Living Car Free - Turn off, Tune In, Drop out of the Petrol Cycle

The old lady crashed up our Elantra. I have been trying to decide what car, if any, to get her. I shied away from going car free at first do to a feeling that it might not work out. What if it turns out we spend more on car rentals and taxi service than we did on cars? What if CK doesn't like it, what if I find out I need a car too often? How will I get my bubble tea from the other side of the west hills? So I spent a couple days shopping for cars, which I hate more than anything. I hate car salesmen, dealerships, dealing with the goverment to register a new car, dealing with insurance agents to insure them. It's all a giant expensive hassle.
Then I had a mini-epiphany. We are already car free. I don't own a personal automobile right now. If I find out I need a car then I'll go through the hassle of getting one. Until then I'll see if I can handle life without one. What I'm saying is I don't need to be in a rush to get a car.

Mmm. Bubble tea...

I love epiphanies! My theory is that they are ideas that were well thought out in the unconscious mind, that suddenly come to light. It'll probably work out great for you.

BTW, I don't think we have bubble tea around here, but we do have tapioca puddin' that's pretty good.

It's a west coast thing. I first saw it in LA, thought it would be nasty. I tried some and now can't get through my week without it.

That was actually how "car free" started for me when I was 16. Now, almost 13+1/2 years later, I'm still there. :)

It's a west coast thing.
Not really, they have it in St Louis, and apparently there's something similar here in Colorado that's called bobas.

Granted I only tried one once, but I wasn't that impressed. Then again, it was at a mall, so maybe the quality wasn't so great.

But back on topic, that's great! I'm in a similar situation - didn't wreck my car, but quit using it for a couple of different reasons, and realized that I don't really need it. I'm now debating whether to sell it. I think I will.

That's another thing. I grew up in Chicago, our family didn't have a car. I moved to AL at 16 to go to school, were I think Ken Kifer was the only person in the state without a car. I then joined the Navy, where I bought a car almost as soon as I got out of boot. I couldn't even afford gas after making the payment and insurance, and I shudder to think of all the time I've spent cursing the car repair gods in the last decade. It seems I got unneccesarily caught up in America's car culture after being raised car free.

I never really got bubble tea. I mean, it's fun, I guess, but is it really worth a second or third try?

A West coast thing huh? Maybe that's why I'm starting to see as many Bubble Tea stands as Starbucks here in Western Washington. I'll have to try it, any suggestions on flavors?

As for the car thing, good job! Despite the hassle, it would be much easier doing what you're doing now than to buy the car, decide you don't need it, than end up selling it should you decide to go car-free. Besides, you can use that extra money to buy LOTS of bubble tea, and even more cause you'll need the energy to ride those hills!

A West coast thing huh? Maybe that's why I'm starting to see as many Bubble Tea stands as Starbucks here in Western Washington. I'll have to try it, any suggestions on flavors?

Honeydew seems to be extremely popular, and is my personal favorite.

That rocks. I often wonder what I would do if a similar thing happened to me. I loathe dealing with car salesmen and all the trappings associated with owning a motorized vehicle. I purchased a new bike trailer in September (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=167119 (http://)), and I love it. I can haul groceries, equipment, tools, my art supplies, everything with it. The only problem is that I live in Iowa, where it gets profanity-inducing cold in the winter, and there are some days where I frankly don't feel like riding. However, if I suddenly had no car the decision would already be made for me, wouldn't it? Looks like I need to take that leap myself.

The old lady crashed up our Elantra. I have been trying to decide what car, if any, to get her. I shied away from going car free at first do to a feeling that it might not work out. What if it turns out we spend more on car rentals and taxi service than we did on cars? What if CK doesn't like it, what if I find out I need a car too often? How will I get my bubble tea from the other side of the west hills? So I spent a couple days shopping for cars, which I hate more than anything. I hate car salesmen, dealerships, dealing with the goverment to register a new car, dealing with insurance agents to insure them. It's all a giant expensive hassle.
Then I had a mini-epiphany. We are already car free. I don't own a personal automobile right now. If I find out I need a car then I'll go through the hassle of getting one. Until then I'll see if I can handle life without one. What I'm saying is I don't need to be in a rush to get a car.

congrats - let us know how it goes!! no shame in renting a car from time to time. if you do need a car for life's duties, schedule your "big" things: home depot, sam's club, ski day, etc. all in a weekend, or 2-3 days.

i bike during the day, evening, usually cab or bus (or bike) for social things at night.

find a local budget or enterprise near your house and set up an account. usually it's only $25 - $30 a day, and sometimes weekly rate incentives too.

i've already made the decision i'll never BUY a car again. should i have a temporary job or free lance where a car is a must. i'll just rent for that time. renting an economy car may be $500 a month, but for most people they spend that in car payments, insurance, registration, etc. and i can give back the rental car anytime.

make sure you're somehow insured, via credit card, or their insurance tho.

My epiphany was simply that my car was sitting in the back yard, being driven maybe once a month, yet I was paying insurance on it, and it still required maintenance (oil changes and brake work from rusting). Then I thought about the registration being due at the end of the year, and I says to myself "This is crazy!" So it's gone. Probably I would have done it sooner if it hadn't at least been paid off.

Personally, I don't care for bubble tea, but tapioca pudding rocks! :D

please enlighten me.....bubble tea??

If I find out I need a car then I'll go through the hassle of getting one. Until then I'll see if I can handle life without one.

Try a car-sharing service for the occasional times you simply must have 4 wheels!

http://www.flexcar.com/portland/default.asp

Is the bubble tea you speak of large tapioca balls in various "shakes"? they have them _only_ in Chinatown in Philly.....pretty good...I like the banana or mango. It's like a onnce ina while treat for myself

Bubble Tea is almost as good as being car free :D :D

please enlighten me.....bubble tea??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_tea

Car sharing seems to bee much too expensive, but the enterprise is right up the street. I Have a feeling that going car free is more a mental hurdle than anything else. All the problems are solvable, if one is willing to give it a go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_tea

Car sharing seems to bee much too expensive, but the enterprise is right up the street. I Have a feeling that going car free is more a mental hurdle than anything else. All the problems are solvable, if one is willing to give it a go.
I have a question. Is the "problem" owning a motor vehicle or using one at all? In other words, are miles run up on a rental or borrowed car somehow better than if done with a motor vehicle the cyclist owns and uses when necessary?

Most of these various threads on this forum give me the impression that "car-free" for most posters means car-ownership-free. The economic advantages of not owning (and renting/borrowing) can be demonstrated in some cases, especially for those living a very simple lifestyle in a location with good public transportation to every worthwhile destination.

Besides this economic advantage (in some cases) what other positive points are assumed to be earned/gained for the ownership free?

Car sharing seems to bee much too expensive, but the enterprise is right up the street.

If you're mistakenly comparing car-sharing as a one-for-one replacement to how most people use a private automobile (e.g., drive it to work, let it sit 8 hours, drive it home, let it sit overnight -next day do it all over again) then, no, it is not cost effective. That is why it is car-sharing. You share the car and you share the expenses!

Car-sharing is meant to be one part of an alternative transportion solution to the idea of 1 driver = 1 car.

A starting point to using car-sharing is to find a way for you to commute to/from work other than driving alone. Maybe it is car pooling, using public transportation, or even, dare I say, bike commuting. With the primary need to have a car removed lets look at the secondary uses - shopping, visting friends, going out to dinner, etc. How often do you do these activities? Do you always need a car for them? Can they be combined into one trip?

Even if you decided to use a car for most of your travel outside of commuting I can almost guarantee that car-sharing beats car owning. But don't take my word for it - visit your nearby car-sharing company and talk to them.

Why don't you give it a try? It costs nothing/very little to join and if it doesn't work out you can always then replace your car knowing, for you, it is more of a necessity than a luxury. In the meantime think about all the money you are saving by not having a car payment or insurance!!!

...Besides this economic advantage (in some cases) what other positive points are assumed to be earned/gained for the ownership free...
From a practical standpoint there are only varying degrees of car dependence. For some people though, non-ownership of a car is a bright line. When you cross it you send the message "Carfree, and I mean it!"

I was concerned about my young adult children. They had swallowed the consumer lifestyle hook, line & sinker. I felt they were sleepwalking into trouble because their lust for material things wasn't matched by any understanding of what it takes to afford them. I wanted to wake them up.

I have a question. Is the "problem" owning a motor vehicle or using one at all? In other words, are miles run up on a rental or borrowed car somehow better than if done with a motor vehicle the cyclist owns and uses when necessary?

On a mile for mile basis probably not. If your goal is to secure the cheapest personal automobile transportation then buy an inexpensive priced economy car, reasonably maintain it, and drive it into the ground over the next 15 - 20 years.

As I mentioned in my other reply car-sharing is just one component in replacing a personal automobile. In those cities where they exist I think most people will find the following equation true:

cost of car-sharing + public transporation + taxis + etc. < cost of car owning + insurance + parking + maintenance + etc.



Besides this economic advantage (in some cases) what other positive points are assumed to be earned/gained for the ownership free?

You are unaware of the environmental impact millions of cars make? Global warming? How about the geo-political ramifications of oil dependancy? Terrorism funded by petrol dollars? Cardiovascular health and the growing obesity problem?

All of these problems are fueled (hey I made a pun! :D) by overuse of the automobile.

All of these problems are fueled (hey I made a pun! :D) by overuse of the automobile.
How does renting and borrowing a vehicle as needed, instead of owning it, reduce any of these problems one iota?

How does renting and borrowing a vehicle as needed, instead of owning it, reduce any of these problems one iota?

Because you rent the car only occasionally - most of the time you are using other means. Less overall auto usage. Car sharing can be thought of as the crutch to enable people who already have a predilection towards not owning a car, like our friend nateted4, accomplish it.

Because you rent the car only occasionally - most of the time you are using other means. Less overall auto usage.
You happen to have need and usage requirements backwards and transposed. Need/desire determines usage, not ownership. There will be less overall usage when there is less need/desire; Ownership does not determine or create need. Eliminate need through simple living, avoiding family responsibilities, ascetic spiritualism, voluntary deprivation/inconvenience, whatever; there is your reduction in usage. There are no special environmental or moral brownie points just for burning automobile registration papers. And you can stop fooling yourself if you think eliminating ownership of an automobile is "dropping out of the Petrol Cycle."

Huh? You seemed to have lost me somewhere between backwards and transposed. My point to the OP was that the occasional "NEED" of a car does not have to equate to the "OWNERSHIP" of a car. And when we own something (and it is thus more convenient we are going to USE it - perhaps more than we need to).

For example - if I have a 1/2 gallon of ice cream in my fridge I'm going to eat it - every night I am going to eat it. And I really don't need to if you know what I mean ;). But, instead, if I on occasion - say a typical hot muggy DC summer evening - saunter down to the corner ice cream store I'm only going to eat what I really want that moment. End result is less ice cream consumption. Better for me plus I probably will appreaciate that occasional ice cream much more.

I think it is clear that not owning a car (where it can reasonably be done) is a positive economic impact for the individual.

Flexcar (car sharing service) estimates that for every flex car they station in a neighborhood they eliminate 6 - 7 cars. To make the following math easier lets assume it is ony 5 cars. If a city has 1 million drivers each with their own personal transportation device otherwise known as an automobile and Flexcar and other car sharing companies are able to convince 20% to switch to them then that is:

200,000 cars given up - 40,000 shared cars to replace them = 160,000 cars saved. How much oll & gas would these cars have consumed? How much precious urban space would they have occupied? Isn't this enough "environmental brownie points"?

You might argue that the 160,000 cars aren't saved - they just go to someone else. Sure - in the short run that is true. But then those people don't buy new cars. And the people using car sharing never buy a new car either. And just what is the environmental impact of mining the resources, transporting it mills to make the steel, glass, plastic, etc, transporting that to the factories to make the components, transporting the components to the assembly plant, and finally transporting the finished car to the dealer? I'd say for 160,000 cars it has got to be a lot!

t u r n o n , t u n e i n a n d d r o p o u t

Rip Mr Leary....



The Solstice, last April 21st (March 21st--Oracle) a group of us went out in front of the house in Millbrook and we took a sledgehammer and we spent about an hour breaking through the road. And we had this incredible piece of asphalt and rock--about four inches--and then we said: "Hey! Underneath this planet somewhere there's dirt!" It was really magical. And once you get a little piece taken out--it took about an hour to get one little piece--then you just go underneath it and it begins to crumble.

So I think we should start a movement to--one hour a day or one hour a week--take a little chisel and a little hammer and just see some earth come up, and put a little seed there. And then put a little ring--mandalic ring--of something around it.

I can see the highways and I can see the subways and I can see the patios and so forth...Suddenly the highway department comes along, and: "There's a rose growing in the middle of Highway 101!" And then...then...the robot power group will have to send a group of the highway department to kill the rose and put the asphalt down on the gentle, naked skin of the soil.

Now when they do that, we're getting to them. There'll be pictures in the paper. And consciousness is going to change. Because we've got to get to people's consciousness. We've got to let people realize what they're doing to the earth.

The above quote taken from here (http://www.publicappeal.org/library/unicorn/watts/the_houseboat_summit.htm)





But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, all pursuing invariably the same destructive goals, threaten the very fabric of organic life and the serene harmony of the planet, it is the right, it is the organic duty to drop out of such morbid covenants and to evolve new loving social structures.

Such has been the patient sufferance of the freedom-loving peoples of this earth, and such is now the necessity which constrains us to form new systems of government.

The history of the white, menopausal, mendacious men now ruling the planet earth is a history of repeated violation of the harmonious laws of nature, all having the direct object of establishing a tyranny of the materialistic aging over the gentle, the peace-loving, the young, the colored.


Quote taken from this page from 'Declaration of evolution' (http://www.leary.ru/english/works/)


Sorry for interupting this thread but the title caught my attention. Ok, you can tune back in now... :)

And when we own something (and it is thus more convenient we are going to USE it - perhaps more than we need to).
Ah yes, convenience; the old bugaboo of ascetically inclined masochists and moral purists. Just like having a computer, TV, refrigerator, convenience food, or a washing machine; if the allegedly foolhardy wastrels possess such items they might use them in ways that are considered unneeded by "we" of the more pure lifestyle quest.

Sorry for interupting this thread but the title caught my attention. Ok, you can tune back in now... :)
No need to apologize at all; the described outlook/philosophy fits right in.

I agree with you totally.

I agree that bubble tea is a nice treat. I tried it after reading the discussion here.

You happen to have need and usage requirements backwards and transposed. Need/desire determines usage, not ownership. There will be less overall usage when there is less need/desire; Ownership does not determine or create need. Eliminate need through simple living, avoiding family responsibilities, ascetic spiritualism, voluntary deprivation/inconvenience, whatever; there is your reduction in usage. There are no special environmental or moral brownie points just for burning automobile registration papers. And you can stop fooling yourself if you think eliminating ownership of an automobile is "dropping out of the Petrol Cycle."
Actually, although I don't have the figures at hand, I'm quite sure that much of the environmental damage associated with automobiles is caused by their manufacture and eventual disposal, rather than interim use.

I think that almost as much energy is used in smelting the steel, making the tires and other manufacturing processes, as in actually running the damn thing during its useul life. Then, when it eventually dies, you have to bury or burn it; there is another environmental disaster.

One less automobile owned is one less automobile manufactured, and one less scrapped.

Also, privately owned cars are an inefficient use of resources. They are typically used for only a couple hours out of 24, and usually they haul one person on wasteful trips. It seems much more efficient to rent a car for a specific purpose, and then turn it in when you're done.

Furthermore, some of us lack the will power to avoid using the car if we own it. At 5:30 on a chilly morning, some will drive if they possess a car, but would gladly ride if they did not.

I agree now, and have for 35 years, that lack of car ownership doesn't make you petroleum-free. Everyone in our world is dependent on petroleum to the extent that we are destroying our climate, wrecking our economy and fighting a series of destructive wars.

Maybe you don't see oil dependence as a problem. Maybe you see it as a problem but you think it's helpful to insult those who are striving to make themsleves less dependent on oil. Or maybe you don't see carfree living as an intelligent solution to a real problem.

Of course, you never bother to share your ideas in a constructive manner, so I guess we'll never know what you think, or even if you think. We'll only know what you hate, and that seems to be just about everybody and everything.

Of course, you never bother to share your ideas in a constructive manner, so I guess we'll never know what you think, or even if you think. We'll only know what you hate, and that seems to be just about everybody and everything.
Sic 'em, Roody! Ouch! Actually, I think that's a bit harsh - certainly there are some who don't belong in the LCF forum, who just come to troll and never contribute anything useful. (I'll not name names here, I imagine you know who I mean anyway.) ILTB gets a bit snarky in this thread, but he also brought up some good points for discussion.

Speaking of good points,


One less automobile owned is one less automobile manufactured, and one less scrapped.

Also, privately owned cars are an inefficient use of resources. They are typically used for only a couple hours out of 24, and usually they haul one person on wasteful trips. It seems much more efficient to rent a car for a specific purpose, and then turn it in when you're done.

Furthermore, some of us lack the will power to avoid using the car if we own it. At 5:30 on a chilly morning, some will drive if they possess a car, but would gladly ride if they did not.
...here are some more. Count me among those with some lack of willpower. If the van I own was licensed, and I had insurance, I would be tempted to drive at least occasionally, rather than letting it sit in the driveway to rot. The temptation to go ahead and get it legal, despite the high cost and low value, has helped convince me to get rid of it.

And you can stop fooling yourself if you think eliminating ownership of an automobile is "dropping out of the Petrol Cycle."
True enough. The food I eat, the things I buy, the work I do, and the society we have built is based on the consumption of petroleum. As an organism we must consume resources. But as an individual I can make the decision to limit my personal consumption. As a rational being I can decide put my limited personal resources towards things more important than automobiles (like beer).


I agree that bubble tea is a nice treat. I tried it after reading the discussion here.
I've been out of town on buisness, so I haven't been able to get my fix, and I'm begining to get the withdrawl jitters.

Car free living update.
Everything is going fine, but I find myself with a developing list of things I need to go and get:
- Refrigerator
- 1 cubic yard of horse poop
- compost reactor
- lumber for a new desk
- lumber for new vine trellis
- all manner of large yard tool rentals.
This is an incomplete list of just my stuff, the wife has a list as well.
The day to day car free thing is fine, but more often than not I find myself jonesing for a pick up. If I buy a beater ass p/u my liability insurance will be $100/ month. I really don't want the hassle of buying or owning a car, but the need is apparently there. I need some feedback, what to do, what to do?

I was reading through all the posts here as an unregistered user of he bikeforums. This little repartee between Slow Ride and I Like to Bike was interesting enough to make me want to join the forum. So thanks you 2 for bringing me into this thing... hehe

As to what you're both saying, my opinion is that I Like to Bike - you're full of baloney! Slow Ride makes excellent logical points about the increased usage of items that happen to be in our ready grasp... You seem to be the one who has retreated into a pious holier than thou mentality with this quote

Ah yes, convenience; the old bugaboo of ascetically inclined masochists and moral purists. Just like having a computer, TV, refrigerator, convenience food, or a washing machine; if the allegedly foolhardy wastrels possess such items they might use them in ways that are considered unneeded by "we" of the more pure lifestyle quest..

If you want to be offended by what I'm saying that's your choice! Some of us are trying to reduce our wasteful usage levels, and it is NOT remotely because we derive any kind of "holier than thou" pleasure from it... it's rather beacuse we're trying to make a positive change in the world through personal action.

-onegoodmelon.

Car free living update.
Everything is going fine, but I find myself with a developing list of things I need to go and get:
- Refrigerator
- 1 cubic yard of horse poop
- compost reactor
- lumber for a new desk
- lumber for new vine trellis
- all manner of large yard tool rentals.
This is an incomplete list of just my stuff, the wife has a list as well.
The day to day car free thing is fine, but more often than not I find myself jonesing for a pick up. If I buy a beater ass p/u my liability insurance will be $100/ month. I really don't want the hassle of buying or owning a car, but the need is apparently there. I need some feedback, what to do, what to do?

Unless i'm terribly mistaken, there are car-share organizations in Portland, and rental car places all over the area. Does your car-share have pickups? The one in Philadelphia does.

I do a lot with a $100 a month budget for car-share/car-rental. (My partner and I spend something like $100 a month on her car instead, though.)

You can rent trucks (pick-ups or otherwise). Make a few calls to local rental agencies

You can rent trucks (pick-ups or otherwise). Make a few calls to local rental agencies
That is what I did, I decided to rent one. I handled what needed to get done in one day. It was a busy day, but it I handled all of my errands, including:
-new video game room futon
-new beer fridge
-2 cubic yards of horse poop and a new compost bin.

That is what I did, I decided to rent one. I handled what needed to get done in one day. It was a busy day, but it I handled all of my errands, including:
-new video game room futon
-new beer fridge
-2 cubic yards of horse poop and a new compost bin.
Even if I owned a truck, I would probably use somebody else's for hauling horse poop! :)

i wish an old lady would smash up OUR elantra!!
i want to get rid of the car, but my partner would never go for it... :(

i wish an old lady would smash up OUR elantra!!
i want to get rid of the car, but my partner would never go for it... :(
You missed the politically incorrect point. It was his own "old lady" who smashed up their own car.

You happen to have need and usage requirements backwards and transposed. Need/desire determines usage, not ownership. There will be less overall usage when there is less need/desire; Ownership does not determine or create need. Eliminate need through simple living, avoiding family responsibilities, ascetic spiritualism, voluntary deprivation/inconvenience, whatever; there is your reduction in usage. There are no special environmental or moral brownie points just for burning automobile registration papers. And you can stop fooling yourself if you think eliminating ownership of an automobile is "dropping out of the Petrol Cycle."
I don't know "I", if you were trying to reduce your beer consumption would you be sure to keep a dozen beer in the fridge all the time, or would you just buy one once in a while?

oooooh! well in that case, i'd like to get rid of the car but my old lady would never go for it!

I don't know "I", if you were trying to reduce your beer consumption would you be sure to keep a dozen beer in the fridge all the time, or would you just buy one once in a while?
Would you consider mooching beer from your neighbors whenever you got thirsty more moral than keeping a dozen beers in your refrigerator to cover the same need to quench your thirst on occasion? Or perhaps buying beer by the piece (at a bar for 10 times the price per drink) is a real solution to cutting down "unnecessary" consumption? Do you think ownership of the beer, rather than total consumption is the "problem?"

Would you consider mooching beer from your neighbors whenever you got thirsty more moral than keeping a dozen beers in your refrigerator to cover the same need to quench your thirst on occasion? Or perhaps buying beer by the piece (at a bar for 10 times the price per drink) is a real solution to cutting down "unnecessary" consumption? Do you think ownership of the beer, rather than total consumption is the "problem?"
The beer analogy has probably outlived its usefulness. Back to cars.

A car is a ton of raw materials removed from the earth and fashioned, with the use of much energy and the side production of much pollution, into a vehicle. In a few years, that car will be buried, burned or recycled, again with the use of much more energy and the side production of much more pollution. In the few years of its "life," it will serve one master, as a private car, or many masters, as a rental car. Whether this car serves one master or many, the energy and pollution that accompany its "birth" and "death" will be the SAME. Obviously (to everyone but you), the car that serves many masters, as a rental car, makes more frugal and efficient use of the energy and pollution that enabled its birth and death.


DUH!

DUH!
DUH! is right. Take your silly little parable outside of the friendly confines of the true believers and DUH! is exactly the response you will get - DUH! And it will be aimed at your own cluelessness and inability to recognize that most others don't live in your simplified fantasy world, nor do they want to. And you can smugly feel superior at the dullards (in your opinion) and on higher moral ground too, but you will convince nobody else with gross simplifications and smarmy self righteousness.

The beer analogy has probably outlived its usefulness. Back to cars.


Or if he really needs an analogy outside the realm of transportation, how about the lawn mower analogy. If you've got a yard covered in turf grass then you need to cut it. Whether or not you need a gas powered mower is up for debate. Nonetheless you need to cut it, so you need some type of mower. Now does everyone in the neighborhood NEED to own their own mower? No. Financially as well as environmentally, it makes more sense for a group of neighbors to own one cooperatively and share it. This sort of thing does exist and generally works pretty well. Vehicle sharing (by renting, car-share services, cooperative ownership, even riding public transportation) also makes more environmental and financial sense than everyone needing to own their own. The only reason that you don't see this more often is because government regulations and red tape make it virtually impossible for any group of friends or neighbors to co-own a motorized vehicle.

DUH! is right. Take your silly little parable outside of the friendly confines of the true believers and DUH! is exactly the response you will get - DUH! And it will be aimed at your own cluelessness and inability to recognize that most others don't live in your simplified fantasy world, nor do they want to. And you can smugly feel superior at the dullards (in your opinion) and on higher moral ground too, but you will convince nobody else with gross simplifications and smarmy self righteousness.
Smarmy is a good thing, right?

Or if he really needs an analogy outside the realm of transportation, how about the lawn mower analogy. If you've got a yard covered in turf grass then you need to cut it. Whether or not you need a gas powered mower is up for debate. Nonetheless you need to cut it, so you need some type of mower. Now does everyone in the neighborhood NEED to own their own mower? No. Financially as well as environmentally, it makes more sense for a group of neighbors to own one cooperatively and share it. This sort of thing does exist and generally works pretty well. Vehicle sharing (by renting, car-share services, cooperative ownership, even riding public transportation) also makes more environmental and financial sense than everyone needing to own their own. The only reason that you don't see this more often is because government regulations and red tape make it virtually impossible for any group of friends or neighbors to co-own a motorized vehicle.
You said it a lot nicer than I did. But not as smarmily! :)

I hope Stanley can understand this explanation.