Top 10 Hybrid States and Top 10 Hybrid Metro Areas in 2005

[Crazee]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(barbaram @ May 11 2006, 08:50 PM) [snapback]253852[/snapback]</div>

Texas #3??????

surely that must be a mistake!
[/b]

As a Texan I can assure you that it is no mistake. Just because we have a few well known idiots giving the state a bad name doesn't mean we are all idiots. Just like everyone in New Jersey isn't a mobster just because the Sopranos is set there.

There are many of us that drive hybrids. The City of Houston is in the process of converting it's non specialty civilian fleet to Prius. The city already has over 250 Prius and 15 Ford Escapes.

[airportkid]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ May 12 2006, 11:28 AM) [snapback]254213[/snapback]</div>

Ok, I did it by Density in each metropolitan area (Hybrids per Person)

Metro Area - Hybrids - Population - Ratio

SF - 15,828 - 7,039,362 - 1 in 444
Sacramento - 4,144 - 2,167,891 - 1 in 523
DC - 9,396 - 5,139,549 - 1 in 547
Seattle - 5,833 - 3,554,760 - 1 in 609
San Diego - 4,281 - 2,813,833 - 1 in 657
LA - 22,922 - 16,373,645 - 1 in 714
Boston - 6.341 - 5,819,100 - 1 in 918
Philly - 5,552 - 6,188,463 - 1 in 1114
Chicago - 5,843 - 9,157,540 - 1 in 1567
NY - 11,351 - 21,199,865 - 1 in 1868
[/b]

This is Prius ownership by person, not by car owner. I suspect the ratio of car owners per 1,000 population in Manhattan would be significantly smaller than in other metro areas because driving a car in Manhattan is impossible, when it's not merely difficult. If this "population" density reading were against auto ownership instead of base population, therefore, I'd bet NY would overtake at least Philadelphia & Chicago, and LA would surpass DC and Sacramento.

[DaveinOlyWA]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ May 16 2006, 09:25 PM) [snapback]256657[/snapback]</div>

This is Prius ownership by person, not by car owner. I suspect the ratio of car owners per 1,000 population in Manhattan would be significantly smaller than in other metro areas because driving a car in Manhattan is impossible, when it's not merely difficult. If this "population" density reading were against auto ownership instead of base population, therefore, I'd bet NY would overtake at least Philadelphia & Chicago, and LA would surpass DC and Sacramento.
[/b]

very good point. its funny how well mass transit can work if given the chance. no doubt there are many that would love to drive a car in NY. but at the same time, most are resigned to the commute. for years, other areas, (Seattle especially) transportation issues have been in the forefront with no one wanting to spend the extra money to put a good system in. now we are paying for our shortsightness in spades. even if we suddenly agreed on a viable plan and started construction today (the planning, development rights, and funding stage has been going on for DECADES!!) by the time the initial stage was complete, it would be obsolete. and that is over 10 years away!!

i applaud New York, Chicago, San Francisco and other places that started systems years ago. sure BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) had HUGE growing pains just as Seattle is going thru now. but at least they got something going. now that BART has proven its worth, funding for new lines comes much much easier. here is Seattle, we still dont have that and to be honest with ya, i dont know if we ever will.

[Tempus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ May 17 2006, 12:25 AM) [snapback]256657[/snapback]</div>

LA would surpass DC and Sacramento.[/b]

Wait a minute. You're saying LA has less cars per person than DC? I thought everyone in LA had two cars, so their position should fall, not rise if you're going per car

Remember, DC is also an older, denser city center with real mass transit, so I suspect it in fact does have a lower car ownership rate than LA.