About 15% of the lifetime energy consumption of a car is in the MANUFACTURE. If OP gets another 5 years out of the beetle, that means 5/35x0.85= 12.14% of the overall lifetime energy is used,less than manufacturing a new beetle.
Used cars,as they age, create a lot of work in maintenance and repairs.
I recommend he keeps driving it.
You and your VW aren’t adding to global warming with this mileage and only driving 2800 miles a year. However, if you have pets, have your veterinarian fit them with catalytic converters.
I love the classic beetle, but you’re essentially driving a lawnmower. Stop worrying or take yourself out of the gene pool. Don’t listen to people on the internet. I note that the answer previous to this one seems to know your yearly mileage, yet your post did not mention it.
The OP did mention (finally) that he drove 2800 miles per year. If the OP would have include the per year figure initally the the thread would have taken a total different direction.
Temper the condemnation as a gross polluter with the miles that you drive if it is a low number.
I am sure when you factor in the pollution it would have caused to make the new cars you would have otherwise owned, it isn’t worth worrying about.
No worse then the old,big motorcycles( let a group of classics pass you,it will make you appreciate pollution controls)-Kevin
Can you expand please? Is 2800 miles per year low?
One other thing - only way for you to affect things would be to scrap, not sell, your bug. I can’t imagine anyone doing that. So, by keeping your bug and keeping it well-tuned you might be doing better than if you sold it, bought a replacement, and had the bug’s new owner take less-than-great care of the bug.
You gotta be putting me on,how long have you been driving? You have to ask if 2800 miles per year is a low figure? something is wrong here.
“normal” miles is in the 12,000-15,000/year range.
At the rate of 2800 miles per year, a further 5 years would amount to only 14,000 miles, equivalent of one year or about 7% of total miles normally put on a vehicle.
Building a new car is 15% of the total energy over the car’s lifetime of at least 15 years. OP’s energy consumption and greenhouse gas footprint for the next 5 years amounts to only 1/15 of the 85%, or about 6%, compared to 15% to build a new car.
Keep driving and enjoy yourself with a clear conscience!
Thanks! Amen!
If that’s the way you feel, may I suggest getting your Superbeetle registered as a Classic Car, and use the insurance savings to buy a Prius?
Seriously, don’t worry about it. I don’t think you’re negligent. If you want to see negligent citizenry, just take a gander at the bozos who made up the whole “global warming” scam - Google “Climategate” for more info.
Apparently not everyone spotted it, but the deal of the cows and the major pollution was started quite a few years ago as an EPA inter-office joke memo, which was intercepted and believed by a gullible journalist who wandered in and saw it. An EPA official spent a lot of time trying to get people to understand it was only a dumb joke, but it had gone down as part of our culture.
I cannot say they do not now have data proving cows really are a major source of pollution. I am only pointing out this started as a joke in EPA.
We have had similar hoaxes over the years. Probably the most famous and stubborn was H.L. Mencken’s bathtub article written during WWI when he got tired of all the bad news from the front and chose to write something silly. So, he wrote that when the first bathtub was installed in the White House, the public was enraged that they were taking off all their clothes to take a bath. That one made the Encyclopedia Britannica and 32 years later, he was still trying to get people to understand it was not true.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_hoax
After the R-12 ozone hoax, and the Global Warming hoax, anything that sounds too much to be true, I assume is another hoax.
The smog controls on cars, one could see the smog in Mexico City or Atlanta or LA. When we are told something is going to destroy us, but the only evidence they have is in a computer program they wrote themselves, and you can’t see it, I do not believe it at all. These people have lost all credibility.
See page 509 and 510 of the Dec. 1899 National Geographic for reports all the glaciers were melting off. Sigh.
R-12 is not a hoax it does destroy ozone and in about 20 years the continued new growth in the ozone should reach normal levels. Ozone loss was not determined by a computer it was done the old fashioned way by measurements from atmospheric balloons. The computers were not good enough in the 80’s to do the chemistry involved. That was really done in labs and through direct testing.
The glaciers melting is also not a hoax, enough ice has melted in the last 14000 years to cause 400ft of sea level rise. This too happened. Global warming is very real over the last 14000 years, its the last 100 that scares everyone, WHY. It was true before napoleon invaded europe. Its tomorrows weather they cant predict.
Smog in LA is much better now, I know because I did air pollution monitoring work running and testing monitoring stations. Mexico city is a lost cause there are no rules there that mean anything. Atlanta has less smog per capita but hey whos measureing, this just means that more cars haven’t made it as bad as it could be.
Oh the topic. The car is fine just keep it tuned up. What I cant belive is that it survived Mass. and Minn. how do you keep warm and the road salt from destroying the car?
The Enviro-Nazis will probably lynch me for saying this, but it’s disgraceful to see that so much pollution propaganda has been shoved down our throats that now a guy with an older car is feeling guilty for driving it. Sunbug, drive your car for another 32 years, and be happy and proud to do so. You are not doing ANYTHING wrong.