Archives

Before you embrace new ways to save the environment, think about whether you're doing more harm than good. (http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2007/08/26/gray_shades_of_green/)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Prius-II_Car_Sharing_Program.jpg Tom Keane - Boston.com - Aug. 26, 2007

“An SUV carrying two or three people is much more efficient than a hybrid carrying just one.” - I wonder how much more efficient a Prius is carrying five vs. a gas guzzler with a single occupant?

Suddenly, everyone cares about the planet. Prodded by An Inconvenient Truth and worried that our Cape homes might one day be underwater, we're all enthusiastically looking for ways to save the world. That "we" includes the good folks at Massport, the state agency that runs Logan Airport. That's right. Logan says it wants to go green. Hearing this, I thought perhaps the airport was shutting down the New York shuttle and making people take Amtrak. But, no, Massport has something else in mind. A new policy gives drivers of hybrid cars preferential parking at the airport. Yes, use a Prius and you'll get a nice spot just by your terminal, saving oh-so-much time as you head off for your weekend jaunt to Paris.

Let's think this through. Now, instead of taking public transportation to the airport (because, after all, parking is such a pain in the neck), hybrid owners will take their cars. Rather than a smaller carbon footprint, Massport's plan could make it bigger. I call this environmental backfire: something intended to help ends up making the problem worse.

Massport is hardly alone in this. Remember "think globally, act locally"? People act locally, for example, by trying to preserve green space in their towns and keep population densities low. Yet, as Harvard economist Edward Glaeser points out, all this does is push development out farther from cities to areas where there are fewer people to object, which leads to more sprawl. Better to sacrifice a few trees in our backyards and let developers build … http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2007/08/26/gray_shades_of_green/

Sounds like this guy's coffee maker broke down. Just a lot of scattershot whining.

He lost me with the first sentence: "Suddenly, everybody cares about the planet." A lot of people have cared about the planet for a long time. Unless, say, 50 years is considered "suddenly" on his time scale.

That said, I tend agree that special hybrid parking at the airport is not a good idea (which seems to have triggered the whole diatribe), though for somewhat different reasons than his.

I'd have a lot less to gripe about concerning SUVs if the average SUV driver really did haul around four or five passengers. But the stark reality of it is that the average SUV driver is either an insecure, alpha-male with testosterone poisoning, or a fat soccer-mom housewife with a cell phone in one hand and a $6 Starbucks coffee in the other.

That sounds like my commute, AshenGrey (and thanks for spelling Grey the correct way, unlike the author of this article).

An SUV getting 24mpg (show me one that actually does!) would have to have 3 people in it just to match the efficiency of my car, and it would probably still produce more pollution.

I'd argue that most people don't even park at the airport and are just there to drop people off or pick them up. I'd rather have 20 Priuses there iding in EV mode dropping people off than 20 Expeditions crawling through the drop off lane while waiting for a spot near the curb to open up.

Seems no is mentioning the fact that driving to the airport is usually a long drive. Me, I have to drive 1- 1 1/2 hours to the airport. Take a 50mpg car over that time vs my 24 mpg rated highway Aztek and I am sure I would save a lot more gas for the total trip.

The short trip from the off site parking to the airport terminal would have to be very high mpg. These trucks are usually SuperDuty V8 350s and the way they drive I'd expect 10- 12 mpg at best for the 5 mile trip from parking to terminal. Brake - full throttle - brake . . . etc.

Edit: Not to many people take public transport in the Detroit area BTW. Not safe in my opinion at 3 AM.

Only one little problem in LA -- not one of our public rail, train or subway lines connect to any of our airports. We only recently started bus service to LAX.

This perk might provide buyers on the fence one more reason to consider a hybrid, but won't directly impact airport congestion or air quality. Hybrid drivers aren't going to drive to the airport more often due to this, and gas guzzlers aren't going to drive there less. I'll wait till Logan considers congestion pricing as LA is where everyone would pay to drive their car.

i got 85mpg on the way to work today. all by myself. gonna have to put about 4 people in that suv to beat that. i just hope they all have to leave work at the same time....

Great, so I'm not the only one who thinks the author was a complete idiot. I like how his somewhat random pick for an SUV was a somewhat economical Jeep Compass (personally I still consider that a car/crossover). If every SUV got 24 mpg then automakers wouldn't be up in arms about the CAFE standards. Seems to me that the most popular ones flying off the lot are the full-size ones and not the minis.

The guy is a jerk and every one of his arguments is flawed.

The airport parking one is the most stupid idea. Airports should simply lower their parking rates. I can get valet parking off site cheaper than the onsite parking. Whatever FE I get out of my Yaris is destroyed by the shuttle. If I could, I'd park on-site.