |
| Geddi |
Steve: an excellent question and without looking at the website, I will stick out my neck and answer as best I am able. Bare in mind I am not a driver and know little about modern cars, technically.
First, this is not a simple question and on the whole I do not accept the premise at all as NO car at all is 'good for the environment' so no car can be 'better' for the environment. Now that I've picked the nit, I will answer what I know you are asking - "which is less bad for the environment!" 1/ a lot depends on the age of the vehicle as to how old it might be, what size engine and what use it has - long journeys or short. 2/ some newer vehicles are less 'green' than older ones, as performance is increased, as well as the newer 'exotic' materials involved, as you point out. 3/ Total milage of the older vehicle has an effect. Leyland London double decker buses ran for over 3 million miles with simple diesel engines, and are some of the greenest vehicles on Earth. Were they both new, I think it would be unfavourably comparable to modern buses. A Jaguar EV12 is not gonna be 'green' at any time in history, unless it were converted to run purely on hydrogen or solar power, and planted trees every three miles along its route. A 4x4 vehicle is not gonna be 'green' unless it is used in Africa or the Gobi desert where it is the only vehicle which will tackle the landscape, and even then camels and ponies would be more so. Old landrovers, with the aluminium body and original engines, do about 18 to 25 mpg, which is not 'green' at all, yet for working with on farms and taking advantage of all the features - winch, etc.. is perhaps the 'greenest' option possible. For your 100 miles daily journey to and from work, with a ten year old car doing perhaps an average of 28 to 30 mpg, I would say you would be foolish to go out and buy a new car, unless you were to buy a super 'green' vehicle with a mpg above 70, or an alternative fuel vehicle. Now I may go and browse that wesbite... P.S. I know it's the wrong page, did you read the details about DU? |
| Block67 |
 - I will conceed one point with Ged, "as NO car at all is 'good for the environment'". (ouch that hurt!) 
Steve, buying older cars IS better for the enviroment, after all, it is a form of recycling with no waste! Personally, I have always bought older cars even when I have had enough money to buy new ones, for several reasons. 1. they don't usually have a cat (as you state less economical, and they stink!) 2. There is less metal and more plastic on newer cars. 3. Too much electronics and things to go wrong with newer cars. 4. I simply just like older cars. Good website by the way, now added to my favourites! 
|