Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Go Green By Driving It 'Til The Wheels Fall Off
hpmctorque
Member Posts: 4,600
Automobiles affect the environment in many ways. The impact on the environment begin when a vehicle is manufactured (including the production of all the parts and materials that go into the car), and end with its scrappage in a junkyard (which can recycle many parts but also involves the disposal of many wastes).
The environmental impacts begin with mineral extraction and the production of the raw materials that go into the parts of a car. For example, iron ore is converted into steel. Steel can be recycled, of course. On average,
today's automobiles are about 75 percent reyclable, and using recycled steel helps reduce energy use and pollution. Other metal components, such as aluminum and copper are also largely recycled. The lead and acid in batteries are poisonous and dangerous. But batteries can be recycled, if they are returned to a service station, a parts store, or brought to a municipal hazardous waste facility. Plastics, which are mostly made from petroleum, are more difficult to recycle. In any case, some degree of pollution is associated with all of these components, much of it due to the energy consumption, air pollution, and releases of toxic substances that occur when automobiles are manufactured and distributed.
The bottom line is that the motorist who extends the life of his car, through careful maintenance and usage may be doing more to help the environment than the average prius owner, but the former gets much less visibility and recognition for his contribution than the latter.
The purpose of this topic is to have a introduce a forum for discissing the environmental impact associated with vehicle production. While I'm not as knowledgeable as I'd like to be on this subject, for some time now I've thought about the fact that maybe not enough effort has gone into studying the environmental effects of auto manufacturing, compared with the effects of fuel consumption.
The environmental impacts begin with mineral extraction and the production of the raw materials that go into the parts of a car. For example, iron ore is converted into steel. Steel can be recycled, of course. On average,
today's automobiles are about 75 percent reyclable, and using recycled steel helps reduce energy use and pollution. Other metal components, such as aluminum and copper are also largely recycled. The lead and acid in batteries are poisonous and dangerous. But batteries can be recycled, if they are returned to a service station, a parts store, or brought to a municipal hazardous waste facility. Plastics, which are mostly made from petroleum, are more difficult to recycle. In any case, some degree of pollution is associated with all of these components, much of it due to the energy consumption, air pollution, and releases of toxic substances that occur when automobiles are manufactured and distributed.
The bottom line is that the motorist who extends the life of his car, through careful maintenance and usage may be doing more to help the environment than the average prius owner, but the former gets much less visibility and recognition for his contribution than the latter.
The purpose of this topic is to have a introduce a forum for discissing the environmental impact associated with vehicle production. While I'm not as knowledgeable as I'd like to be on this subject, for some time now I've thought about the fact that maybe not enough effort has gone into studying the environmental effects of auto manufacturing, compared with the effects of fuel consumption.
Tagged:
0
Comments
So if your new car uses that much energy before you even drive it off the lot, well, you can see how much good you are doing the environment by just keeping your old car going instead...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Remember it takes more energy to recycle than to use new raw materials. The only advantage is not overloading our landfills with junk cars.
Have you read something specific or are you speculating?
And what if the fully recyclable car will ALSO last 15 years, like your Lexus? I have certainly owned Toyotas and Subarus that old, so it is by no means an unheard-of phenomenon.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You can't say stuff like that without backing it up with facts. Plenty of materials cost less to recycle then they do to make from raw materials. Aluminum and steel are the first two I can think of but there are others.
here is one
and another
one more should I keep going?
Here is one for steel and Aluminum
Now if you want to talk about glass then you are correct. Glass is so easy to make that it doesn't make sense to recycle it except to save landfill space. Unless you reuse glass bottles whole like they do for beer in most of Canada. They return the bottles intact to store which ships them back to the bottler were they are steam cleaned and refilled.
This is kind of a sore point for me because my university discontinued their recycling plan because someone on the board had the same view as you. They convinced enough people that it takes more energy to recycle then it does to make new materials. One of my senior year projects was developing a plan to restart the recycling program and I calculated out how much less energy it takes to recycle various materials compared to making brand new items from raw materials.
I was thinking of all the plastic in new cars. The steel, copper and aluminum are good to recycle. Also the electronics that are not really that practical to recycle. Yet they are the parts that cost a fortune to replace.
I find it counter productive to build cars with recycling rather than longevity in mind. I don't gauge a car by miles driven. I gauge by years of light service.
Even the plastic in most cars can be recycled depending on what kind of plastic it is The glass and upholstery in cars are probably the only things that don't really make sense to recycle.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It still saves the company from using oil to make the seats.
http://www.autonews24h.com/Auto-Industry/Ford-News/1905.html
Old or new, I haven't ever sold or scrapped a car because it needed major repairs, except the very first one I ever had.
I am going to try harder in future...
:-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
1989 Voyager - drove it for a decade. Replaced by a ...
1999 Quest that's doing fine at 120,000 miles although it's overdue for plugs, fluids and hoses.
1997 Outback. Purchased in '03 to replace the void in the garage that the Tercel left (yep, about 8 years in there we did fine sharing one car).
Before '82 we had a couple of beaters that were mostly used up when we got them.
Check out the The Disposable Car? discussion too.
BTW I drive a 7 year old sentra with 95K on it. In the garage is a 73 F250 that my dad bought when I was a kid. I like buying new cars too. But what I really love is finding one I love and making it last. My 87 Mustang GT stayed strong to 147K before temporary insanity made me trade it for a terrible Mitsu 3000. Live an learn.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
1989 saw the unusual Dakota convertible. The first American convertible pickup since the Ford Model T, it featured a fixed roll bar and an uncomplicated manual top. Roughly 2,482 were sold that first year. Another important addition that year was Carroll Shelby's V8-powered Shelby Dakota, his first rear-wheel drive vehicle in two decades.
Wiki
I have worked on two different ones over the years.
Oh, as for driving it till the wheels fall off, I'm sort of at a turning point with my 2000 Intrepid, which is around 137,000 miles. I put it in the shop this evening to have the mechanic check out the front suspension (getting a bit loose) and the a/c (getting a bit weak). If he can find a few thousand $ worth of repairs there, I might just be tempted to bite the bullet and put it out of its misery!
Heck, it'll be EIGHT years on November 6! It's downright scary how fast that time has gone by! And as long as the suspension problems aren't too scary, I'll go ahead and get it fixed, and just drive it until something major fails on it. I figure if the a/c repair is too catastrophic, I can just live without it, as long as the windows still roll down! Nothing worse than having a car with broken power windows AND a busted a/c!
I wonder how we are all defining "til the wheels fall off"...I have had cars whose powertrains were still going strong 15-20 years after they were new, and over 250K miles. Of course, other stuff was beginning to need replacement that wouldn't be considered a maintenance item, like springs and bushings, oil seals that were beginning to leak onto the pavement, stuff like that. To me, this begs two questions:
1. if it is leaking oil and fluids everywhere and perhaps belching smoke into the air, even though it still runs reliably, is it really still the green machine, or should the replacement for it have come earlier? And if so, how do you know when is the right moment to replace an old vehicle, relative to environmental concerns?
2. Presuming it is doing none of that, but instead leaking/burning nothing, getting gas mileage as good as when it was new, and passing every smog check with flying colors (which would still only ensure that it was compliant by decades-old standards, of course), how much is too much to pay for repairs to keep it on the road? I mean, we all know the wheels never REALLY fall off (although I am open to hearing amusing anecdotes of old cars off which the wheels really DID fall!).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
My driver's side window finally failed completely this past spring. The a/c has never worked as long as I've had the truck (since around Sept 2002), but between opening the vent window, rolling down the passenger side window, and opening the sliding rear window, I can usually tolerate the heat. I'm usually never in the thing for more than 10-20 minutes at a time, so it really doesn't bother me. As soon as I get the ambition though, I'm going to fix the power window. Now that cold weather is setting in though (I noticed frost the first time this morning), I can put that little project off for awhile.
andre: how much would you have to spend to repair the Intrepid, seriously, before you would probably just replace it instead?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I was concerned about the belching smoke thing the last time I took my '85 Silverado in for the emissions test. It smokes pretty nicely when it first starts up in the morning, and also under hard acceleration. But it passed its last emissions test with flying colors. So, I'm guessing that the stuff you can't see is worse than the stuff you can!
As for emissions standards, in Maryland at least, they actually tighten them a bit every year. I noticed this in 2002 when I had to take my '79 New Yorker in for its test. I had a 1979 Newport for a couple years, and I had to get it tested in 1997. The standards in 2002 were stricter than they had been in 1997. I got historic tags for it in 2004 though, which exempted it from testing, so I dunno if they got more stringent since then or not.
I had my truck tested in Jan 2005 and Dec 2006. I'll have to dig up the sheets and see if they tightened up the standards any. The Intrepid went on the treadmill back in 2002, but in 2004 and 2006 they just did the quickie OBD-II scan. I do remember the truck passed by a pretty wide margin, despite that grayish smoke it tends to blow.
Welllll, we know what is in the stuff you CAN see: it's either coolant (let's hope not) or more likely burning oil or unburned gas. No matter which of them it is, we know it's not GOOD for the environment, right? But neither are the ones we can't see, and so it's good to know that you are still passing the smog check easily.
That's what I meant by my question: how do we tell when it's doing more harm than good to the environment to keep an old vehicle?
And if we decide the good still outweighs the harm, how much would we spend to keep the beater rolling?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Honestly, I dunno. I have thought about that, but never really came up with an answer. Now if its little 2.7 engine were to blow, I'd drop it like a hot rock. Maybe I'd park it at the mall, then whack it with one of my other cars that could take the hit, claim hit and run, and get it totaled out! :surprise: Nah, seriously, I could never bring myself to do something like that.
If the tranny went out on it, that might be the tipping point. Last time I checked, out of morbid curiousity, the mechanic told me a replacement tranny would be aound $2200. Now if I knew, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that $2200 would get me years of service out of the car, I'd do it. But with my luck, I'd blow that money on a tranny and THEN the engine would go. Or the car would get hit.
I did put about $1050 into the car back in April, but that was for alot of work. New front brake pads (Mopar parts), new hoses, coolant flush, right front bearing hub, transmission cooling lines, and some other stuff I'm probably forgettting. I've been using a rough rule of thmub where if I get a month out of that car for every $300 I sink into it, I'm doing okay.
One thing that makes it such a hard call is how well the Intrepid has held up. I remember my first car, my Mom's 1980 Malibu that she gave me when I got my license in Jan 1987. When that car was 8 years old, its paint was faded, the dash was cracked, the shift indicator was eternally stuck somewhere slightly to the left of park, the headliner was falling down, carpeting pulling loose from the door sill area, etc. And by 1988, a 1980 Malibu was looking pretty ancient. In contrast though, the Intrepid is still nice and shiny, and the only real flaws with the interior are where my dumb-#$# roommate put some cigarette burns when he's borrowed it! :mad: And with all those retro/angular/chiseled trends going on these days, IMO, an Intrepid doesn't look so dated. Not that I'd really care about dated, considering my unhealthy attraction to 70's cars. :P
Would I overhaul the tranny if the car had 250,000 miles? Probably not, but anything <200,000, just to pick a number, I'd probably go for it, assuming I still liked the car.
One thing that would be a "must have" for me is A/C. It's not that I couldn't live without it, but that I wouldn't want to. Of course, you won't need A/C for the next several months, which buys some time.
My 2 cents.
Hmmm, that's a good idea, Lemko, I'll have to remember that suction cup thing! :P When my truck's window was starting to get weak, it would go down with little strain, but would need help getting back up. I had to make sure not to put it all the way down, so I'd have something to grab ahold of to help pull it back up.
In the case of your Park Ave, Lemko, I think the transmissions for those are actually pretty cheap, at least by today's standards. For some reason the figure $1200 is sticking in my mind. So that's not *too* bad. It's when trannies start getting up into the $2-3+K range that I start getting scared.
When repairs are >$200 per month, it's time for that car to go for me. I figure that anything over that amount is just going to lose too much money for me over time. I have only once driven domestic and maybe with cheaper repairs that would be more bearable (the domestic I had was so unreliable that I couldn't trust it to get me to work- now that would be 'expensive').
It sounds like most of you guys have more than one car to depend on. I guess that if you don't have all your eggs in one basket you can take more gambles with one not starting.
That got me thinking, and curious as to how much my Intrepid has cost me since I paid it off. So for kicks, I looked up my records. Looks like I made the last payment in late November, 2004, when the car had around 99,200 miles on it. It's now a bit over 35 months later, and the car has around 137,100 miles on it.
Looks like it's cost me about $2430 since then, plus gas and insurance. Once I factor out registration renewals, emissions tests, oil/filter changes, I figure it's at around $2050. Some of the highlights in there are: new rear brakes, new battery, fix oil pan leak/new drain plug (my fault, I stripped it), "new" wheel/tire/hubcap from junkyard (one wheel got stolen in a parking garage), another new tire (hopped a curb), then two more new tires (finally rounding out the set), a transmission service, and a fairly major repair this past April, which included new front brakes, turning the rotors, new transmissions lines, front bearing hub, new coolant/hoses.
So, I figure that since the car's been paid off, it's cost me about $69 per month. Or ~$59, when I factor out oil changes, emissions tests, registration renewals, etc...stuff any car would need, new or old.
I have a feeling that if I ever did get to the point that the car was averaging $200 per month in repairs, I would dump it. Especially if it started doing stuff like breaking down regularly, leaving me stranded, etc.
Anyway, I guess if I had let that bearing/hub go for too long, I might just have driven that car until the wheels fell off! :surprise: