David Wong Quotes

I love driving. I still drive a 1993 Toyota Camry. I do want to get an electric car, but it's less of a carbon footprint if you keep your old, fuel-efficient car on the road than if you say 'build me a whole new car.'

If you had a carbon tax, you'd have less cars and more bicycles, more people getting around on foot and by public transport.

With all the hybrid stuff and things like that, I think that's a fabulous direction to go with cars in that sense. As someone who grew up around muscle cars, I'll never not be able to not love a muscle car. Not that I don't care about the environment, that's not it. But I adore muscle cars.

The coal mining industry is very destructive and it doesn't have to be.

My goal is to leave this planet with the biggest carbon footprint I can possibly leave.

Contrary to what you might think, China's economy is relatively less efficient, and more polluting, than those of rich countries.

People don't want to give up their SUVs. They don't want to turn the thermostat down in the winter and up in the summer.

China leads the world in energy consumption, carbon emissions, and the release of major air and water pollutants, and the environmental impact is felt both regionally and globally.

The products built in the factories of G.M., Ford and Chrysler are some of the greatest weapons of mass destruction responsible for global warming and the melting of our polar icecaps.

What makes tar sands particularly odious is that the energy you get out in the end, per unit carbon dioxide, is poor. It's equivalent to burning coal in your automobile.

If you tell people, 'that old banger of yours, we're going to tax the hell out of it,' they'll rightly tell you to get lost. But if you tell people that when they next buy a car, the tax will be adjusted so that the cleanest ones will cost less and the polluting ones will cost more, most people would say 'fair enough.'

Carpooling is important for urban density, air pollution and other reasons, but carpooling is not the kind of thing that actually changes the energy equation.

There is no reason why, with the huge potential for market out there in the world for fuel-efficient vehicles, we can't be the cutting edge for change.

The environmental effects of the automobile are well known: motor vehicles cause, for example, as much as 75 percent of the noise and 80 percent of the air pollution in our cities, and the industry must face mounting pressure from environmentalists.

War contributes greatly to global warming, which shouldn't surprise us. All those bombs going off, all those rockets, all those planes and helicopters. All that fuel of various kinds being used. It pollutes the air and water of this very fragile and interconnected planet.

The European auto industry made a commitment to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by an average of 140 grams per kilometer. But then there was a significant change in what customers wanted in their vehicles.

We need to stop flying, stop driving cars and jetting around on marine recreational vehicles.

The bulldozer and not the atomic bomb may turn out to be the most destructive invention of the 20th century

Automobile efficiency is the ballgame of energy security of the country.

What is truly frightening is that, despite our knowledge, we continue to subsidize activities without regard to their environmental—and economic—impact.

The oil market is the biggest failure of the free market because it did not take into account the environmental damage.

Environmentally friendly cars will soon cease to be an option...they will become a necessity.

You cannot affirm the power plant and condemn the smokestack, or affirm the smoke and condemn the cough.

As a native Oklahoman, I'm dismayed by what fossil fuel pollution has done to the Sooner State.

Markets are lethal, if only because of ignoring externalities, the impacts of their transactions on the environment.