The Mythology Of The Petrol Car
We live in precarious times, with the consensus of thousands of UN-backed climate scientists pointing to the fact that we now have less than eight years to overcome the issues resulting from our emissions, or face the calamities of climate change.
With more than 25% of global CO2 emissions coming from road vehicles – of which personal transport accounts for the greatest percentage – we must progress towards clean transport solutions powered by electricity from renewable sources.
Yet, adoption has been slow and our collective love for oil-powered vehicles is as strong as ever – with the rise of SUV marketing causing the second largest rise in global carbon dioxide emission over the past decade – contributing considerably more than all aviation, shipping and heavy industry outputs
To discover why we must look back to 1957 and the work of Roland Barthes – specifically his Mythologies – for a better understanding of where we are today, and how we progress towards a greener future.
Understanding our myths
The purpose of Mythologies was to examine modern myths conjured by social values, our human need for story telling – and how these may be manipulated by the growing industry of advertising to repurpose the stories we tell ourselves.
A beautiful example Barthes offers is red wine. It is a celebrated resource in his native France, a national drink, a drink of the common person and the physical embodiment of the blood of Christ. And yet, little attention is given to the negative side effects of this alcohol – instead it is viewed as restorative and refreshing; “in cold weather it is associated with all the myths of becoming warm, and at the height of summer, with all the images of shade, with all things cool and sparkling.”
The same can be said of oil. A substance that takes millions of years, and inconceivable heat and pressure to produce, and yet which is being depleted at a breathless pace. It is so ubiquitous in modern life that we rarely question its origin. Or its effects.
Like smoking, we know that the continued use of ICE cars is bad for our health and the world around us, and yet the logical brain can be overcome with addiction and advertising. But why is this the case?
Filling up with freedom
Car ownership began to explode in the late 1950s as the car culture took hold, in line with the growing concept and counter-culture of the teenager, the stabilisation of politics and economies after the second world war, and the increase of mass production.
By the end of the decade one sixth of the entire American workforce was employed by the industry and a total of 57 million cars were manufactured by the close of 1959.
Since the 1960s, cars have been used to sell sex… and sexism. Advertising is the mythologising of products to hide their inherent harm. Credit: Dodge
The American-birthed mass production of cars had control of the means of production and of consumption. Adverts for 1960s cars scream of “Liberty”, “Freedom”, “Power”, “Excitement” – they align masculinity with car ownership, to the point where the most prestigious class is known as the “Muscle Car”.
An advert for Dodge perfectly encapsulates this: “Mother warned me… that there would be men like you driving cars like that. Do you really think you can get me with that long, low, tough machine you just rolled up in? Ha! If you think a girl with real values is impressed by your air conditioning and stereo… a 400 Magnum, whatever that is, well – it takes more than cushy bucket seats to make me flip. Charger R/T/SE. Sounds like alphabet soup. Frankly, I’m attracted to you because you have a very intelligent face. My name’s Julia.”
The message is clear; own car, own woman, own destiny – empower yourself by buying this car.
During this decade, we see this stereotype further enforced through the growing industry of cinema. Cars become the stars of films, sharing equal billing with our on-screen heroes. Except that we cannot be a Hollywood star, but we can drive the cars they drive – we can be as cool as them.
Try to find a picture of Steve McQueen away a film set without a car or cigarette present. These mythologies are inherent. He is cool. Smoking is cool. Cars are cool. Copy, consume, repeat.
This is not a logical message, but we rarely make logical decisions when faced with advertising that appeals to the unevolved aspects of our brains that deal in danger and pleasure.
Lexus claims that “The safest accidents are the ones that never happen” - causally ignoring the fact that SUVs are almost twice as likely to kill a pedestrian compared to other cars, and that pedestrian deaths from SUVs have risen by 81% in the past decade. Credit: Lexus
Another 1960s advert loudly proclaims “Presenting the unexpected…New Ford Mustang”. One would rather hope that the vehicle they were buying was predictable, reliable… safe. However, these were secondary motifs that only emerged in the late 1980s once buyers were already hooked on the drug of petrol.
As cars evolve, so do their selling points. Sports cars offer power, executive cars offer the freedom from your oppressive job, cool hatchbacks offer freedom from family and responsibility, family cars embody the safety and protection you offer your loved ones.
It is only in the last few years that we have seen this narrative evolve again – to the mythology of hybrids.
The myth of hybrids
When speaking of the mythology of soap-powders and detergents, Barthes writes:
“’Persil whiteness’ for instance, bases its prestige on the evidence of a result; it calls into play vanity, a social concern with appearances, by offering for comparison two objects, one of which is whiter than the other […] Advertisements make him the accomplice of a liberation rather than the mere beneficiary of a result; matter here is endowed with value-bearing states.”
This perfectly encapsulates the growing trend around hybrid adoption.
The prestige is based on this option being “cleaner, greener” than a petrol or diesel car, and plays to your value judgements. The adoption of a hybrid frees you from the care of polluting the world, and makes you feel that you are playing your part in reducing global emissions.
Except that this is not the case.
To return to the issue of smoking once more; driving a hybrid is like smoking at the weekends – you are still doing the same level of damage, just changing the timeline that it takes place across.
Our problem relates to our addiction to oil. Our freedom machine is tethered endlessly to the petrol pump – as is our wallet.
Writing about plastic in Mythologies, Barthes writes:
“More than a substance, plastic is the very idea of its infinite transformation. As its vulgar name indicates, it is ubiquity made visible; moreover, this is the reason why it is a miraculous substance: a miracle is always a sudden conversion of nature.”
The same is true of oil. We just consider the miracle that we pull a pump and petrol emerges to propel us along. We do not consider the inherent processes responsible for consuming and transforming this natural substance on an unimaginable scale. Nor do we conceive of the ecological toll.
VW uses the wind turbines - a universal signifier of sustainability - to promote its hybrid vehicles, which are still primarily dependent on fossil fuels. In this way car companies sell the myth of being ecologically-conscious while actively worsening the Climate Crisis. Credit: VW
So why does it matter what we put in the tank?
This is the question that we must return to. Why does the substance that powers our vehicle matter in the grander scheme of things? Beyond the cost to our wallets, do we choose a petrol car over a diesel car due to the fuel that ends up in the tank? No.
We buy petrol cars, diesel cars, hybrid cars, and SUVs because we are told to. Because we have been inculcated – the process of instilling values by repetition – by petrol and car companies since the time these vehicles were invented.
These are the self-same companies that have been proven to suppressed truths about the impact of petroleum products on the climate, and who have been proven to spread disinformation about clean energy. Hell, they’ve even had an environmental lawyer under house arrest for over a year due to the fact that he won a $9.5 billion legal case against Chevron after they poisoned soil, water and people in Ecuador.
Exxon Mobile is not your friend selling you freedom and power, they are suppressing your right to healthy air, to travel at low cost, to a future for your grandchildren.
And yet, the mere mention of going electric sparks derision and anger amongst the self-proclaimed petrolheads.
Is it that their logical side is not being appealed to?
The myth of modern cars being infinitely more efficient than the ones we drove 10-15 years ago is so close to a bare-faced lie that it is almost scary. Did you know that a combustion engine vehicle converts just 17-21% of what you put into the tank into propulsion? The rest is lost as heat and noise.
The reality that we face is that we have less than 8 years to address the Climate Crisis and avoid the worst-case outcomes. Millions of people will be killed and billions more displaced this century unless we all step up. Credit: Professor Ed Hawkins
An electric vehicle, on the other hand, converts around 59-62% of electrical energy into kinetic energy. It wastes less. And when powered by renewable energy, it costs nothing – no carbon, no emissions, no ethics.
Is it that a so-called ‘petrolhead’s’ sense of excitement is not being appealed to?
Electric cars offer instant torque – meaning power is instant, and they accelerate faster than their oil-based counterparts. Pressing the accelerators instigates a visceral gut-punch that propels the user of even the most mundane electric car in a way that few supercars allow.
So why does it matter what we put in the tank?
In truth, there is no need for a tank at all – but we have been perpetually sold on its necessity.
Awakening to the myth
It is self-evident that myths are the tales of supernatural beings – they are false stories that we tell ourselves for comfort.
There is little consolation left in the petrol car myth today with the weight of collective scientific fact weighing heavy on its shoulders. As Barthes concludes, this “embodies the most contradictory dreams, and mythically reconciles the infinite power of man over nature with the ‘fatality’ of the sacrosanct, which man cannot yet do without”.
We cannot put the genie of the car back in the bottle. The time for that has passed, and with it societal views of public transport, of personal sacrifice, of ecological responsibility. And yet, with the advent of electric cars we have the potential for redemption.
We can re-write our myth. We can tell of a modern Prometheus, who stole renewable power from the fossil fuel gods to set humanity free, so that they may not compromise their modern lifestyles, but instead live more harmoniously with nature in a Golden Age of liberty.
And once we have re-written that myth, we can start to have a sensible and informed conversation about why public transport and active travel are the real path to tackling the Climate Crisis, and how the ever-growing demand for car parking is worsening the Irish housing crisis – but like Heracles, we must focus on killing one Hydra at a time.
What To Read Next
Media Accountability: Cars & Climate Change
It’s time for the media to report on the health & environmental impact of cars, as a leading contributor to climate change
SUVs Are Killing The Planet
SUVs are twice as likely to kill a pedestrian in a collision and are the second largest cause of the global rise in carbon dioxide emission over the past decade
The Problem With PR
We look at the ethics of naming and shaming PR agencies who reinforce greenwashing in Ireland and abroad, and what this means for the climate crisis