Originally Posted by lurkette

1. We live in a large (2600 sf) house, built in 1890. It's a bear to heat and cool. Environmentally speaking, would we be better off a. staying in the house and attempting to alter its energy use (ideas, anyone? Solar panels?) or b. building an eco-friendly house (e.g., made with natural and/or recycled materials, designed to use very little energy, etc.). We, personally, would be using less energy, but someone would be living in our inefficient old house, so would it really be a net gain, environmentally speaking?

2. We are about to replace our Miata with something that doesn't hurt ratbastid's back. He would like a small SUV (a Toyota Highlander or Rav4, both of which get mileage comparable to a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry), I am having an aneurysm over it Ustwo used to go on and on about why gas mileage is pretty much irrelevant to the environment. I didn't believe him then and I'm not sure I believe it now just because it would soothe my conscience. However, if anybody has any compelling scientific environmental arguments for an against the purchase (or lease, as ratbastid is planning) of these vehicles in favor of something else, I'd like to hear it. Hybrids are not really an option partially because of cost and partially because their actual performance is rather disappointing, as is pointed out in another thread around here.

Thanks!