[Simon47]

Greetings All

One gets the idea they have been around the debate too long when one ceases to be surprised when one learns what they already knew. It would seem simply logical that if we remove our old clunkers off the streets that our footprint would be significantly reduced but many fail to recognize that in order to achieve reduction it would mean buying a bicycle or taking public transit instead of buying a brand new car with the cash; given that studies have shown that our new shiny cars are not as friendly as we are being led to believe. That is another debate but it suffices to state it. When will we learn.

Environmental benefits limited from ‘Cash for Clunkers’ | Viewpoints, Outlook | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Cash for Clunkers fails the environmental sniff test for a number of reasons. Consider these facts:

• • Although the program was originally billed as a way to reduce greenhouse gases, it achieves this aim amid huge expense and massive inefficiencies. Cash for Clunkers may diminish our nation's overall carbon footprint, but the associated costs will be at least 10 times higher than other carbon-reduction strategies contemplated for current climate legislation. Sharpen your pencil even further to add the amount of carbon it takes to make new cars and destroy older ones — and the bottom line of the program goes from bad to worse.

• • Cash for Clunkers was touted as a way to reduce the automobile-generated pollutants that continue to plague major urban areas such as Houston. That's certainly a noble goal, but pressure from the classic car lobby — which mainly serves the interests of mechanic shops that specialize in older cars — effectively watered down the program's potential impact. By deeming that cars built before the 1980s were not clunkers, legislators missed a cardinal opportunity to eliminate some of the least efficient vehicles on the planet.