The Great Car Reckoning: Why the World's Obsession with Private Vehicles is Driving Us Toward a Cliff
In a world of eight billion people, we've somehow convinced ourselves that the solution to freedom is one billion cars sitting idle for 95% of their existence. While we debate electric versus fossil fuels, we're missing the forest for the trees. The real question isn't how to power our cars: it's whether we need so many of them at all. The answer is transforming cities worldwide, and it's not what the automotive industry wants you to hear.
Every year, the average American spends roughly $9,000 on a car that sits parked 22 hours per day. In Canada, vehicles are used for a mere 380 hours annually out of 8,760 possible hours, a staggering 4% utilisation rate. Yet we've built entire civilisations around this massive inefficiency, dedicating roughly 350 square feet of land per car at both origin and destination.
It is wasteful and it's economically absurd. As one transportation analyst put it: "The car is an incredible consumer of land and the biggest contributor to congestion". We've created a system where the most resource-intensive, rapidly depreciating asset in most households spends nearly all its time doing absolutely nothing.
The Degrowth Alternative: Less is Actually More
Enter the concept of degrowth: not recession or deprivation, but a planned reduction in the material intensity of our lives. Applied to transportation, degrowth challenges the fundamental premise that more cars equal more freedom. Instead, it asks: what if we optimised for access and utility rather than ownership?
The environmental case is stark: Manufacturing a single car requires approximately 39,000 gallons of water, while the automotive sector accounts for 24% of global CO2 emissions. Even if we electrified every vehicle tomorrow, we'd need 60 times current lithium production levels to meet global demand. The physics of planetary boundaries simply don't support a billion-car world.
The degrowth approach offers five key principles for mobility transformation:
1. Reduce material throughput by dramatically cutting the total number of vehicles needed
2. Prioritize access over ownership through sharing and service models
3. Optimize existing infrastructure rather than building more roads
4. Strengthen local communities by reducing travel demand
5. Reconnect with active mobility through walking and cycling infrastructure
Perhaps the most tangible expression of degrowth principles in urban planning is the 15-minute city, where all essential services are accessible within a 15-minute walk or bike ride. Paris has already implemented 50 fifteen-minute neighborhoods, with 94% of residents living within five minutes of a bakery. Barcelona, Milan, and Melbourne are following suit, redesigning urban space around human needs rather than automobile access.
The concept isn't just European fancy: Portland aims for 90% of residents to walk or bike to daily needs by 2030, while Shanghai plans 99% of public services within 15 minutes' walking distance by 2035. These aren't utopian fantasies but practical policy goals with measurable outcomes.
Real-world evidence supports the degrowth vision. Car-sharing reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 10-13% per user, while increasing average vehicle occupancy from 1.9 to 3.9 people per car delivers a 26% emissions reduction. In the Netherlands, car-sharing users increase their use of trains, buses, and bikes by 14.2%, 1.4%, and 1.0% respectively, decreasing transportation emissions by 823 kg CO2 per person annually.
The Carshare Devon scheme demonstrates the scale of potential impact: since 2003, it has reduced miles traveled by 27 million, avoided 6 million tonnes of CO2 emissions, and saved participants £6.9 million in fuel costs. These aren't marginal improvements but represent fundamental shifts in how transportation systems operate.
One of the most compelling aspects of the degrowth mobility vision is that it largely uses infrastructure we already possess. Cars spend 95% of their time parked, occupying roughly 150 square meters of urban land per vehicle when roads and parking are included. Imagine reclaiming even half that space for housing, parks, or community facilities.
European cities are already demonstrating what's possible. Nine European cities have implemented successful car-free zones, from Pontevedra, Spain (where the last traffic death occurred in 2011) to Venice, Italy (Europe's largest pedestrian-only urban space). These aren't museum pieces but thriving communities that prioritize human-scale development over automobile access.
The Economic Logic of Less
The financial case for shared mobility is becoming undeniable. The average market value of a vehicle at purchase is $27,236, but annual payments, insurance, and maintenance add thousands more. Meanwhile, only 21% of households of the car-sharing users in Bremen owned a car whereas 80% of non-user households owned a car. Other strategies such as Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies offer immediate returns on investment. CMAQ program analysis found that while traffic flow improvements cost $42.70 per pound of emissions reduced, rideshare programs achieved the same results for only $10.25 per pound. The most effective TDM programs reduced emissions for just $7.66 per pound.
The Political Challenge
The biggest barrier to degrowth mobility isn't technical but political. Municipal governments depend on parking fees and vehicle taxes for revenue, while automotive industry interests resist reduced vehicle demand. Real estate developers profit from car-oriented sprawl, and cultural attachments to private vehicle ownership run deep.
The question isn't whether we need fewer cars. The question is whether we can transition quickly enough to prevent the worst impacts of climate change while creating more livable, equitable communities.
The evidence is clear: one billion cars for eight billion people isn't sustainable, regardless of how they're powered. The alternative of shared mobility, active transportation, and human-scale communities offers better outcomes for both people and the planet. The technology exists, the economics work, and cities worldwide are proving it's possible. The industrial utopia of universal car ownership is ending. What comes next depends on whether we choose to cling to an inefficient past or embrace a more intelligent future.
The great car reckoning has begun. The only question is which side of history we'll choose to be on.
References:
1. https://www.auto123.com/en/news/angus-reid-survey-car-use-canada/65772/
3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00731-5
4. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/parking-real-estate-uban-planning-1.4221365
5. https://www.thebrainyinsights.com/report/shared-mobility-market-13472
6. https://www.news.market.us/shared-mobility-statistics/
7. https://www.ube.ac.uk/whats-happening/articles/15-minute-city/
9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10962713/
Transit Matters Charlottetown
2wThank you for writing this incisive analysis on the appalling absurdity of the personal automibile!