Some Interesting Information About Cars Carbon Footprint

Governments and concerned citizens are doing every little thing they can to reduce cars' carbon footprint. There's an advantage to it, certainly. However, there is some intriguing information out there about automobiles carbon footprint.

Not too bad to own a vehicle

One of the most common things people look at on the subject of reducing their carbon footprint is their car. A lot of people are working hard to reduce the carbon footprint of civilization.

AutoGuide points out that the carbon footprint of an automobile may not be that bad as shown by a new Zealand study. IT showed that the Toyota Landcruiser with its 4.6-liter V-8 and a full-size SUV has the same carbon footprint as a dog does.

The study, by Robert and Brenda Vale, came to that conclusion by estimating the land usage for producing one year's worth of kibble, figuring the typical pooch consumes 3.17 ounces of meat and 5.5 ounces of grain per sitting. A one-year supply needs 2.07 acres of land to grow. By comparison, the energy generated by driving a Landcruiser 6,200 miles in one year generates 55.1 gigajoules of energy, equivalent to using 1.1 acres of land.

Not the first intriguing find

Even though Vales was not estimating the driving range of a typical person yearly, the fact still remains. Only about 2.2 acres of land would be needed, or 0.05 more than a dog, to drive a car an average 12,400 miles a year, which is probably much more accurate. Still, a dog is cheap, and also you will need carloans to buy a Landcruiser that works for you. You will have to decide for yourself, which makes more sense, or maybe you need to get both.

They likewise found a cat had a carbon footprint roughly equal to a Volkswagen Golf.

Edmunds found, using Environmental Protection Agency testing procedures that a Ford Raptor pickup, with a 411 horsepower, 6.2-liter V-8, emits less carbon dioxide, non-methane hydrocarbons and nitrous oxide, the main emissions looked at in vehicles, than gas-powered leaf blowers.

Comparing the Raptor with a Ryobi leafblower with a four-stroke motor and an Echo leafblower with a two-stroke motor found the truck put out 6.8 times fewer carbon dioxide than the Ryobi four-stroke, as well as 13.5 fewer times the amount of nitrous oxide and 36 times fewer NMHC emissions. The two-stroke was even worse.

Cars not too bad comparatively

The New York Times explained that electric automobiles really have big footprints too. Even though the carbon footprints are not terrible, they are about the same as a normal subcompact. The cars are powered through electricity, and 45 percent of the electricity in the country is generated by coal still. That means some areas are really bad for electricity.

There was a survey in 2011 by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, according to AutoBlog, that showed it costs more emissions to produce electric cars. In fact, it costs 8 percent more carbon dioxide to make a hybrid car in contrast to a normal car. It is 12 percent more if the car is a plug-in hybrid and 23 percent more if the car is a complete electric car. You should not go to Nissan dealers, Everett, Washington to Miami, Florida, looking for electric vehicles to cut back your carbon footprint; you may not really be doing that.