Please, don't take my truck, the website
We hear a lot about how the stricter emissions laws in California are sometimes used by other states. Over a dozen states have either taken some or all of the California laws or are contemplating doing so; and sometimes those discussions cause trouble. In Minnesota, truck, SUV and minivan supporters are trying to prevent their state from adopting the California standards. Don't Take My Truck was set up by the Minnesota Auto Dealers Association to get Minnesotans to contact state representatives and voice concerns about the Clean Car Standard (HF 863), which state Representative Melissa Hortman is pushing through the legislature. According to the Don't Take My Truck folks, the law will hurt customer choice in the state and "impair the state's ethanol policy," among other arguments against the bill (PDF).
As our friends over at Green Daily point out, while Don't Take My Truck claims that trucks are "99% more efficient that they were in the 1970s" and that trucks are not a major contributor to global warming, the Oakridge National Laboratory finds otherwise and that about a third of all U.S carbon dioxide emissions comes from cars and light trucks. Trucks aren't alone in contributing to that third, but to say they're not a "major contributor" is slippery at best.
[Source: Don't Take My Truck via Green Daily]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Karkus 1:58PM (4/25/2008)
Don't worry...I promise I will never covet or steal your gas guzzling, wallet robbing monster.
I'll be happy to let you keep it and suffer the increasing gas prices.
But I will support regulations that make it harder for you to hurt yourself in the future by making that mistake again.
And for the FEW of you that actually need a big truck for your job, well that's part of the cost of doing business, and if I need your services, then I realize that I'll have to pay more for your services.
Reply
jmspearman 2:32PM (4/25/2008)
99% more efficient? Wow. Does that mean the trucks in those states get 4000 mpg? If so, sign me up for a truck.
Reply
Phil L. 2:49PM (4/25/2008)
imspearman -
No, 99% means they haven't quite doubled mileage in almost 30 years...
Reply
Gordio 3:05PM (4/25/2008)
Trucks need to be smaller for sure. Who needs 10,000lb towing power anyway? Most work trucks don't need to be bigger than a small-sized truck like a Chevy S10, or the older "toyota"s.
When you need that much torque you use a diesel truck.
Reply
spence 5:58PM (4/25/2008)
Um, guess what? They have trucks and SUV's in California. How would adopting California's standards lead to their trucks being taken?
(In South Park Redneck Voice) Theeeyyy toooookkk our truuuuuuckkkssssss!
Reply
jim 9:16PM (4/26/2008)
I don't know where the 99% comes from. I had a 70's Dodge 1/2 ton with a 318cid V8 that got 12-14 mpg. A friend has an 05 Dodge 1/2 ton w/the 4.7(?), he gets 13-15.
The bizarre thing about PR stunts like this is that they're complaining about the wrong issue. People have stopped buying trucks, not because the Feds have taken them away, but because of the price of gas.
Reply
kry350 8:08AM (4/28/2008)
One third of all CO2 from cars and light trucks? How could this be when every living human and animal in the country is emitting CO2 24 hours, 7 days a week??!! I'm assuming that the data suggested in the article only takes into account PART of the CO2 emissions from the country. Please keep it factual!
Reply
The Other Bob 8:23AM (4/28/2008)
"1. Don't worry...I promise I will never covet or steal your gas guzzling, wallet robbing monster."
Yes you will. The next time you want to move something big, I am betting you will mooch some friend's truck.
Reply
Steve 4:49PM (4/29/2008)
Good move by these people. They actually want to keep their freedom of choice. If I WANT a BIG truck then i should be able to buy. If you want a tiny ugly hybrid car, have at it. The beauty of America is we get to CHOOSE. We should not be told by the government what we can and cannot buy.
Reply
Shelby 10:53AM (4/28/2008)
How about you flame jobs (Karkus) stop deciding what I can and can't drive. If you don't want a truck, great, don't buy one. But last I checked we live in America where the type of automobile I drive is not governed by anyone except me. It's a shame America won't be like this much longer due to complete morons making legislation like this.
Reply
Derek 12:24PM (4/28/2008)
From reading the article, it doesn't sound like the legislation would prohibit trucks in any way. Just set emissions standards that would force trucks to change. Boo-****ing-hoo. Californians still drive trucks (including the Governators H2, if I am not mistken) so you will still have trucks. I don't see what people are upset about.
Reply
ncranger 7:34PM (4/28/2008)
In 1996 I had a new Toyota 4runner with the biggest v6 they had a time. Even with out towing anything it got the worst mileage. I live in the Carolina foothill's one moment your going down a hill the next going up. Even with Toyota's best engine offering at the time the vehicle was underpowered for it's weight. On flat interstate it got reasonable mileage. I'm not going give specific mpg's it's been to long ago to remember. In 1998 we traded for a gmc yukon, with a mighty vortech 350 v8. I'm going say it got about 20-30% better mileage than the 4Runner. Why? because the V8 didn't have to strain and stay in passing gear all the time. Saying that I realize most people don't live in the mountains and small motor is a plenty and eco friendly. My point is a small lite vehicle is not all ways the most efficient for some job's and terrain. And most people can only afford to own a work vehicle with a motor to do there job, and afford to have a environmentally ever day car. Now day's I drive a v6 car with reasonable mileage, strong enough and lite enough to get me around the mountains. And far as Karkus's comment goes, even if I had a big truck and you asked me to haul your solar panel's or your couch I would just toss a rope around your neck the other end to the trailer and tell you to pull really hard. Practically every home, business, road, bridge, monument every built in this country owes it's building to the big truck, and the redneck that drove it, that brought the supplies to it. I say redneck because I get the feeling that you think your better than everyone else. And anyone who does not drive a green car must be a truck driving ignorant redneck. And I wouldn't bother trying to criticize me back for my poor Carolina grammar, and sentence structure, I know it's bad. I probably want read it for the fact I don't waste electrical power all day by going on green blog's so I can be a hypocrite.
Reply
Jon 8:58PM (4/28/2008)
I'm way pro-environment, and I don't have a thing against pick-up trucks for those that need them, and a lot of people who live outside the urban fringe need them. I don't think they are even a fraction of the problem that urban SUV drivers are.
Without any hostility at all though, it is just a fact that gas prices are going up and CO2 restrictions are going to become harsher. Unless manufacturers get off their fat a**es and start earning their huge paychecks by investing in a little engineering ingenuity, it's going to get a lot harder to own a powerful pickup truck in the future.
It's worth remembering that really, it's only lack of ingenuity, ignoring reality, and slowness to react to change that will threaten our standard of living in the long run. If we think and act wisely with an eye on the future, oil production can decline and things can be better anyway. If we do nothing but fight to maintain the status quo, though, ignoring the changes around us, well, lots and lots of things, pickups among them, are going to go away no matter what any legislation says about it.
Reply