
Soaring SUV sales keep carmakers on collision course with climate policy - thg
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-autos-suvs/soaring-suv-sales-keep-carmakers-on-collision-course-with-climate-policy-idUKKBN1Z916R
======
shrubble
Buying an SUV is sometimes due to network effects.

If you are in a sedan, it isn't high enough to allow you to see traffic
through the windshields of the SUV ahead of you, it's not much different than
being behind an 18-wheeler.

So as a defensive maneuver, you also buy an SUV...

~~~
alamortsubite
If you're following the SUV ahead of you at a safe distance, why would you
need or want to see through its windshield?

One of the reasons SUVs and pickup trucks are popular here in America is that
they're easy to get in and out of. About 1/3 of Americans are obese (far more
overweight), and from my observations, many have weak legs and cores. SUVs are
part of the same phenomenon that has popularized single-story suburban homes,
bottom-freezer refrigerators, etc. I see it as less of a network effect and
more of a feedback loop.

~~~
throwaway3563
Cuz some of us are safe drivers and want to see what is up ahead instead of
blindly (literally) following the car in front like a lemming

------
hurricanetc
Gas taxes haven’t gone up in nearly three decades. The cost of driving an
automobile is divorced from the reality of what it costs to maintain roads and
protect the climate.

~~~
itbeho
They have in California.

[https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-
government/article23164...](https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-
government/article231643868.html)

------
mxschumacher
There's a 1973 video [0] about people shifting away from gas-guzzlers because
oil prices have risen so much. I wonder whether we can expect history to
repeat itself here:

[0]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClaNhx71XB8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClaNhx71XB8)

~~~
ZeroGravitas
An alternative is that as battery prices drop and an equivalent electric SUV
can cost less (with better performance on most metrics) that we'll see a kind
of Jevon's Paradox and SUVs will get even bigger.

------
thedrbrian
As with everything else, the answer to combating climate change is Miata.

~~~
rland
The answer to just about damn near anything is Miata, of course.

But I formerly drove a Miata, and now drive an American Medium Size (that's a
rest-of-the-world extra large) SUV. Same mileage for both, about ~23mpg.

------
throwaway53678
I have one hypothesis for part of the uptick: rear seat room for carseats. I
consider myself the SUV hater of SUV haters, and I reject that you need one
when you have kids (such is the idea in my part of the US), but...we bought
one last year anyway, mainly to accommodate two rear-facing carseats with two
adults in the front. There aren’t many cars that make this work, and you’d be
surprised how big of an SUV you have to get to get any more rear seat space
than a regular car. Not even most of the “mid-size” models.

------
koksik202
I understand why even cheap crappy plastic SUV sell in IE AND UK so well,
people are tired of speed ramps and those vehicles are great for driving
through crappy roads and speed ramps in housing estates and minor roads in
small towns that are cursed with speed ramps. Sitting high enough to see
surrounding plus not having to slow down for speed ramps win win

------
obblekk
Why are these mutually exclusive? An electric drive train can be fitted to an
SUV form factor. In fact, it might be easier to get to an acceptable range
(300mi) because there’s more space for more batteries (assuming each battery
delivers more range than its weight continues to scale).

I think the easiest way to accelerate decarbonization is to make green tech
more desirable independent of the greenness. If people want it, they’ll get it
and in that sense SUVs could help achieve climate goals.

~~~
carlmr
Bigger cars are heavier, SUVs have terrible aerodynamic properties, bigger
batteries are heavier and consume more resources bring produced. Even electric
SUVs aren't really green by any stretch of the imagination.

------
thrower123
No one will care when an Explorer gets 20-25 mpg and gas is still under
$2.50/gallon. The comfort and utility advantages more than outweigh any
possible long-term externalities in the ordinary calculus.

~~~
tzs
> No one will care when an Explorer gets 20-25 mpg and gas is still under
> $2.50/gallon.

I was curious if their fuel efficiency is really that low. I've only been
interested in smaller SUVs (I've got a Honda CR-V) which are up to around 28
mpg city, 34 highway for current models.

So I went to Ford's site to check. On the page for the Explorer [1] I can't
find fuel efficiency info! Searching for "mpg" on the page (or on the pages
for specific models) shows hits but Firefox does not actually show them.
Disabling styles and doing again finds that those mentions are just in
standard disclaimer footnotes.

Even more interesting is this page [2], which lists all Ford SUVs and
crossovers. All of the gas powered ones (Ecosport, Escape, Edge, Expedition,
and Flex) _except_ for Explorer list their fuel efficiency right there.

Ford seems to be specifically avoiding listing Explorer gas mileage.
Expedition is 17/24 city/highway and Flex is 16/23, so it's not like they are
unwilling to list low numbers. So what is going on with Explorer?

[1] [https://www.ford.com/suvs/explorer/](https://www.ford.com/suvs/explorer/)

[2] [https://www.ford.com/new-suvs-crossovers/](https://www.ford.com/new-suvs-
crossovers/)

