We hear a lot about “sustainability” – but everything being done in its name isn’t. The “transition” to electric vehicles, for instance. As Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares admitted openly the other day, there isn’t enough lithium to make enough batteries for enough electric vehicles to replace those that aren’t. Kind of like musical chairs, in that more than just one person will find they haven’t got a place to sit when the music stops.
But then, what is actually meant by “sustainability” is just that. The idea being to assure as many people as possible are left without a place to sit – or a car to drive – and many other things besides, such as heat and food that isn’t bugs. For “sustainability” can be translated as less for most – so that a few have almost all.
You have heard this put more directly by the saggy-faced sourpuss who heads up what is blandly styled the World Economic Forum, as if the latter were a kind of debating society rather than a cabal of power-hungry oligarchs intent upon becoming (per Huxley) World Controllers, on the Mustapha Mond model.
Only not as benevolent.
When these World Controllers use a word, assume it means the opposite of its face value, or some other sinister thing. They know that by manipulating language, they can manipulate thought and thereby manipulate people, especially if people take at face value the meaning of the words these World Controllers use.
“Safe and effective,” for instance.
When most ordinary people hear “sustainability,” in the context of cars, they naturally think of cars that do not consume much energy, either to make or to operate – so as to conserve limited natural resources – and that have a minimal negative impact on the environment. In other words, a very economical and efficient car that, ideally, almost anyone could afford to own because the more people that owned such a car, the more . . . sustainable it would be.
Such cars existed.
Italicized to emphasize that they no longer do. They why we’ll get to. But let’s first dig into the what. Here is just one example.
Until 1997, one could buy an extremely sustainable car – in the form of the Geo Metro. Geo was – for awhile – GM’s sustainable car division. It only sold small, very fuel efficient little cars that almost anyone could afford to buy. Cars like the Metro, which had a starting price back in ’97 of $8,580 – in part because it did not come standard with power windows or locks or AC.
It was also capable of returning 44 miles-per-gallon in city driving and 49 miles per-gallon on the highway; the Xfi version tickled 60. No currently available new car that isn’t a hybrid (like the $22,800 ’23 Toyota Corolla hybrid) can match, let alone surpass this.
The Metro’s superlative fuel efficiency was achieved without the efficiency advantages of an automatic transmission with multiple overdrive gears (or a continuously variable automatic transmission). The Metro came standard with a five speed manual transmission. Its 1.0 liter three cylinder engine wasn’t turbocharged or direct injected.
It wasn’t just extremely fuel-efficient and extremely affordable. It was also extremely simple, which made it . . .very sustainable. Most repairs and maintenance could be performed by the owner rather than the dealer – as is the case with all new cars, due to their complexity and their proprietaryness; the reference here being to the occult (as in, hidden – from you) code and “diagnostic” equipment only the dealer has that one must have in order to service modern cars.
If the clutch ever needed to be replaced, it could be done in the driveway for about $150 in parts and the cost of your labor. If you had to pay to get it done, the cost was still about a third or less the cost of replacing an electronically controlled automatic (or CVT) transmission. It had sealed beam glass headlights that never yellowed and cost about $20 each, if you ever needed a new one. It rode on 13 inch steel wheels shod with skinny tires that used up probably half the rubber/raw materials that goes to waste making a typical modern car’s 17-inch tires – that also cost twice as much to replace.
The little Metro wasn’t fast or sexy but it was just exactly what the World Controllers do not mean when they say they are after “sustainability.” And that is why other very sustainable vehicles, such as the 50-plus miles-per-gallon (and $23k or so to start) diesel-powered small cars VW was selling as recently as seven years ago aren’t sold anymore. It is not because people weren’t buying them. It is because the World Controllers did not want them to be able to buy them.
Because the World Controllers do not want sustainability. They want “sustainability,” which is a thing like “equity.”
And “safe and effective,” too.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.Â
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!Â
Our donate button is here.
 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!
Fuck them all.
Up the bunghole.
With a piece of rusty rebar.
GodDAMN these tyrants!
I’m glad that at least for the time being there are still some options remaining, because I wouldn’t find having to drive a Metro/Prison/whatever any more appealing than what the WEF has planned for us….. (Although I was thinkoing of getting one just to keep in the back of my Excursion as a spare)
I bought a new 1999 Chevrolet badge Metro. Four door automatic with AC.
Great wee car. I think it was $9995, 15,000 after 5 years of payments. Sold it to my cousin to move back to Scotland. When I visited in 2015 it was parked in my uncles yard, no longer used.
My Dad was still driving his 1988 or thereabouts Taurus I gave him when I got the Metro cause I was tired of fixing the damn thing. He always said it was a new car from autozone as we’d replaced every part on it!
One of the more appalling trends over the last 10-15 years is the removal of useful land from the marketplace. Obama and Biden have set aside millions of acres of land in the west. Land that could be used for homesteading and development. Land like Camp Hale-Continental Divide National Monument, which sits between Vail and Aspen Colorado. Not the choicest real estate in Colorado, but affordable housing has become so scarce people (many of whom commute hundreds of miles a week and could use a Geo Metro) aren’t ever going to be able to afford to rent, let alone buy, a home in the area. Not to mention there’s another section of land that’s not attached at all to the Tenth Mtn Division or Camp Hale at all that’s included just because a few well connected people don’t want the former BLM land leased out for gas production. Off limits for eternity with the stroke of a pen.
https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/CH-CD-NM-Factsheet.pdf
The federal government hates the you. The Twitter files proves it.
Hear, hear, as an owner of a 1992 Geo Metro with 289,000 miles I endorse this article. My current Geo is my ninth one, and I hope to get the coveted ‘XFI’ model soon as I like to tinker and do hypermiling tests. I think it would be cool to have a car that can be modified to get over 60 mpg.
Believe it or not, there is a growing group of nerds and engineers who actually like fuel economy over power.
What I want for a car is NOT 200 horsepower and 0-60 in a few seconds, what I want is a simple reliable car, that I can fix in the woods, on the cheap, that gets superior fuel efficiency. The reason for my insanity is simple, I want to spend more time hobnobbing around the redwoods, country fairs, folk festivals, and less time slaving away at a job making 7 years of payments on an overly complicated, overly priced, overly protected – air bagged, ABS computer controlled brake nightmare.
Can I fix a Tesla? Hell no! I doubt if most electrical engineers could fix one. I long for the days of simplicity, like the horse and buggy era. Now that buggy was a simple thing, I actually looked at one at one yesterday in downtown Jacksonville, Oregon. It was simple and effective transportation, it used one horsepower to carry two people and their stuff, like maybe lard, grain, salt, and bacon.
https://image.invaluable.com/housePhotos/NorthAmericanAuctionHouse/61/432261/H5363-L51139718.jpg
Anyone could fix it, the brake was external, you did NOT have to remove the wheel and tire to get to it, it was a friction pad on the outside of the steel rimmed wooden wheel. Little did the people of 1880’s Jacksonville know what that buggy would evolve into – the modern automobile with mechanical horses. (BTW Jacksonville, Oregon prides itself on the restoration of the original gold miner’s era homes. My wife and I go there often to get coffee and walk the narrow streets checking out how people a couple of generations ago lived. So the original homes are just as they were, but the transportation has changed.)
The modern car is a modern marvel, but they have gone to far IMO. Keep it simple stupids. I like to joke, that I will still be driving my Geo while ALL the Teslas are taken to the scrap yard. Think about it, a Tesla is not fixable, it is not economical to replace the 20k+ battery. I see this with those hybrid Prius’s, people loved used Toyota’s but they do not want a 15 year old Toyota with a battery that costs $4,000 to replace. Thus the Prius also have a definitive life span.
What kind of ‘crazy’ person would drive a Geo Metro? Ed Lucero, world record white water kayaker:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Lucero
Crazy kayaker called Ed Lucero; he is the new waterfall record holder (Kayak: Pyranha S6, crazy again!!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u822CADsON4
Yes, you could call Ed ‘crazy’ and he would agree with you. I just happened to know this risk taker and one day out in Hope, Idaho while collecting driftwood for art, I ran into him and he wanted my Geo Metro, as he was planning on leaving on his next big adventure. So I traded his welding outfit for a ’92 4 door. We loaded all his welding gear into my little car, we drove to my cabin, unloaded, then I gave him the signed title and off he went. He sold his welding truck for gas money.
He loved that little Metro, and a year later he was back in town after kayaking from Idaho to New Mexico, he told me it was the greatest car he ever owned – because he could go anywhere on pennies. So the real power of the Geo Metro might be that an adventure seeker could go places without having a dime. And red necks who live way back, who do not have much money, use these little cars to go hunting, like in Montana:
https://i.imgur.com/DhFudf5.jpg
How they got that bull elk on top of that car is beyond me, I have trouble even rolling one over to skin it out.
(BTW the posted useful load GVWR on that metal tag on your car door is based on stopping distance, it is not the limit on the wheel bearings.)
They are true freedom machines. I personally prefer ancient diesels to the buzzy gas engined Metro and Festiva type cars. But they do have a place. And it’s funny how annoying it is to ONLY get 28mpg after owning and driving a freedom machine.
Sustainability equals scarcity.
Scarcity means most with little means will have access to a product, some with large means will have all the access to a product.
When it comes to the tyrants doublespeak, simply replace their “sustainable” with the word “dependence” to get the real meaning. Sustainability is the last thing *they* want, because that conveys independence and liberty; they want dependence which requires reliance upon them and their extrotionist schemes and subsidies and market manipulations, for that is how they control the masses.
My stepson was lucky enough to get ahold of a ’92 Geo Metro. Though, yes, it won’t win too many races, it’s actually a bit quicker than I remember. He was even able to quickly traverse the rugged dirt roads out here. Nice little machine, it is!
Yes, that is another unknown great feature of the Metro, it is excellent on dirt forest roads, it is very light and front wheel drive, narrow in track, and I have taken my on roads of no return. Best of all, while way back in the middle of nowhere, where I have to remove the debris on the road, use my axed to clear downed trees, I know that if I even have an 1/8 of a tank of fuel I can get back to civilization, which is always down hill, in the valleys. With chains on the front tire, it is nearly unstoppable.
Yukon Jack,
It is truly amazing. Never would’ve thought that little car would plow over all those rocks and ruts like that. He was almost outrunning me in my Ranger!
You hear people talk like we never did things more sustainability in the past. When in many cases we did, and now we no longer do. So more “sustainable” in the past.
An example: soda-pop bottles. Into the 1980’s the major (and not so major) soda pop bottlers reused the (glass) bottles. No, they didn’t “recycle” them by making new ones, they washed and reused the same bottles. Many of the bottles lasted decades. I remember looking for old logos on the bottles, and sometimes seeing ones from the 1960’s even in the 1980’s!
Then they stopped doing that seemingly overnight. They switched to those crappy plastic two liter bottles that only can be used once. Some do get recycled, but most don’t. Many become litter along the roads etc. The bottlers accountants outsourced dumping bottles on,,,,,,, nobody,,, making it everybody’s problem. I bet the “savings” were a lot less then was forecast too. They sure didn’t pass on the savings to customers.
There is almost no doubt the old way was better. Yes, there was the cost of collecting the empties, but you picked up bottles along the way as you delivered new soda-pop, so it wasn’t costly in that sense.
There are lots of used bottles lining the highways. Many of them are “trucker bombs” and are a biohazard.
I remember that so well! Even the vending machines had them — smaller ones I think though. Might be in my head (and other peoples’ too) but I could swear it tasted better in glass. Soda cans came out before they switched (to plastic) and it seemed like most people liked the bottles better than cans too — anyone I knew anyway.
And such a deal, glass is made of sand, right? Though they did wash and reuse them as you say they could grind them apart and make more glass out of them, couldn’t they?
The beverage and bottling companies are the ones that elected to switch to plastic and not because of any shortage, any environmental issue, or certainly not because of popular demand! Pretty sure it was for their bottom line — so the executives could still make millions of dollars a year.
And that’s a good example because it isn’t the beverage/bottling companies that are blamed for plastic trash. It’s us common people — the ones that never asked for it and liked the original form just fine.
They put plastic into and around every damn thing. Bottles, bags, sacks inside of boxes, on and on. Then when the geniuses figure out it’s not a good idea, it’s the fault of common people not the corporations that give us no choice.
The same thing is happening now. Only much worse because they blame us for shit that isn’t even real (e.g., climate change). And still forcing us to buy new shit that most people don’t want — would rather have the existing stuff.
Watch, it’ll also be the fault of little people when they discover that EVs are no good. Like we ever got a vote. Fucken sucks.
Another term these “World improvers” have concocted that is actually the OPPOSITE is RENEWABLE ENERGY. There are countless stories out there that this MASSIVE push for “Green energy” (i.e. WIND & SOLAR) will NOT work, but instead KILL people. And there are also stories of whales winding up dead on beaches in parts of oceans where windmills just happened to be installed, but the media either ignores that, or we’re told that the whales “Died from climate change” or “We don’t know why they died, but don’t you dare ask if those huge windmills killed them.”
And if that wasn’t enough, they’ve concocted yet another term that we’ve come to hear ad nauseum at the height of COVID hysteria…..”The Science”, and a certain former public health bureaucrat actually called himself “The Science” in various media interviews. The sad thing is, there were people who’ve come to worship him like he was some GOD OF PUBLIC HEALTH, and people who dissented were HERETICS or even “Science Deniers”.
I’m sure there are other terms that are the OPPOSITE of what people might think.
From ZH yesterday;
82% Of Berlin’s Voters Refused To Support Net Zero 2030.
Hard to believe the greenies let this go to a referendum. They really thought people were on their side, and didn’t prefer to eat, and live indoors with some heat, over ineffectively stopping an ever changing climate from ever changing again.
That’s surprising coming from Germany TBH. Those people are fucken insane when taken collectively. How many times did Merkel get elected?
And coincidentally, I was reading an article from Eugypious on substack today. The Germans have 116 million doses of mRNA poison and are going to receive another 111 million doses. Even at the current lunatic rate of 2000 doses per day (!), it would take them 311 years to use it up. One small problem it will all expire in 18 months.
Time to buy more!
Also, they have amassed a “National Reserve for Health”. No, not for things that actually increase health but (maybe you guessed it) 245 million masks. And those expire by the end of the year!
Actung! Nicht masken haben.
Those fucken lunatics were the driving force behind all of this “sustainable” bullshit. Now, ist nicht so gut, ja?
The “friends of Germany” helped them out of an abundant supply of natural gas. And what do they do about it. Nichts.
I’m sure Greta will figure it out for them.
Nothing is sustainable if nothing is done.
The reindeer herders in Siberia live in teepees, are nomadic, have plenty to eat, don’t have ICE vehicles, no refrigeration, no electricity, and are sustainable. They can’t just sit there and do nothing, that is not sustainable.
No roads and no services means you’re on your own. If you’re a Nenet in Siberia, you’re on the move.
You can go live in the woods, forage for edible plants, find some kind of clothing rather than running around naked, it’ll be a sustainable existence. You build a tree house to get some sleep at night. Might live to the ripe old age of 55, it’ll wane sooner than wax by then. Hope there is a ready and willing woman to help maintain the cave you live in during the winter.
Probably a better way to live than eek out an existence where each day has considerable risk. You’re always chasing away the wolf at the door. What you do has to be sustainable, no other choice.
Joe Biden is the wolf at your door. Fauci is the wolf at your door.
Rochelle is the Jewess wolf at your door. Bourla is the Jew wolf at your door.
Violent trannies get shot in Tennessee. Call it safe and effective treatment.
Everywhere you go, the place is looking unsustainable, somebody has to do something.
Indeed, sitting on your butt drawing stimies is definitely unsustainable.
Here’s a new thought for you. E-fuels (whatever that means).
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/04/stirrings-of-euro-eco-rebellion/
Hi Gwyneth,
I’m working on this; expect an article shortly!
Hi Gwyneth,
Thanks for that link, very encouraging that the Germans are finally (re)growing a spine. Hopefully this spreads to some other countries and they all tell the EU to get stuffed, dissolve the EU and make all those useless bureaucrats in Brussels get real jobs.
Hey Gwyneth,
I’ve been ranting here and elsewhere about the production of hydrocarbon fuels using biomass and the Fischer-Tropsch process for years. What they’re calling “e-fuels” here is just that, save for skipping the biomass and taking the CO2 from the air and hydrogen from other sources (solar-powered electrolysis, for one) for use in the process.
While I’m somewhat skeptical they’ll be able to produce substantial fuel this way, I’m happy that Europeans are finally beginning to rebel against being force-fed electric cars as their only “solution” to environmental problems.
That said, I’ll be happy if these “e-fuels” ARE successful.
I still plan to explore the biomass option, which would be both “sustainable” and “carbon neutral”. Think of how many square miles of California have gone up in an inferno in the last few years. Now think if all of that biomass was converted to gasoline and diesel. How much “carbon neutral” fuel would’ve been produced?
I don’t see solar power even coming close to doing it. But nuclear would (and will) make it entirely viable.
“Because the World Controllers do not want sustainability”
Well of course they do Eric. The question being, exactly what they want to sustain. It appears the answer is their position, wealth, and privilege. In order to describe “sustainability”, one must first define what is to be sustained. And it ain’t private transportation. Or private much of anything. Unless you are in the club.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUaqFzZLxU
It’s a club and I’m ( and most people are ) not in it.
Exactly. Sustainability means keeping their privilege for them – while eliminating ours. John Kerry wants to keep his private jet while confining you to a 15 minute city riding a bus, but only if you are vaxxed (which also means your life span cut short).