Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
The GOP Convention: Maverick in Name Only
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
White House: Bush wasn't detached from war review
 
 
expand
KEITH NAUGHTON | DRIVING FORCES

Detroit’s Blind Spot

Is safety taking a backseat to green technology?

By Keith Naughton | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jan 16, 2008 | Updated: 2:31  p.m. ET Jan 16, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: JayKay3141 @ 02/28/2008 9:56:58 PM

    Comment: It's completely backwards to argue that because some people drive faux assault vehicles, so should everyone else. By that logic, every time some manufacturer comes out with a larger monster the rest of us should go out and buy something even bigger. Where does it end? When we all have tanks and locomotives just to go to the grocery store? When every vehicle has a grenade launcher?

    The problem isn't the safe driver or the small car. It's those troglodytes who think that their "freedom" and "manliness" is expressed by buying a truck that gets 8 mpg and can blast everyone else out of their way because their gas taxes paid for more of the road and their cell phone call is the most important conversation on earth.

    The manufacturers are just as guilty by promoting these hulking monstrosities as "safe" when the reality is that they only make drivers FEEL safe - witness the H3, the 2 Mazdas that failed crash tests, etc. etc. Forbes has reported that more and more designers are playing "Me Too" with higher beltlines, smaller windows and raised rear ends, all to enhance a cocooned FEELING of safety when in reality what they're doing is just creating huge blind spots!

    We've somehow been conditioned to think that it doesn't matter if we ARE safe so long as we FEEL safe, that we can drive whatever we want regardless of the effects on other drivers or the environment, and that all this juvenile selfishness has no consequences. We've gotten fat, dumb, and happy (literally!) and can't see it. But the rest of the world can - why is anyone surprised at $100+ oil and buck-fifty euros?

  • Posted By: kcarizona @ 02/10/2008 6:16:52 AM

    Comment: Thank you for promoting our peoples safety by promoting the horific statistic of casualties on the homefront. i hope you never have to come to my trauma center to id your loved one.
    If you are not suicidal do not buy a motorcycle!!!! Parents do all you can to keep your babies off of them!!! They should be banned! Or at least 21 and over for they are much more dangerous than alcohol. If you are suicidal do it with a shotgun in the woods or do it on a highway on a motorcycle with no helmet.

  • Posted By: GordonB @ 02/08/2008 6:32:39 PM

    Comment: Why do people need gas-guzzling tanks to commute to work or drive to the grocery store? They are a threat to the safety of everyone who doesn't drive a vehicle of the same size and weight. They should be reclassified to reflect what they truly are; pleasure craft. The purchase of such vehicles should be taxed to the hilt and the operators of such vehicles should be leagally required to carry extra insurance (super liabiltiy) for the damage they may cause to smaller vehicles and the greater bodily harm they may inflict upon the operators of smaller vehicles.

  • Posted By: Djimnik @ 01/22/2008 12:56:10 PM

    Comment: I had the dubious privlidge of repairing a honda insight at the body shop I worked at a couple of years ago. The customer stated that they were not paying attention when leaving a store, and selected foward instead of reverse when leaving a parking spot. Fortunality there was a pole infront of them, hitting it instead of another car or grounding the car on a curb. Unfortunality for them this pole caused over five thousand dollars in damages. Honda in trying to make the car more fuel effeciant, cut as much material as they could. Reinforcement bars, the first piece of metal on the end of the car, are typically 1/8 steel or 1/4 aluminium and weighed somewhere around 20 lbs. The insights rebar was 1/8 aluminium and wieghed about 8 lbs. The typical ones probably wouldn't have to be replaced in a crash like this. The insights was caved in pretty bad. Another 5 mph or so, and it would have taken out the ac condenser and radiator.

  • Posted By: genericname @ 01/19/2008 3:36:22 PM

    Comment: One of the main reasons for to continue to stress fuel economy over further improving safety is money. How much more should we all pay for our next cars to protect drivers who, according to this article are often drunk and/or refuse to wear their seat belts???? With all due respect to the safety lobbyists quoted, the focus of their day jobs are NOT the only thing the average person considers in a car purchase. Although there's always room for improvement ( at reasonable cost) cars sold in the US are already quite safe. Also, our total death and injury count may be stagnant, but considering the yearly increase in miles traveled per year there has actually been a considerable drop in deaths per mile. I believe the US's deaths per mile are nearly the lowest in the entire world.
    With regard to the Swedish comparison, I bet Swedish drivers are more careful and civic/society minded, I bet they don't drive the miles we do (no NYC to LA trips, no outer ring suburbs) and I know their cars are mostly the same general size -Volvos and Saabs- no need to worry about being crushed in your Focus by somebody's cellphone blathering ego being driven carelessly around in a 6,000lb Escalade

  • Posted By: hartman_john @ 01/19/2008 12:20:14 PM

    Comment: The author is typical of most U.S. citizens in that he feels he is entitled to drive any vehicle he wishes, the earth and the environment be damned. His deep concern for "safety" is a red herring. What he is masking is a desire to drive an M-1 Abrams tank through the streets of Manhattan while sipping his Starbucks latte and sending text messages to his drug dealer. Shame on you! Your planet-piggishness is precisely what has brought civilization to the brink of destruction. Perhaps the world would be a better place if all hom sapiens were to disappear.

  • Posted By: henriklitsne @ 01/19/2008 8:32:47 AM

    Comment: Some numbers from Sweden:
    Swedish deaths in traffic last year was 475. Dividing US deaths (42000), by that number, I get 88.4.
    Swedish population is 9 million. Dividing US population is (300 million) with that number, I get 33.4.
    Swedish population density is 20/km2. US population density is 30/km2.
    This means you are 300% more likely to in a traffic accident in the US compared to Sweden, measured
    per capita and population density.
    Swedish cars, while larger than most european ones, are certainly smaller than US cars.
    Unfortunately I can't quantify this difference.
    Swedes most likely drive less than americans, but I find it hard to believe that we drive 75% less,
    measured per capita and population density.population
    Car

  • Posted By: shorelinerider @ 01/18/2008 10:51:44 AM

    Comment: Detroit deserves the problems that that have economically--they've put all their eggs in the SUV, truck basket. In reviewing the 2009 cars that will hit the showrooms soon, I'm very disappointed in the posted mileages. Why can't American car manufacturers produce vehicles that average at least 35 mph? I don't see any creativity; why not bring out a wagon and hatchback that rivals the Toyota Prius? We need more useful, efficient vehicles that are "right sized", not more of the same.

  • Posted By: shorelinerider @ 01/18/2008 10:48:00 AM

    Comment: Detroit better get with the program, or else they'll be left in the dust. In looking at

  • Posted By: shorelinerider @ 01/18/2008 10:47:21 AM

    Comment: De

  • Posted By: popslashgirl @ 01/17/2008 1:19:12 PM

    Comment: Of course a small car will come off worse against a Hummer--but to my mind, that means that the Hummer is the more unsafe vehicle. Unless you have six kids and live in the Yukon, no one needs a Hummer or an SUV for their morning commute. Buy a station wagon or a mini-van, or just buy a regular sedan or hybrid and teach your children that sometimes, sadly, we have to sit next to our annoying little brother. You'll save money, save gas, save time finding a parking spot, and save the world.

  • Posted By: bishop3d @ 01/17/2008 12:19:42 PM

    Comment: Small cars have been part of the American road experience for quite some time (Ford Festiva, Geo Metro anyone?) so trying to say survival chances are limited by car size takes away the facts of most traffic fatalities (like the alcohol impaired driver in the article mentioned Hummer). Heck, I'd buy that cheap car from India if they'd bring it here as long as is it had a seat belt and got the advertised gas mileage. I'd rather idle for hundreds of hours a year during the morning/evening commute in my hamster wheel powered machine than a V-8 guzzling behemoth. Thanks for making me feel like I'm facing impending doom everytime I get on the on-ramp. If safety is the issue on roads, then bigger fines, prison time, etc. needs to be implemented to facilitate better drivers.

  • Posted By: tdn0024 @ 01/17/2008 11:05:39 AM

    Comment: Romney gave Huckabee a golden chance.

    In the NH debate, the Turnaround Chance slapped the Huckster back by saying we can't be free of oil (or foreign oil) in 10 years.

    The Huckster should have said "OH YEAH? Ya dam pessimist! If the American people put their mind to it. they can do anything they want, and we don't need old hacks like you telling us we can't"

    The Huckster missed a magic moment.

    He could and should have spun the Republican nomination into a referendum on whether America can and should get free of foregin oil in 10 years.

    Jeepers folks.

    Two terms from now, what single thing do we want from these guys.

    One thing we all agree on... we want to get outta bed in 10 years and know that we put the Ayatollahs and Chavez outside of our financing.

    And Turnaround Boy, it is doable.

    The Huckster could have grab the big picture vision and drive, brought his Evangelical base along "Bibllical stewarding of the Earth", America first, etc. and given Obama a real challenge as the visionary of tangible and determined change.

    Huckabee blew it, and just let himself get slapped down by Mitt.

    Huckabeee could have gone into Michigan a dangerous man, talking about a Detriot renaissance.

    Blew it. Blew it. Blew it.

  • Posted By: Josef70 @ 01/17/2008 10:56:46 AM

    Comment: I agree if people slow down stay off the cell phones while driving and do not drive while intoxicated it would be a safer place. People are not that way we wait til the last minute for everything, We are the fattest country in the world. We use the most fuel ,we are in a rush to have the biggest, fastest cars on the road. Now we are paying for it. We should have been green a long time ago. I bought a sport touring motorcycle to commute back and forth to work. I re-geared my motorcycle to get almost 300 miles per 4 1/2 gallons of fuel. I do not drive a car, last year alone I saved almost $3600.00 in gas and insurance. So as a country we all need to stop being so selfish and arrogant and steip up to change the future for our country.

    Joe
    USMC

  • Posted By: gopher1 @ 01/16/2008 11:20:57 PM

    Comment: I also didn't realize that Americans really get to decide what gasoline prices are....I was under the impression that OPEC controls the majority of the world's production, distribution, and futures commodities traders in NYC (not the American people) determine the price well in advance. By the way, isn't that the reason that GW took his recent sword-twirling trip to Saudi Arabia?? Oil price issues? Just wondering aloud. Curious to what others have to say.

  • Posted By: gopher1 @ 01/16/2008 11:20:29 PM

    Comment: I also didn't realize that Americans really get to decide what gasoline prices are....I was under the impression that OPEC controls the majority of the world's production, distribution, and futures commodities traders in NYC (not the American people) determine the price well in advance. By the way, isn't that the reason that GW took his recent sword-twirling trip to Saudi Arabia?? Oil price issues? Just wondering aloud. Curious to what others have to say.

  • Posted By: gopher1 @ 01/16/2008 11:10:45 PM

    Comment: JohninMonroevillePA..

    You can't be a liberal fascist....because a fascist is a very, very FAR TO THE RIGHT winger. The left-wing of the political spectrum is a COMMUNIST. Please do your research on politics before commenting!

  • Posted By: rogerhall @ 01/16/2008 8:01:00 PM

    Comment: Keith Naughton is caught in the past. Huge cars that consume more energy than some homes and smash everything they hit are "good" and small cars that use one-third of the energy a normal car uses are "bad". That's only true in big-oil boardrooms, Republican fund-raising events, and thirty years ago.

    Are you worried about safety? Then let's ban any vehicle over 0.5 ton from the freeways. That's the least expensive option for everyone. We wont need all the fancy safety gear if all of the cars have soft shells around safety cages; cars like that exist right now. With less deadly crashes, we will not only save medical expenses, but also save all those missed hours of work.

    Yes, Hummers lower American productivity.

    Besides, if you can afford a Hummer, you can buy a ranch to drive it around on.

  • Posted By: rogerhall @ 01/16/2008 8:00:02 PM

    Comment: Keith Naughton is caught in the past. Huge cars that consume more energy than some homes and smash everything they hit are "good" and small cars that use one-third of the energy a normal car uses are "bad". That's only true in big-oil boardrooms, Republican fund-raising events, and thirty years ago.

    Are you worried about safety? Then let's ban any vehicle over 0.5 ton from the freeways. That's the least expensive option for everyone. We wont need all the fancy safety gear if all of the cars have soft shells around safety cages; cars like that exist right now. With less deadly crashes, we will not only save medical expenses, but also save all those missed hours of work.

    Yes, Hummers lower American productivity.

    Besides, if you can afford a Hummer, you can buy a ranch to drive it around on.

  • Posted By: fatmomma @ 01/16/2008 6:51:51 PM

    Comment: A non story. Let's just make bigger SUVs and be really safe. Then you can drive from one domed enclave to another perfectly safe and in traditional Detroit style. I'm glad Detroit is finally starting to maybe wake up. But Detroit has been largely clueless about making fine automobiles for years. The Japanese ethic has been refinement. The Detroit ethic has been greed.

  • Posted By: fatmomma @ 01/16/2008 6:51:30 PM

    Comment: A non story. Let's just make bigger SUVs and be really safe. Then you can drive from one domed enclave to another perfectly safe and in traditional Detroit style. I'm glad Detroit is finally starting to maybe wake up. But Detroit has been largely clueless about making fine automobiles for years. The Japanese ethic has been refinement. The Detroit ethic has been greed.

  • Posted By: mm123 @ 01/16/2008 6:40:53 PM

    Comment: If everybody were driving smaller more fuel efficient cars instead of empty SUVs, vans and Hummers, then there wouldn't be as many safety concerns...Isn't that obvious?

    • Posted By: JohninMonroevillePA @ 01/16/2008 19:52:37

      Comment: MM123,

      I wonder what fairyland you drive in? Where I drive, we have pickup trucks, heavy trucks and buses on the road.

      I want my wife of 42 years to drive in a vehicle that gives her a fair chance to survive an accident, not some tin can that some liberal fascist think I should be driving. If you want to drive a Prius, where 40% of its weight is in batteries laying in the floor of your vehicle where it does nothing to protect the occupants, go ahead. I want that weight contained in a safety cage all around me.

      I drive a Honda Pilot and I will pay the extra cost of lower gas mileage to gain greater safety. And don't go off on your manmade Global Warming religious speech, either. That is another liberal fascist program to undermine the US economy.

    • Posted By: JohninMonroevillePA @ 01/16/2008 19:37:38

      Comment: I don't know where you drive mm123, but I drive on highways with large trucks and buses. The heavier vehicle wins every time. I own a Honda Pilot and don't worry too much about mileage. I want my wife of 42 years driving in a vehicle that will give her and me a fair chance.

      What is happening to freedom in this country, if someone else will determine what kind of car I drive? Sounds like national socialism. And it is coming from the liberal elite in this country.

      Let the market determine what kind of a car is popular and what the price of gasoline will be.

      John
      Monroeville, PA

  • Posted By: mm123 @ 01/16/2008 6:39:57 PM

    Comment: Totally agree with jchapa13!

  • Posted By: stonecanoe @ 01/16/2008 6:37:55 PM

    Comment: Ditto that ... the problem is caused by the Hummers, Excursions, Esplandes, Suburbans etc. How about a $25.00 a pound tax for cars over a certain weight. Sure businesses will scream that they need those vehicles but that is mostly a crock. I was a CPA for many yeras .. most of the SUVs owned by companies were driven by the owners wife. Allow business use but penalize cheaters severely .. I am thinking confiscation for non business use.

  • Posted By: CommonSense0711 @ 01/16/2008 6:37:16 PM

    Comment: The point Naughton was trying to make was that while automakers do indeed need to invest in more fuel-efficient and environmentally-friendly cars, disregarding the technological innovations in car safety (as they clearly have done this year) is a grave mistake. While it is true that it an estimated 250,000 people (surely more today) have died as a result of climate-change, the fact remains that every year, more than 1 MILLION people are killed worldwide as a result of traffic accidents. Moreover, with the spread of globalization, the number of car owners around the world will surely increase, and with them, the number of traffic-related fatalities. No one said the environment wasn't important, but, as Naughton put it, "saving the planet won't be any fun if we all die on the road first."

  • Posted By: CommonSense0711 @ 01/16/2008 6:36:46 PM

    Comment: The point Naughton was trying to make was that while automakers do indeed need to invest in more fuel-efficient and environmentally-friendly cars, disregarding the technological innovations in car safety (as they clearly have done this year) is a grave mistake. While it is true that it an estimated 250,000 people (more today) have died as a result of climate-change, the fact remains that every year, more than 1.17 MILLION people are killed worldwide as a result of traffic accidents. Moreover, with the spread of globalization, the number of car owners around the world will surely increase, and with them, the number of traffic-related fatalities. No one said the environment wasn't important, but, as Naughton put it, "saving the planet won't be any fun if we all die on the road first."

  • Posted By: FedUpw/GOP @ 01/16/2008 6:36:40 PM

    Comment: Ditto that ... the problem is caused by the Hummers, Excursions, Esplandes, Suburbans etc. How about a $25.00 a pound tax for cars over a certain weight. Sure businesses will scream that they need those vehicles but that is mostly a crock. I was a CPA for many yeras .. most of the SUVs owned by companies were driven by the owners wife. Allow business use but penalize cheaters severely .. I am thinking confiscation for non business use.

  • Posted By: jchapa13 @ 01/16/2008 5:57:03 PM

    Comment: This article is extremely short-sighted. Is Keith Naughton saying that we shouldn't drive efficient, less polluting vehicles because there are some who drive large Hummers dependent on dirty foreign oil? I think he is missing the point. It actually comes down to mathematics and not physics. If more people start driving fuel efficient vehicles, there will eventually be less large gas guzzling ones on the road. D'uh!

  • Posted By: Waiting @ 01/16/2008 5:34:57 PM

    Comment: I love you columnists who seems to be fixated on "gosh, it's great to care about the environment, but....." The fact is that automobile generated polution whether it be the emission of greenhouse gases or particulants kills and endangers the health of more people worldwide than automobile accidents. It was estimated five years ago that climate change was responsible for 250,000 deaths and that number is climbing. Were you outraged when Hummers hit the road?

 
 
Reply
Cancel
 
 
Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

Cancel
 
The Peek
 
 
PROJECT GREEN
Karen Breslau

Passing the 'fossil fools' in a CNG-powered car

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
PAKISTAN
Mark Hosenball
Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu