Detroit’s Blind Spot

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.

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.

Totally agree with jchapa13!

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.

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."

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.

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!

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?