I'm wondering if you missed my point Ed. I'll use my own situation as an example: We once had a need for a large SUV but now we don't. So we bought a 50 mpg car and replaced a 15 mpg car. It's perfectly comfortable for 4 people. Not everyone can do this, for a variety of reasons, but if everyone who COULD make this kind of change WOULD do it...the difference in consumption nationwide would be massive. COULD/WOULD...that's my point.
IF 4 seats (ok, 5, but 4 comfortably), modest cargo capacity, etc. works for a person and they drive any significant number of miles per year, AND they're ready to buy a new car...THIS is the route that makes the most sense. Don't sell conservation short. It's the only way in Hell for some of us to "Beat the System" at this stage of the game.
As for safety...if I were phobic about safety I wouldn't be flying small aircraft and wouldn't have ridden motorcycles most of my life. Even a small car, with today's safety engineering, is far safer than most automobiles of just a few years ago.
This is a simple equation for me, based solely on dollars and cents: Drive everywhere we want to go for 1/3 the cost in gas. That's it in a nutshell. No rationalizing as to why it's not a good idea, no emotional factors, JUST an economic decision.
I have a great deal of respect for Rush Limbaugh's political insight but the one area he has consistantly played the role of Supreme Moron is his disdain of any mention of resource conservation. Common sense dictates we treat the subject with a balanced approach. The hardliners on both sides have done inestimable damage to this country.
