“Monster Truck Madness”

Dad left work early on December 5, 2003. The snow had only begun to fall, and a blizzard was predicted. After traveling on the Long Island Expressway, he turned off on exit 35, Shelter Rock Road, en route to our home in Port Washington. His small Mazda RX-8, a new performance car with only rear-wheel drive, began to lose traction and skidded across snow and slush to a stop. When he had regained his composure, dad shifted into first gear and stepped on the gas. Nothing. Again he tried, and again the car didn’t move. The rear tires were in a puddle of slush and muddy snow and they could not gain enough friction to move the vehicle forward. Many people claim that Long Islanders only drive sport utility vehicles because it is trendy and that the poor fuel efficiency is unpatriotic because of environmental factors and the fact that most of the oil for the cars comes from Middle Eastern nations who support terrorism. If my dad had been driving an SUV with four-wheel drive he would not have had this dilemma, so is it fair to say that SUVs are unnecessary and unpatriotic?

            Most arguments against driving SUVs stem from their tendency to get poor gas mileage. One such argument deals with the fact that the money used to pay for gasoline supports Middle Eastern nations; the same nations that support terrorism. If we are so worried about supporting these Middle Eastern economies, then why should we purchase any petroleum products? Are purchasers of Vaseline guilty of supporting the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001? Over the last few years, there have also been many anti-French feelings in the United States, but in this period of “freedom toast” and “freedom fries”, American consumers did not fail to purchase fine French wines. The American people are lucky to be able to enjoy foreign products among their own. And why haven’t any of these anti-terrorist supporters suggested opening some of the domestic oil reserves? Could it be that the claim that gas money supports terrorism is only a last ditch effort for environmentalists to put an end to the driving of oversized vehicles in America?

Another argument involves environmental damage that the emissions from the burning of gasoline does to the ozone layer. The gas guzzlers  may burn more fuel than the newer gas/electric hybrid cars, as well as smaller vehicles, however it has been proven that new SUVs actually are more fuel efficient than older cars. So why aren’t the anti-SUV campaigners also lobbying against older cars? Just as relevant, emissions from cars and light trucks only account for 1.5 percent of all global greenhouse gases annually.[1] Therefore, getting rid of these vehicles will not even drastically effect the environment, which happens to be improving anyway. The environmentalists also often belong to a class of people who are “terrified by other manifestations of the expansive American spirit.”[2] In other words, they do not like what is big, and SUVs belong to this long list. The SUVs, like a 300-pound high school linebacker, are larger than the norm, and therefore feared by some.

This brings us back to the question of why so many of these fanatic American spirits feel so strongly against the driving of sport utility vehicles. One clear point that stands out from all others is that while so many former hippies, now facing a midlife crisis, have decided to protest the over-use of petroleum from the Persian Gulf, few have suggested opening up domestic oil reserves. The use of an Alaska Pipeline, although potentially devastating to the environment, would both bring down the cost of fuel and keep the money within the nation. While I may not be suggesting the opening of the Alaska Pipeline, it is clear that there may be an environmental goal in the heart of the anti-terrorism campaign against the driving of SUVs.

SUVs have many useful and necessary purposes, most of which are not being argued against by the said protesters. However, it appears that the complaints are against the driving of light trucks that has become a trend, for no other purpose than to sit high on the road. As Dave Shiflett states, it is a “blessing of our consumer society” that we may drive the vehicle that we chose to.[3] There are no significant environmental effects due to the driving of SUVs, and until we choose to open domestic oil reserves our need for oil from the Middle East will continue, so long as we continue to drive cars. Sport utility vehicles are not unpatriotic, because contrary to popular belief, their burning of more fuel does not significantly alter the environment, nor does it contribute much more to the economies of these foreign nations than driving a smaller car would.