I’ve no idea if Fred Pearce is a Green Loony, or suffers from SFB (shit for brains), but I wonder just what the point of his Guardian article, mocking car maker Lamborghini, under the heading of Greenwash is.
If we accept that cars are one of the great evils of our time, throwing out tons of various pollutants and hastening the end of the world in the great global warmer burn-up, then it makes senses to target car manufacturers and expose the various levels of pollutants their products pile out into the atmosphere. We probably have to accept the same complaint against cows as well, as they pass tons of methane into the atmosphere – yet there are no tables comparing the various breed, or taxes on the farmers that own them.
Does it make sense to single out Lamborginhi?
Perhaps giving someone like Fred Pearce a platform like the Guardian is not really such a good idea, as he can hijack for his own personal agendas, rather than globally relevant matters.
While the volume car makers produce millions of cars globally, and rather than do something that would cut pollution, are propped up by things like government funded car scrappage schemes – paying car owners to scrap a perfectly good old car, and replace it with a shiny new one, thereby keeping car manufacturers in business, while ignoring the environmental insanity that says producing a new car to replace an existing old car also produces more pollution than continuing to run the already manufactured older car – minority specialist manufacturers like Lamborghini (even if grouped together with their peers) only produce a few thousand cars in any given year. Even if their vehicles produced ten times the emissions of an ordinary car, their number (and perhaps more importantly, usage) are simply insufficient to make any other than a negligible contribution to global warming.
In truth, most of these cars spend their lives in garages or museums. Most of the owners bring them out only at weekends and special occasions, even the well-heeled look to the single figure miles-per-gallon figures their expensive toys return. In the past few years, I have seen one Diablo and one Murcielago actually on the road, or parked at a house near me. The only Countach used to sit in a car museum year on year, until it closed a few years ago. Even when they’re on the road, many of these cars only register a few thousand miles in any year, and many cover only a thousand, being sold on after ten years with 10,000 miles or less on their odometers.
I’m not even going to venture far into America, where the multi-millionare celebrity rubbish seems to have a garage with at least 20-30 cars from stables like Lamborghini, Ferrari, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, Aston Martin etc etc. Those cars aren’t going anywhere far or fast – not unless the owner lives in them and drives them 24/7. They probably waste more water as their slaves wash them, and more polloution from the waxes and polishes they use to keep them ready for the media to come and film them, and worship at the altar of their god-like owners.
No, I’m afraid the only reason I can see for Fred Pearce running his story and putting the boot into Lamborghini for daring to announce that it was making a gesture at environmental concerns (and it had to, as its customers and fans would expect it, whether or not it made any real difference – and there is the small matter of the company being owned by the Volkswagen Group, which does make lots of cars, and doesn’t want anything adverse in its catalogue) is that he harbours deep seated feelings of jealousy and resentment of Lamborghini, and has the tool to express that to a wide audinence, in the hope of winning some popularity amongst those with the same problem.
Fred Pearce would do better to just come out and say he disapporves of Lamborgini, call for it (and presumably any other similar make) to be consigned to the nearest scrapyard, and get on with writing the much better, more balanced, and usefull Greenwas articles that I found he had written in the past.
Personal issues should be kept for blogs (yes, like this one), and editors should be more careful with what they allow their contributors to publish.