WSJ Blogs

Real-time commentary and analysis from The Wall Street Journal
Environmental Capital


Cash-for-clunkers really can’t catch a break.

While the economic stimulus part of the program means that many auto dealerships are fronting hundreds of thousands of dollars while awaiting payment from the government, new studies paint the program’s environmental creds in even darker light.

Christopher Knittel, a professor at the University of California-Davis—the university that does much of the ground-breaking work on U.S. transportation policy—did some “back of the envelope” calculations of the environmental cost of cash-for-clunkers. It ain’t pretty.

In a nutshell, getting older cars off the road and substituting them with more fuel-efficient models appears to cost about $365 for each ton of carbon-dioxide emissions that are saved. Granted, if that clunker had stayed on the road pumping out noxious fumes for another five years, that cost comes down to a miserly $333 a ton. If it only had three years left anyway, then the cost is a princely $556 a ton.

Remember, the government estimates of the cost of carbon emissions under the Waxman-Markey bill are in the neighborhood of $28 a ton. So, Mr. Knittel asks, could the program ever actually be cost-effective, environmentally-speaking? Sure—if all the clunkers had stayed on the road, racking up mileage and emissions year after year for 60 years each, then it actually makes sense.

And these estimates assume that drivers giddy with new-car smell won’t actually put more miles on their new, more fuel-efficient (and more comfortable) cars. In that case, things get even worse.

“The estimates suggest that the program is an expensive way to reduce greenhouse gases,” the report drily concludes.

Add a Comment


Comments (5 of 15)

View all Comments »
    • I'm as leery of the federal cash for clunkers program as anyone. But let's not overlook the other benefits -- helping families get out of upside down car loans and fuel costs they can't afford, and helping auto companies and banks out of their crisis. In this light it may be better than simply handing money to the latter. But where is the simple math that would show if any of this is true? Unfortunately people like Mr. Knittel are never around beforehand, doing their math and getting it into the public discussion.

    • 'Just another fine example of Gov't inefficiency. If our elected officials had a collective brain they'd be dangerous.

      Another problem with this Clunker program is that it encourages binge buying at a very stressful time in our economic history. Our Gov't seems addicted to gimmics, stimulus, and give-a-ways and they haven't learned their lesson from the recent mortgage bubble. What happens next fall when the days are getting shorter and it's gray, cold and cloudy and we get the price tag for this shop-a-thon? What will the Gov come up with then? Oh! I know.... Free health care for all. They've wrecked everything else they've messed with, why not wreck our health care system? Idiots!

    • C4C was never reallly about environmental concerns - it was a payback to the auto unions for supporting the Obama campaign, by keep the auto cos. afloat a while longer.

    • The environmental movement used to rail against profligate consumption and waste...the "throw away" society. Now, some environmentalists support profligate consumption and waste (throwing away the largest object a consumer can throw away) as long as it is done in the name of carbon reductions.

      "Cash for Clunkers" is a shameful waste... destroying productive assets. "Clunkers" is a terrible misnomer, hiding for the most part a perfectly good fleet of used cars. Putting EnviroGlow glossy lipstick on this Clunker pig is shameful.

      Scrapping cars years before the end of their useful life is the height of profligate and wasteful consumption. The thousands of pounds of energy-intensive, highly-processed materials and advanced engineering equipment in cars is an enormous investment based on massive inputs of energy, mining, water, labor and materials. It makes no energy, environmental or economic sense to destroy the car engines and render the investment useless years before the end of their useful life. "Cash for Clunkers" is a net waste of the environment, including energy resources. "Cash for Clunkers" is an environmental disaster.

      By disabling the engines and scrapping perfectly good used cars, the "Cash for Clunkers" program is hurting the used cars dealers and the poor and moderate income folks who can only afford used cars. The "Cash for Clunkers" is largely benefitting the haves and hurting the have-nots.


    • When all the smoke clears and the data is analyzed you will find that half the vehicles purchased are gas guzzling trucks. You can even get $3,500 for a superduty truck under the guidelines. The ones with 4 rear tires.

      BTW that new car smell? That is toxic VOC's you are inhaling there.

About Environmental Capital


    • Environmental Capital on Twitter
    • Environmental Capital on Facebook