So instead of a hybrid premium we should all pay a higher premium for some other technology. I think the ex-lax idea would have a better cost benefit outcome...

 

All things come with a price. A carbon fiber bicycle or professional tripod costs a lot more than one made of heavier, less sexy materials. Replace "hybrid" with whatever else a manufacturer would need to do new to bring about the killer fuel economy we all crave, and until that becomes faster/better/cheaper to manufacturer, that too will come with a price premium.

 

Price is closer than you think when you couple in tax credit and fuel savings over a reasonable ownership period (to me, that's at least 6 years, if not more), but if price is the prime mover on a buying decision, I agree, the hybrid's have an uphill battle.

Fuel economy for the money? Heh... I'll stick to real fuel economy since no one's come up with a good formula for "fuel economy per dollar spent on vehicle"
2006 FEH -- 36 MPG city, 31 MPG hwy, 33 MPG combined. Real life? 32+ MPG without trying, city and highway.
Honda CRV -- 23 MPG city, 29 MPG hwy, 25 MPG avg.

I came from a 1992 Toyota Corolla that was still getting 30 MPG when I sold it 5 mos. ago. I had to have a vehicle that got the same or better fuel economy. The fact that I could get a reasonably sized (not behemoth) SUV that did that? So much the better... especially now that I know we have our first child coming along in April 2007!

As for pollution? The Honda CRV will put out 7.3 tons of greenhouses gases a year. The Ford Escape Hybrid? 5.5 tons. Obviously, individual buyers have to decide if that really means much given the costs of either vehicle.

Some people may have buyer's remorse over their hybrid purchase, but that doesn't change the realities of why others purchased their hybrids and continue to enjoy them and be optimistic about hybrid and related cleaner, more fuel efficient technologies for personal and commercial transportation.

Not all of us bought a hybrid just for the fuel savings. One of the major reasons we bought ours was because it pollutes so much less than an ordinary vehicle. Driving in rush hour traffic it's so nice knowing I'm not contributing much to the suffocating, lung-burning nastiness that is floating around behind everyone else's idling vehicle. As a cyclist, I appreciate the few hybrids I encounter from the other end of the tailpipe, for the same reason -- a little breath of fresh air. Smug? No, just a fact. If I were smug, I'd be clenching my teeth every time I went out into our garage because hubby drive's one of the most popular fuel inefficient, polluting vehicles available -- the Ford F-150 Supercrew 4x4. Instead, I enjoy the pickup for what it is -- it gets us and our bikes around and it's paid off, which in real life is all that matters sometimes!

 

To the "must be 3x better" rule, I say bah - all you need is marketing, and you can sell a lesser product. People paid a premium for DVD players and DVDs, so that now instead of getting a little fuzzy like a VHS, the thing would just stop playing, lock up, and send you back to the beginning. Marketing. (If you're not convinced, Google VHS vs Betamax).

As for a problem with this article I'd say the worst is the author's political smugness showing:

Ah those latte-drinking, tree-hugging Hollywood liberals. Glad the old campaign slur could make it into an article. And how on-topic for a man to write for "WomanMotorist". They could at least choose a man who's objective.

 

2007 Honda CRV is 23 mpg city - 30 mpg highway

As for not getting the Ford Escape Hybrid, why would I? I get more car for the buck, period. For the same price, going with the Ford, I lose in features (big time) and gain a marginable improvement in FE. So yeah, not everybody buys because of cost, I buy for what best fits my needs... money is somewhat secondary.

As for polluting less, when you can take the tail pipe exhaust from any hybrid and pump it into your cabin, then I'll be impressed. But you can't so it's not like you are saving the world, your contribution is minor, to the point that it can be dismissed. When you can pollute an order of magnitude less, than a comparable car, then that will make a difference. Until then, it's all hype... especially if your only contribution to saving the environment comes from driving a hybrid.

 

The numbers I quoted come from the Fed. Gov'ts own fueleconomy.gov website. I look up data before I post it.

I didn't buy my hybrid to impress others, but you can wait for someone to do so. You quote pollution stats but then backpedal and say it really doesn't matter unless we can pump the exhaust direct into the cabin. Well, that's not possible with current technology, except for a bicycle (and you wouldn't want to inhale directly from the "exhaust pipe" of a cyclist, either... we humans emit gases, too, after all.)

Sounds strikingly like a smugness of another sort, no? Greenwashing in the reverse. The "anyone saying/doing something, if they aren't single-handedly saving the world, should just shut up and do nothing." Yes, that's one option. Sounds awfully negative and short-sighted, but it's an option...

We all want higher fuel economy, cleaner vehicles. Just because they aren't capable of taking us to Jupiter on two drops of gasoline doesn't mean they're trash... except in retrospect, like comparing a 386SX to a modern day computer processor, found in anything from a cellular telephone to a PDA or web server.

One hazard of modern times is always looking to the future for solutions, at the expense of embracing current and emerging solutions that are viable for the near future. It's the reason some people still have ancient computers in their homes, because they know even if they buy tomorrow the technology will have advanced before they pay off the new computer's balance on their credit card. Why bother upgrading, when you're always a step behind? Sometimes, the answer is why not? Incremental improvements are still improvements.

 

Quote
But you can't so it's not like you are saving the world, your contribution is minor, to the point that it can be dismissed.
End of quote
Sorry, but I can't ressit, this is one wrong way of looking at it. That's exactly what every one of 500 million drivers probably thinks, all over the world. The problem is that they all think and act the same. Now imagine if they all thought they can make a difference one at the time and then multiply that by a half a billion or so. Somebody, somewhere has to make that first step so the rest of sheep can follow, don't you think so?

 

As for polluting less, when you can take the tail pipe exhaust from any hybrid and pump it into your cabin, then I'll be impressed

Since most of your jibberish seems outdated or unsupported, here's your chance to offer scientific opinion. I'll loan you my TCH overnight to connect to your ductwork.

 

 

YO! WOAH! We're all friends here, right? Livvie has strongly held views, that's clear. But any chance we have of effective discourse is dead if we don't stick to the issues and the facts.

Look, I don't agree with Livvie's view that current hybrid technology is "unimpressive" and "a gimmick." If I thought that, why would I be posting to this forum?

But Livvie has the right to post his/her views as long as he/she keeps it on the issues. Livvie has not attacked me personally, nor anyone else that I know of. He/she (OK, I'm tired of extra keystrokes to be PC...any chance you'll let us know your gender, Livvie?) deserves the same respect.

My $0.02...