IMAGINE A WORLD WITHOUT CARS
"Oil is the problem. Cars are the solution", say Iain Carson and Vijay Vaitheeswaran of The Economist in their new book, "Zoom". They predict another industrial revolution-- and they want the American government to spark it ...
Special to MORE INTELLIGENT LIFE
Imagine a world without cars. Suddenly, it might seem that three great evils widely associated with automobiles--environmental harm, economic pain, and geopolitical insecurity--would vanish. But realistically, a world without cars would be a dim, joyless place with much-diminished freedom, mobility and prosperity.
This is especially true for America, the birthplace of the modern automobile industry and of most of the political, technological and cultural developments behind mass motorisation. From drive-through banks to drive-in churches, car culture permeates American life. Three-car garages are becoming the norm. Inspired by the American example, developing giants such as China and India are taking to the roads too. Soon we will be a world of a billion cars.
Oil is the problem, not cars. That is why we must reinvent the automobile. As engines of change, clean cars of the future can help speed the world towards a more sensible approach to transportation. The snag is getting from here to there. Big oil clearly has no interest in seeing its main product fall by the wayside, and the Detroit car industry has shown few signs of real innovation or long-term vision.
Contrary to what some critics claim, there is nothing inherently evil about oil companies' pumping oil, or carmarkers' selling cars. That is their job, and for decades it was socially acceptable for them to do it. The difference today is that society's expectations are changing. A richer, greener, better-informed world is demanding more from its energy and transportation industries. The social contract is evolving--but public policies have not yet changed to reflect that progress.
That is why government still matters. Only sensible and courageous action by government to take account of the external costs of burning oil can set things on the right course. These external costs are not reflected in the pump price of gasoline, but of course we pay for them through the Pentagon budget, the suffering of asthmatic children, and the pain of economic shocks. Only if the federal government spurs change, either through market-based regulation or, better yet, through carbon taxes, will America level the playing field and give clean cars and carbon-free energy a fighting chance.
That will happen only if everyone is ready to abandon the myth of cheap fossil fuel and pay an honest price for gasoline. There are signs that a Great Awakening is changing consumer attitudes on this crucial issue. Ask ordinary Americans if they will simply support a hike in gasoline taxes, as the New York Times did in 2006, and the majority say "no". But when the pollsters asked whether those same people would be willing to support higher gasoline taxes if the money went to reduce oil imports and to fight global warming, a strong majority responded "yes".
That suggests people are ripe for a new approach. Americans will follow political leaders with vision and courage, who put forth a comprehensive, bipartisan, long-term strategy to tackle oil addiction and global warming. No one likes to pay taxes, but Americans do respect straight talk and have always had a strong sense of fair play. If political leaders take the trouble to explain the notion of oil's external harms, and make the case for subsidy and tax reform, citizens will rally to the cause.
Tomorrow: What is the right price for petrol?
Article tools
- Login to post comments
Email this page- Printer-friendly version
Delicious
StumbleUpon
Facebook







Comments
Blessed be the cars, for they shall set you free
September 22, 2007 - 09:39 — VisitorI don't know about this claim that cars set us free. I ditched mine about four years ago, and though there are certainly things that I can't do, the very fact that I don't any longer need to deal with the car is far more liberating.
For short-distance travel, I ride a bike. For long-distance, planes, trains, and busses. I can live in a place (DC) where cars go very, very slowly. I reduced by a third my errands--no trips to the mechanic, no fill-ups, and never having to visit the DMV is worth while. With the money saved, I could probably take a cab ride every day.
I don't really think Americans will get rid of their cars; so, to the extent that our C02 output should be lowered, I'm pleased that cars will slowly go green, and that people continue to advocate that.
But you know all that suburban isolation? The miles of KFC and big-box stores? The obesity epidemic? They only come with the car. It's a shame we won't retire the whole institution.
I envy you.
September 25, 2007 - 13:45 — VisitorI envy you.
The oil industry has been
January 30, 2008 - 03:00 — Good Luck Chuck (not verified)The oil industry has been dominated by what are called supergiant fields. The four reigning supergiant fields of oil our time were discovered decades ago and are now in decline. The Burgan field of Kuwait, the Daqing of China, Cantarell of Mexico, and Ghawar of Saudi Arabia. Together in recent decades they were responsible for 14 percent of the world's oil production, and they are now in decline. All except Ghawar of Saudi Arabia have been declared officially past peak by their own governments and Ghawar is showing clear signs of trouble -- though Aramco itself won't say so. Ghawar has provided 60 percent of Saudi Arabia's production. Saudi Arabia's total production is down 8 percent in the year past, despite a massive increase in drilling rigs, and the incentive of high prices.
What? We can't take the bus?
April 29, 2009 - 13:35 — Visitor (not verified)What? We can't take the bus? The trolley? The subway? Come on, man. We don't need cars. The only reason people think they "need" cars is because they live in an environment that was designed around it. They choose to live in the suburbs, the gated communities, these predominantly residential zones with poor access to things like supermarkets, stores, and restaurants. I live in a city that is very dense, has a good public transportation system. Where I live, it's a good mix of residences and businesses. I have not needed a car ever.
If cities were designed
June 16, 2009 - 20:51 — Bike Messenger (not verified)If cities were designed better and more friendly to bicyclists and pedestrians and public transportation to and from close suburbs then that would solve most of the problem. There are many areas that may still require cars to transport people especially in the heartland of America but the biggest problem is in the big cities where cars rule and people are slaves to them.
lame
June 16, 2009 - 22:41 — Visitor (not verified)lame
no cars?
November 26, 2009 - 13:25 — Visitor (not verified)Old story, I know, but city folk tend to forget about the rest of us out here. Taking a bus to work would not be impossible but very very time consuming in our situation. Not to mention, I like my car and being able to hop in and go. Could I get the bus to drop me off in the woods to go hunting? How about throwing a load of wood onto the trolly? I'm happy that some people are glad to live in the city... I don't want to and would not enjoy it. Different people enjoy different lifestyles, and if it makes sense for you to ditch your car, go ahead, but I'm certainly not going to any time soon.
i dont see any problem
December 7, 2009 - 20:45 — LA car parts (not verified)i dont see any problem living without a car.. but i think having a own car will saves us a lot of time and effort
Hybrid cars
February 2, 2010 - 15:31 — steel buildings for sale (not verified)Hybrid cars & bio-diesel are good options & other new technology are under research,but still then we've to be careful.
http://www.amerikanischescasi
March 23, 2010 - 02:41 — Casino Amerika (not verified)http://www.amerikanischescasino.com/
What about industry? Even if most people could find a way to get
to work, there would be far fewer jobs to choose from. Factories
could only be built in places with rivers nearby. Raw materials would be
harder to get. Finished goods would be harder to deliver. And the
automobile industry would not exist at all.