If GM or Ford could make a hybrid SUV that got 30 MPGs would Greenpeace support and buy the SUV?

Question

Or are they so anti car/suv they do not really care except about their agenda?

Answer 1

The majority of a vehicles environmental impact occurs before it even hits the road. Production is where the resources, materials, and pollution really pile up. Therefore, the larger the vehicle, the larger the impact, regardless of gas mileage.

People aren't anti SUVs. People are against the un-necessary use of SUVs when a smaller car would be more sensible. It's the spirit of wastefulness and callous consumerism that upsets people, not the vehicle itself.

Answer 2

most environmental n***s drive the very vehicles they rail against. why? because they are hypocrites. movie stars rail against suv's but show up to hollywood premiers in stretch limos. they also own suv's, they just dont want you to know it, or they explain it away as they need the extra room, but somehow a family of five only needs a small honda civic. greenpeace doesnt care about what vehicle someone drives, they just want a symbol to rail against. if it wasnt an suv, it would be something else.

Answer 3

My observation is that most of the adherents to the green agenda already drive SUV's. They are probably more upset because you are using too much fuel making it more expensive for them than adherence to any true conservation agenda.

30MPG is actually pretty poor.

Answer 4

probably complain because it didn't get 100 mpg, or make gas as you drove it.

Answer 5

30 mpg? you think that is good??????

you really dont have a clue do you?

most 4x4s here do 25-30 mpg ave.

even my dads 2 litre 2 tonne ford luxury family saloon does 40mpg. 'economy' small cars here (u.k.) do at least 60mpg.

look outside your borders!

Answer 6

SUV's are dangerous to drive, and dangerous for others on the road.   I wouldn't drive one if it were given to me.    My 16 year old truck gets over 30 mpg and can carry objects that can't fit in any suv.