What are environmentalist measures we could make mandatory?

[MiddleRoad]

Ones that would be enforceable and not have a major effect on life - simple things that, done in masse, could go a long way?

[Bootes Void]

Maybe allowing trading in older less fuel efficient cars for newer fuel efficient or EV cars?

[dead0man]

Maybe allowing trading in older less fuel efficient cars for newer fuel efficient or EV cars?

it's already allowed.  Encouraged even.

[MATTROSE94]

Maybe allowing trading in older less fuel efficient cars for newer fuel efficient or EV cars?

it's already allowed.  Encouraged even.

Most people with older cars do not have the money to get newer vehicles with better fuel efficiency. A brand new car costs at least $25,000 for a base model, which requires a person to either save up for several years to buy the car in cash, or to take out a loan and risk repossession if they are unable to pay the loan back in a timely manner. Also, there are a lot of supply chain problems that are making it difficult for people to acquire new cars, so even if someone can afford a new car, they may have to keep their old clunker for a longer period of time.

[dead0man]

Maybe allowing trading in older less fuel efficient cars for newer fuel efficient or EV cars?

it's already allowed.  Encouraged even.

Most people with older cars do not have the money to get newer vehicles with better fuel efficiency. A brand new car costs at least $25,000 for a base model, which requires a person to either save up for several years to buy the car in cash, or to take out a loan and risk repossession if they are unable to pay the loan back in a timely manner. Also, there are a lot of supply chain problems that are making it difficult for people to acquire new cars, so even if someone can afford a new car, they may have to keep their old clunker for a longer period of time.

There aren't a lot of the really dirty or inefficient  cars left, other than with enthusiasts and a handful of little old ladies that only drive to church once a week and neither group is one that would take advantage of any "cash for clunkers" program.  Even cars made 30 years ago are clean.  Poor people drive '05 Camrys and '99 CRVs, neither are belching smog like your weird uncle's '82 Monte Carlo or your weirder cousin with the riced out '12 Civic (maybe, depending on what he's doing).

[MATTROSE94]

Maybe allowing trading in older less fuel efficient cars for newer fuel efficient or EV cars?

it's already allowed.  Encouraged even.

Most people with older cars do not have the money to get newer vehicles with better fuel efficiency. A brand new car costs at least $25,000 for a base model, which requires a person to either save up for several years to buy the car in cash, or to take out a loan and risk repossession if they are unable to pay the loan back in a timely manner. Also, there are a lot of supply chain problems that are making it difficult for people to acquire new cars, so even if someone can afford a new car, they may have to keep their old clunker for a longer period of time.

There aren't a lot of the really dirty or inefficient  cars left, other than with enthusiasts and a handful of little old ladies that only drive to church once a week and neither group is one that would take advantage of any "cash for clunkers" program.  Even cars made 30 years ago are clean.  Poor people drive '05 Camrys and '99 CRVs, neither are belching smog like your weird uncle's '82 Monte Carlo or your weirder cousin with the riced out '12 Civic (maybe, depending on what he's doing).

Even cars built 5 years ago are lot more energy inefficient than newer vehicles. For example, I drive a 2016 Jeep Compass that get 20 MPG combined (15 city driving and 24 highway driving), whereas a 2022 Jeep Compass gets closer to 25 MPG around town and 35 MPG on the highway. Better fuel economy means less of a strain on the environment due to less of a need to fill up as often.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I drive a 2000 Dodge Dakota.

Molon labe.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

ban gas powered leaf blowers.

[dead0man]

Even cars built 5 years ago are lot more energy inefficient than newer vehicles. For example, I drive a 2016 Jeep Compass that get 20 MPG combined (15 city driving and 24 highway driving), whereas a 2022 Jeep Compass gets closer to 25 MPG around town and 35 MPG on the highway. Better fuel economy means less of a strain on the environment due to less of a need to fill up as often.

there has been modest gains in the last 5 years, but nothing spectacular.



the avg mpg has gone from 22 in 1986 to 25.4 today.  Not good.  That's mainly due to all the selfish, ignorant c**nts in full size pickups and SUVs.


Figuring out a way to convince the sheep, the bros and the karens to think of an Escalade as something to mock(it's a full size Chevy truck with whore makeup on), not something to aspire to would do a lot to push us in the right direction.


Also, cars are super expensive right now and inflation is a problem if you haven't noticed.  Subsidizing people in 5 year old cars to buy new ones might not be the best use of tax dollars (and also another way to give money to a group of people who don't need it...what is it with red avs wanting to give free govt money to people who don't need it lately?).

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

As I understand it fuel efficiency standards are based on size ("footprint") of the vehicle. Which if people are just buying larger vehicles that doesn't do much good, and might make manufacturers to go with a bigger design that uses fewer gallons/size instead a smaller design that uses less fuel overall. Replacing that with a tax on new vehicles that decreases as their fuel efficiency increases might make more sense.