Climate Change, Talk about the effects of long-term weather changes on the planet, along with the good work being done to counteract this trend.

25974 Followers

Follow Justmeans editorial on:

Share this on:

Torn over Tata

Dane Pflueger | Tuesday 24th March 2009

I'm grappling with some of my feelings about the recent unveiling of the Tata car. "The People's Car" is the world's cheapest and smallest car aimed initially at the Indian market. It is hailed as a pilar of equalityand democracy, paving the road for millions of Indian families to enjoy what was once only an upper class pursuit-"excelling in equity" as Sara rightly says in her blog. The egalitarian inside me is all for it.

But the environmentalist inside me thinks that it's a huge disaster. These accessible cars are likely to give rise to 15 million new car owners in India over the coming years. Already there are 1 million applicants for the 60,000 Tatas that are available this year. Although the car gets 50 miles per gallon, this increase in personal car use will undoubtedly give rise to extraordinary environmental effects. Not only will the smog and congestion increase, but demand for sprawling suburbia will too. In my opinion, the Tata is the second worst disaster since the Model T.

There's an obvious conflict here. How can I believe in equality and also believe that someone enjoying the same freedoms that I've experienced is fundamentally bad? How can I legitimately argue against giving someone the option to drive rather than take a crowded and hot bus when I spent six years of my life driving an SUV?

The most legitimate reason that I can come up with, and its one I feel pretty good about for now, is that I have the right and the duty to teach people what I've learned and to encourage others to learn from my mistakes. We've learned that the Model T, while wildly democratizing, also created incentives to abandon and in some cases destroy public transportation systems, it led to the building of sprawling but ultimately inadequate road systems, and the development of problematic suburbs. All of these I experienced, benefited from, then realized the shortcomings of. None of these do I want to see happen again. And I think I can legitimately explain to any Indian thinking about buying a Tata that they shouldn't let it happen either.

Other Great Categories

Other Climate Change Articles

Climate Change to Increase Ground-Level Ozone, Smog, and Air Pollution

New CSR Report: Doing Climate Change Business Better

Scotland Policy: Going Blue with Wave and Tidal Renewable Energy

Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Cyclones

Should We Switch To Consumption-Based Carbon Dioxide Accounting?

Carlton Jackson 20 May 2009

I am pleased that this subject is getting the attention it deserves. Eating meat, driving cars, or unbridled consumerism... the system is damaged and has been damaged from the start. Martin mentions protectionist regimes but fails to mention the exploitation and brutal death of millions of indigenous tribes in the "amassing" the wealth to launch the industrial revolution.

The solution involves the conscience of each individual and follows a path of Ahimsa. The west could allow the developing countries to grow by sacrificing or giving-up our "god given" rights to eat meat and this simple act would offset much of the problem.

Maybe we should split the days of the week: Monday industrialized countries eat meat but don't drive while developing countries drive but don't eat meat. Alternate with developing countries each day and take Sunday off.

The unity of man is real... it is not an abstract idea.

Martin Smith 20 May 2009

If capitalism is going to work, then it has to work for everyone. On the macro level, it cannot just work for the Western economies that developed under protectionist mercantilist regimes in the 1400s-1700s and subsequently amassed enough wealth and knowledge to open up their economies. On the micro level, solving climate change will directly be related to INCREASING the living standards of the poor in the developing world. That includes the ability to buy a car.

Maybe a better start to combating climate change would be getting the 50% of Americans that are overweight to slim down. That would be my first wedge before depriving Indians of their "god given right to a car" as one American put it 50 years ago.

Dane Pflueger 20 May 2009

Hi Aman & Ankit,

I appreciate both your comments very much. Your views reflect the very moral dilemma I try to convey in the post.

"There's an obvious conflict here. How can I believe in equality and also believe that someone enjoying the same freedoms that I've experienced is fundamentally bad?"

And yes, I understand the hypocrisy of being a former SUV driver and saying that others should not go down the same route. But I do not think that one tragedy is a good reason for two!

I would also argue that easier access to personal or family transportation undermines the development of good public transportation. That is the experience of the West Coast of the United States, and a lesson that I would hope can be learned from. So, while I can only try to imagine the difficulty with public transportation in India, I do feel obligated to suggest that personal transportation gives rise to extraordinary and largely irreversible problems as well.

Regarding lower figures, thats great news!

Aman Bhatia 19 May 2009

http://jm.ly/jtLQhB

Aman Bhatia 19 May 2009

I am sure you had the best intentions when writing this blog, but I must say that it is illogical at best and hypocritical at worst.

Even when public transport in the West is better developed, people are driving SUVs. At the same time, they preach Indians to use the highly underdeveloped public transport system. This is like the nation with the most nuclear weapons asking other countries to sign Disarmament treaties.

Also, your numbers are not correct: For the first batch of 100,000 cars only 200,000 applications have been received, though the company expected that number to be around 500,000.

Ankit Kala 19 May 2009

In developed countries, families have 1 car for each and every member. I see SUVs (and other fuel inefficient cars) being driven with just 1 person inside it. And when a comapny like Tata comes up with this novel project to provide atleast one car for a comfort of a family, you people criticize it. Its just height of hypocricy.

Amy Hall 18 May 2009

Not to mention that, as far as I understand, there are no driving tests in India. Just show up at the dealer, buy the car, and drive it home (ideally without hitting anything).

Great post, Dane. How can a company like Tata, with sufficient resources to do anything it wants on behalf of the Indian people, justify such an environmental travesty? I'm with you on this one.