How much will drivers pay for gas-saving cars?

A recent study commissioned by Ford says that 82 percent of Americans would be happy to pay more for cars that save them gas money in the long term, Gordon-Bloomfield writes.

Ford Motor Co./AP/File
In this August 2012 photo released by Ford Motor Co., a brand new car is checked by a worker at a new Ford/CFMA Chongqing Plant after its launching ceremony in Chongqing, China. A new study by Ford found that 95 percent of customers placed a high level of importance on fuel-efficient cars, Gordon-Bloomfield writes.

At the start of September, gas prices hit an all-time Labor Day average high of $3.80 per gallon

So it’s no surprise that a recent study commissioned by Ford says that 82 percent of Americans would be happy to pay a higher sticker price on cars that save them money in the long term. 

The study, carried out by Penn Schoen Berlandalso, asked an undisclosed number of drivers about their opinions on green driving, energy saving, and new car purchases. 

Among its findings, the report concluded that 95 percent of those questioned placed a high level of importance on fuel-efficient cars , while 70 percent of respondents admitted to changing their driving habits recently in order to save fuel.

While only 21 percent of those questioned said they had recently purchased a new car with improved fuel economy, most respondents said that saving money and helping the environment were important factors when making energy-efficient purchases. 

When asked what they would do with a $1,000 discretionary income to spend on energy saving, 25 percent of those questioned said they would invest in a car fitted with hybrid technology. 

As with any survey, without details of sample size, a full-list of questions asked, or further details about when and where it took place, this Ford-sponsored study doesn’t impart as much data as it could. 

Sadly too, the survey doesn’t answer the question we really want to see answered: how much more sticker price will consumers pay in order to get a gas-saving car? 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.