Introduction
Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) became incredibly popular
during the past decade – to the point where even state and
local governments bought or leased SUVs in lieu of regular
passenger cars. This trend continued despite evidence that
SUVs use more fuel and produce more air pollution than cars
and are actually less safe, both for their occupants and
for other cars on the road. SUVs are also more expensive
than most cars, and this fact may have an impact that safety
and environmental arguments do not. Increasingly, cash-strapped
states and cities are rethinking the presence of SUVs in
their fleets.
Consumers are drawn to SUVs because they are under the
impression that they are the safest vehicles on the road.(1)
This could not be further from the truth. Drivers in SUVs
are far less safe than drivers of minivans and midsized
cars, according to a recent study.(2)
Legislators in New York consider SUVs enough of a public
safety threat that their use needs to be limited on certain
roads. AB
9656, introduced in February 2004, promotes the “health,
safety, and welfare of the driving public by establishing
new guidelines for the use of personal-use vehicles with
a gross vehicle weight of at least 6,000 pounds [i.e., SUVs]
on New York state and local roadways and parkways.”
Most SUVs are built on a truck chassis and many weigh over
3 tons, a combination that makes them unable to stop as
quickly as a car and more difficult to maneuver. Due to
their inadequate safety design, SUVs often fail to sufficiently
absorb crash energy or to crumple as they should. They are
also three times as likely as a car to rollover; in fact,
61% of all SUV occupant deaths are attributed to rollovers.(3)
SUVs are also dangerous to occupants of other cars on the
road. In a crash, the high bumper, stiff frame, and steel-panel
construction of SUVs override crash protections of other
vehicles.
Because SUVs are built on truck chassis, they are subject
to less stringent emissions standards than cars. Their lower-than-average
fuel economy combined with a rising market share pushed
the carbon burden share of SUVs from 7% in 1990 to 24% of
the overall new light-duty fleet carbon burden as of 2000.(4)
The Jeep Grand Cherokee, a typical SUV, has a fuel economy
of 20 mpg. The corresponding CO2
emissions rate is 6.2 TCO2/yr (tons
of carbon dioxide emitted per year), 40% higher than the
4.4 TCO2/yr average for passenger
cars.(4) For further data on
vehicle fuel efficiency, consult the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s Green
Vehicle Guide.
The cost of owning an SUV is significantly more than the
cost of owning even a midsized sedan. According to AAA Wisconsin,
it cost $0.517/mile to drive a car in 2003. (AAA’s
cost figures are based on a composite national average of
three domestically built 2003 cars – a subcompact Chevrolet
Cavalier LS, a mid-size Ford Taurus SEL Deluxe, and a full-size
Mercury Grand Marquis LS). The average cost of operating
an SUV in 2003, such as a Chevrolet TrailBlazer, was $0.561/mile.(5)
If both vehicles are driven 12,000 miles a year, the SUV
will cost $528 more to operate.(6)
California has one of the largest government-owned vehicle
fleets in the world – 73,000(7)
– approximately 7% of which are SUVs.(8)
In SB 1170 (2001), California sets the goal of reducing
energy consumption in the state’s vehicle fleet to
10% by 2005. Another bill, SB 552 (2003), establishes guidelines
that will allow California to meet this goal. SB 552 specifies
that all state departments and offices must dispose of non-essential
SUVs; they are also prevented from purchasing non-essential
SUVs in the future.(9)
Massachusetts state offices will be required to follow
guidelines similar to California’s, if SB 373 is enacted.
For more information on how your state can save money and
help the environment at the same time, see SERC’s
Green
Scissors Programs State Activity page.
State Actions
California
SB
1170 (2001) established a state policy goal to reduce
the energy consumption of the state vehicle fleet by 10
percent on, or before, January 1, 2005.
SB
552 (2003) established guidelines for state vehicle
fleets in all offices and departments to meet the energy
consumption goal of SB 1170 (above).
Connecticut
The “environmentally preferable purchases” policy
for state agencies requires that light-duty vehicles, purchased
by the state after September 2001, must achieve, on average,
35 miles per gallon and, after December 2002, 40 miles per
gallon.(10)
Maine
Executive
Order No. 05 (1/7/03) outlines an ambitious program
to green Maine’s state fleet.
Massachusetts
S
373 establishes measures enabling Massachusetts to reduce
its energy consumption 20% by 2012. One section of the bill
mandates the replacement of state vehicles with high-efficiency
vehicles.
New York
A
9656 is a response to the public safety hazards posed
by heavy-duty SUVs to their occupants and to occupants of
other vehicles. The law would restrict SUVs weighing at
least 6000 lbs. from certain state and local roadways and
parkways.
Executive
Order 111 (June 10, 2001) mandates a higher percentage
of alternative fuel purchases for fleets than is required
under EPAct, but permits hybrids.
Municipal Actions
Portland, Oregon
The city set a goal to reduce CO2
emissions for the city as a whole to 20% below 1988 levels,
which was subsequently lowered to 10% in a 2001 report.
Among a host of other strategies, the city plans to purchase
15,000 highly efficient vehicles and 15,000 alternative
fuel vehicles with low CO2 emissions.
Portland maintains that its goals cannot be met through
local legislation and initiative alone, and therefore advocates
an increase in federal car and light-truck fuel efficiency
standards to 45 miles per gallon and 35 miles per gallon,
respectively.(11)
San Francisco, California
The city of San Francisco has thinned and “greened”
their vehicle fleet in recent years. Any new vehicle purchase
must be a clean air vehicle (ZEV, bi-fuel, natural gas,
hybrid), with two exceptions:
(1) If the vehicle needs to be driven long distances;
there isn’t a statewide infrastructure yet to refuel
clean air vehicles and electric vehicles don’t yet
have long-range driving capabilities; and
(2) If it is an emergency response vehicle for personnel
such as police and sheriffs. Currently, there are 650
clean air vehicles in the city’s fleet of 3500. The fleet
has been thinned 15% in recent years, and will be thinned
further in the future. Departments are required to eliminate
non-essential SUVs. The city runs two motor pools and
all employees are encouraged to use public transit.(12)(13)
Seattle, Washington
For Earth Day 2003, the Mayor and Council set a long-term
goal of having a 100% clean and green fleet. For additional
information, see the City of Seattle, Office of Sustainability
and Environment’s story about Seattle’s
Clean and Green Fleet.
Los Angeles, California
The city adopted a goal of increasing fuel economy of fleet
vehicles by 25%, between 2001 and 2010. The significance
of this undertaking is, perhaps, enhanced by the fact that
Los Angeles’ fleet is larger than those of all but
three states.(14)
Fairfax County, Virginia
The county has a policy restricting SUV purchases.(15)(16)
Press Clips
News Articles
Press Releases
Reports
- Prepared by Kevin Walthers, Utah State Legislature,
Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst. “Update
on Fleet Issues.” (13 November 2001)
Links
|
