UK - Cost, not environment, drives consumers
Global warming not enough for most consumersUS studies have indicated that a significant percent of Americans are worried about global warming, foreign oil dependency, or both. Unfortunately, despite this worry, the majority of those concerned about these issues are only willing to buy a car that helps fight these problems if it makes obvious financial sense.
Well, auto consumers in the UK aren't much different.
Covering the study, GCC notes, "While 20% of Britons are now saying they look at CO2 levels when buying a new car, the survey found that 75% of motorists would purchase a lower-emissions car only if it saved them money. Almost two-thirds of people surveyed (61%) believe that cost is the most important consideration when others buy a more environmentally friendly car."
Labels: Foreign Oil Dependency, global warming
posted by Dahcredyns at
6:55 AM
8 Comments:
No surprise there, when push comes to shove it's all about the impact on your wallet. This fundamental flaw has always plagued the environmental movement as being percieved as a costly luxury. Only when the Federal Government steps in with the threat of fines or policy is when environmental initiatives are taken seriously.
And, sadly, its not just cost-effectiveness. Things like horsepower and 0 - 60 also weight into the buying equation.
Agreed, and that is part of the problem that fact that as consumers we brought into the market propaganda of the auto companies who for decades preached the virtues of muscle horse power and acceleration performance.
Unfortunately this marketing agenda only serves the auto industry's profit centers. In an ideal world the marketeers will wisen up and instead preach the benefits of green technology and that power and performance compared to frugal fuel economy are for now mutually exclusive.
sadly, the marketers have started changing their tune. unfortunately, the technology isn't as always as green as the marketing messages.
ford and gm have spent a lot on hybrid vehicle commercials, for instance, but their hybrid sales are not impressive.
i fear greenwashing will become more common in the future.
"Tree huggers" (myself included) face the same road as Abolitionists did: Moral high-ground fighting economics. Where the cost to the consumer is minimal, people will side with their conscience (ie - the North's investment in industry made slaves more expensive by comparison, so they could take the high-road; while the South's dependency on plantation agriculture made slaves more cost-effective, indeed their economy dependent on it.) With oil controlled by the wealthy, they will play this careful balance in their favor. Hopefully it won't take civil war to make people wake-up to the importance of sustaining our environment over their wallet's short-term needs. Hopefully government can use taxation to steer society towards a peaceful economic decision rather than the oil shortage-chaos route. Given their tax record on leveragin gas tax versus income tax though, I don't see it.
I completely agree, KP.
When it comes down to dollars on a fool will part with there money to support the global warming scam
Lol Thats What You Would Think Tree Hugger (=
Post a Comment
<< Home