There’s all kinds of controversy over what makes a car “green” and what doesn’t. Some point to size and efficiency, crucifying Hummers and full-size trucks as criminals against the planet. Others point to lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions, battery-component mining pollution and other less-obvious measures to excoriate hybrids. In any case, TTAC’s scientific department isn’t well-funded enough to issue a comprehensive report on the subject. Forbes may not have tested cars itself, or dug into true “dust-to-dust” footprints, but it’s gone ahead and published a list of “America’s Dirtiest Vehicles” anyway. Let’s take a look, shall we?
Categories:


Recent Comments
Jellodyne - I had the same experience with English in Texas.
carguy - That was in an era when cars weighed a lot less. The 4,000+ lbs cars of today need significantly more power to provide the effortless propulsion that is...
danio3834 - “The overall feeling from the passenger seat was not one of jerky, violent motion like I had imagined when I had first seen the photos in Kazu’s magazines but was instead...
carguy - Even more reasons not to do it.
Scoutdude - It was after the 2005 Mustang since Mullaly took over in late 2006. I’m not sure where the PAG divestiture lies in the bring back the Taurus name,...
Power6 - You are writing the new history, Bertel, Wikipedia is already updated with your findings…
55_wrench - My boss had one for a light delivery vehicle in ’82, and it was a blast to drive. Free revving, great acceleration (have to remember the...
gslippy - Growing pains? Fisker essentially repackaged the Volt drivetrain in a vehicle that is less reliable (how many fires and breakdowns?), more...
danio3834 - ” I still can’t look at one without being reminded of RoboCop.” Yes! These have 6000 SUX written all over them. A British tradition?
bball40dtw - Well then Scottdude, everything just got ruined. I like your alternative Ford product line better than the current. So this prior to Mullaly selling all...