In order to combat the many negative effects of an auto culture (see Problems), you as an individual can and should help. The best thing you can do immediately is use alternative vehicles or public transit whenever possible, and cars that are created with the environment in mind whenever else. You can also take an active role in political action which in many cases is as simple voting.


In big cities with poor public transit, people often think that driving an automobile is the only way to get places. While in cities with expansive sprawl, automobiles are often required for many tasks, most people would be surprised to find out how often they could ride a bike or a small electric scooter. Trips to the post office, or to pick up one or two things from the store don’t usually require driving a car. Not only does riding a bike offer many benefits for the environment and take congestion off the roads, it is also extremely good for you: you’ll find that you’re in a better mood, sleep better, and feel better about what you’re doing for society. It’s a scientific fact that guilt causes stress, so to reduce stress, reduce your feelings of guilt about your vehicle! You can do this by a) remaining ignorant of your automobile’s effects on society, the economy, and the environment; or b) reducing the amount you drive. We suggest you opt for b).

Alternative vehicles you could be riding or using are: bikes, scooters, EVs (electric vehicles), hybrid cars (half EV, half ultra-efficient combustion engine vehicles), solar-powered electric bikes, electric scooters, roller blades, and finally, your feet.


Alternative vehicles are great, but they can be costly (though, nothing compared to the costs of cars, see Problems - Financial) and are not always practical in poor weather (roller blading is no fun in the rain!). In times like these, the need for good public transit is vital. Compared to an automobile-based system, public transit is relatively cheap to develop and maintain, and is a more fair system for transporting people of any income from one part of a city to another.

Many people hear “public transit” and think “infrequent trains” or “noisy Ls”, but these fears are out-of-date. In cities with well-implemented public transit, you can get most anywhere you need to go, and you’ll get there in only a few extra minutes than if you had driven (and at some times of day, much more quickly). Chicago’s L (elevated train) system is very loud, but it is a heavy-rail system. Newer, more recent train systems use a light-rail system which is far quieter and even when elevated is too quiet to hear through a building wall.

Special interest groups who oppose the development of quality public transit frequently dismiss trains as being “financial drains” and “money losers.” If this is true, then so are police and schools. Public transit is a service to citizens just as fire departments are. If anything is a drain, it’s the multi-billion dollar highways and roads. To develop 1 mile of a light-rail train system costs only a fraction of what it costs to develop 1 mile of highway, and the maintenance cost over time is lower still.

Under-funded as it often is, public transit continually beats the odds and the predictions. When rail systems were put in St. Louis, Missouri and Dallas, Texas (rail is the most costly and slowest form of public transit to install) both cities’ results superseded expectations in every aspect. They were built ahead of schedule, for less than budgeted, and had nearly twice as many early adopters as even the most optimistic predictions had hoped for. St. Louis has other rail and bus systems which this new one interfaced with, but in Dallas this was the first rail installment. With Dallas’ severe sprawl problems, the buses are not a very realistic solution (compared to cars), so the adoption of this rail system was important. Luckily, the reaction to DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) Rail was exceptional, despite the limited amount of terrain covered by the new rail system. Many people still opt to commute part way into down town, and take the DART Rail the rest of the way. This saves them money on parking, and frees up time for reading or other activities that can’t be done while trying to navigate through miserable traffic. The success of DART and MetroLink (St. Louis’ light rail system) are sterling examples of how public transit is helping to turn things around in cities that were car-only. By taking these trains, you support additional funding to them, and reduce the pollution you would have created by driving.


Your votes count. Get involved with local community groups such as ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) so you can learn more about local politics and find out who supports things like public transit. Remember the old cliché “Think globally. Act Locally.” Nothing is more true. Your local activities change your city which then lends other cities examples of how things can be. It’s a domino effect and it starts with you, in your city. By becoming active in city government you’ll learn which candidates support public transit and zoning laws that protect natural resources and promote good land use practices such as increasing density.


It is imperative that we, as consumers, put pressure on the world’s major auto makers to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles. How do we prove to the auto makers that we want more low-emission vehicles on the market? By BUYING more fuel-efficient vehicles. Auto makers respond to one thing: sales. They will start making more fuel-efficient vehicles when we start buying more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Just as a frame of reference, here are some current stats on fuel economy in the U.S.: The current fuel economy of vehicles in the U.S. is the lowest its been since 1980. SUVs/light trucks are allowed to average 7 miles to the gallon less than regular cars. The average SUV gets 8-15 miles to the gallon, while the average hybrid car gets 51. And here’s an interesting tidbit: if an SUV is massive enough – if it weighs 8,500 lbs or more, like the Ford Excursion or the new Hummer – it is completely exempt from all fuel economy standards. That’s right, if the vehicle’s inefficient enough, the auto makers don’t have to report its gas mileage to the government. And guess what? An overall increase of just 3 miles per gallon in our automobiles would save the U.S. from having to import ONE MILLION barrels of oil every day (See Solutions – Dependence on Foreign Oil)!

And now, here’s a run-down of what all the major auto makers are doing (or not doing) in the ways of environmental thinking:

BMW:
BMW offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Daimler/Chrysler:
(D/M is also: Mercedes-Benz, Chrysler, Dodge, Sterling, Thomas Built, Mopar, Temic, Smart, Jeep, Freightliner, Setra, American LaFrance, Powertrain, and Plymouth)
Daimler/Chrysler’s environment page has multiple sections covering the basics, recent news, and special reports. They have partnered with Ford and other groups to try and create better, more efficient fuel cell technologies and are developing a zero emissions car.

Ferrari:
Farrari offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Ford:
(Ford is also: Volvo, Mazda, Lincoln, Mercury, Jaguar, and Aston Martin)
Of the American car dealers, Ford has their act together the best, environmentally speaking. Just recently, Ford met with members of the “What Would Jesus Drive?” campaign and promised to boost the overall fuel efficiency of their SUVs by 25% over the next three years, as well as to introduce a hybrid SUV that gets 40 miles to the gallon.

Honda:
(Honda is also: Acura)
Honda has a great overall product emissions record. They are releasing some of the first EV and hybrid cars and have been researching these alternative vehicles for years.

Hyundai:
Hyundai offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

General Motors:
(GM is also: Pontiac, Saturn, Oldsmobile, GMC, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Buick, SAAB, Opel, Vauxhall, and EV1)
GM, as the largest auto maker world wide, is following the lead of other (primarily foreign) manufacturers by introducing new cars that are lower-emission and get better gas mileage. Visit the environment page of GM to see how they plan to help clean up their part of future messes.

Kia:
Kia offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Land Rover:
Land Rover offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Mitsubishi:
Mitsubishi offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Nissan:
Nissan offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Porsche:
Porsche offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Subaru:
Subura have many recycling programs for their waste and have a site about how they help eco causes.

Suzuki:
Suzuki offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

Toyota:
Toyota has an environmental page that lists their news, events, technology, and how they manufacture for a cleaner planet.

Volkswagen:
Volkswagen offers no information that could be found as to their environmental practices.

But the fact of the matter is that the fuel economy of vehicles in the U.S. is the lowest its been since 1980, and there’s something we can do about it. We may not ever be able to stop relying on foreign countries for oil, but we can certainly reduce our dependency. And the best way to do this by buying more fuel efficient cars (an overall increase of just 3 miles per gallon in our automobiles would save us from having to import ONE MILLION barrels of oil every day!).