Raise the Hammer
Winter idling is bad for the environment and is even bad for your car.
By Thom Oommen
Published February 09, 2007
Winter has finally arrived despite our best efforts, willing or otherwise, to contribute to climate change (and I was just getting used to riding my bike in relative comfort during winter.) I suppose it's a good sign that we can still rely on some things in life.
One of the things I used to count on in winter as a boy was my father's morning ritual. No not shaving or showering, but just as common: winter idling. You see, if my dad's car didn't have a good twenty minutes of idling in the morning, the engine would stall as he drove along to work.
During the 1980s and earlier, winter idling was a necessity if one chose to drive. I wasn't alone; we all witnessed this parental behaviour every day the temperature dropped below zero. These memories stick with you and inform your choices later in life.
Unfortunately, today people still behave like it's the 1980s (in more ways than one). The myth of "essential" winter idling remains very powerful for many drivers. Since 1990, though, advances in technology have negated any technical need to idle in winter.
When was the last time you or someone you know stalled their car? It doesn't happen any more, thanks to fuel injection and computerized engines. The average car today has more processing power than the Apollo 11 spacecraft that landed humans on the moon.
Natural Resources Canada recommends a maximum of 30 seconds of idling in winter, to get fluids moving, followed by consistent and steady driving; if you gun it you're more likely to stall.
For one thing, idling doesn't actually get all a vehicle's parts moving. Only driving does that: a vehicle is more than an engine. Even worse, excessive idling can corrode exhaust systems and foul spark plugs, which leads to decreased fuel efficiency. Nobody enjoys a trip to the mechanic for no good reason.
Many people already know that from a technical standpoint, their vehicle doesn't need to idle in winter. The sole reason they idle is to warm the interior.
Is comfort a good justification for fuelling climate change or poor air quality? Do you want to breathe in all that exhaust or have your children do so? What health impacts might this have? I'm still amazed to watch people casually clean the snow off their vehicles in a cloud of chemicals in the morning.
A car is not a coat. If the steering wheel is cold, get some driving gloves. If you're cold when you get in, please ponder what you're wearing. Maybe that light jacket isn't enough - think about a thick coat, toque and scarf instead.
I assure you that well-dressed kids and even a bundled-up baby can handle a cold car in the morning. When did Canadians get so soft?
With the City of Hamilton seriously pondering an anti-idling by-law, Hamiltonians would be advised to rethink some of the myths of and reasons behind winter idling.
I encourage you, dear reader, to pass on this information to your family and friends. It's the only way this wasteful behaviour will ever be changed.
By Ted Mitchell (registered)
Posted February 13, 2007 16:39:18
If education is the only tool available for reducing idling, it will have minimal effect.
Better are laws prohibiting it, but this will only motivate those who need a small nudge to comply.
Best is a societal push for person-to-person feedback on not idling. People really respond to shame, especially the SUV crowd who have purchased vehicles for nothing other than their curb appeal. Everywhere we see advice to do the opposite - don't encourage road rage for example - well, then the cluster* can continue rationalizing their harmful behaviour.
Also necessary is some limitation on just how much the business world can crap on the environment with impunity. e.g. Why are remote car starters legal? Why is anything that will make a buck somehow glorified as having a uniformly positive impact?
TO have Hamilton saying "please don't idle, it pollutes" while letting any shmuck buy a remote car starter at the local canadian tire, well, try harder next time.
( Permalink )
By Capitalist (anonymous)
Posted February 16, 2007 13:19:40
( Permalink )
By Ted Mitchell (registered)
Posted February 16, 2007 20:05:07
quoting:"Just exactly who is going to be around 24 hours a day to enforce this law?"
My point exactly. How would Capitalist's ego withstand strangers coming up and saying "please don't idle, it's polluting my children's lungs". THat's more effective than the law. More people need to do that. I will.
quoting: "Poor roads result in more pollution than any "idling"."
Wrong. Good roads result in more cars, which produces congestion, and slows more traffic, which equals more pollution. The only solutions are tolls or gas taxes.
( Permalink )
By ohwow (anonymous)
Posted December 25, 2008 15:11:40
( Permalink )
By common sense (anonymous)
Posted December 18, 2009 11:48:39
( Permalink )
Newsfeeds
By Ray (anonymous)
Posted February 12, 2007 20:49:45
( Permalink )