The most anti-hybrid editorial ever

I'd guess this is the major gripe. The author wants CAFE to be more stringent.

I used to think the same, but not anymore. I just want higher taxes on petrol, although a credit can have much the same effect. My only beef is giving credits for hybrids, rather than based on performance. Giving money to hybrids that have worse fuel economy than non-hybrids is stupid. But it is part of the repub ideology of subsidizing technology, regardless of results :shrug:

Start the free money at 40 mpg, and increase the bar 2 - 5 mpg yearly.

 

I agree... no reason to single out hybrids.... It's funny... Toyota/Honda where able to define the FE market... I still think much could be done to an ICE only car that could probably compete or beat the Prius...

Also bumping the goal each year would make it very interesting.

 

How many prius owners are disappointed with thier gas mileage?
We just picked up our new 2006 prius. My wife called to say she averaged 53 mpg on her commute into town this morning. I get as low as 39-40 when I do multiple short trips but that is uncommon. I am very happy so far.
We live in a warm area (Austin) but it was about 40F this morning.

 

Lots of people out there making claims on one sided data perspectives, as long as it's in-line with their viewpoint, it's good to go.

Lots of that going around these days...

 

anti-hybrid retoric is a sign of success... a few years ago hybrids where ignored not they are being attacked... soon they will be accepted...

 

Most of his points seemed valid to me.

EPA does certify unrealistically high MPG values and, by most reports, these are more greatly exagerated for hybrids like the Prius.
EPA is finally in the process of revising its protocols.

Most people who do not adapt their driving habits to maximize their fuel economy will only see about 45mpg from a Prius (as many of us here who already knew what to expect did).
Keep in mind that there's a lot of people out there who do not want to "sacrifice" their driving style for mileage.

Although, I will gladly accept my federal income tax credit and mortgage deduction, etc., I also think using the tax code for these types of government spending complicates the tax system and hides government spending.

I also disagree with the author about instituting an additional gas tax as being the simplest solution.
Instituting a graduated tax based on the vehicles' EPA mileage and emissions would do the job nicely.

my2p

 

Wimp.

 

that backwards argument keeps popping up everywhere.

i'm saving gas. it does not make me culpable for billybobjoe in his huge truck who chooses to use more gas for the extra 20 horsepower and to be able to sit 6 feet off the ground.

sure, someone's going to use it whether it's me or not. but don't blame me for others using MORE gas to compensate.

sigh...

 

V took the quote out of its context:

This is a valid perspective.
I don't think it is intended to reflect poorly on those that purchase hybrids but rather is a criticism of how the CAFE law is written.

 

I don't see the article as anti-hybrid at all---just opposed to the policies of rewarding hybrid buyers so lavishly.

In his only comment on the Prius itself, he says:

"---and there is no denying that it's a great car to drive--"

When he points out that every Prius sale "enables" a guzzler sale, he's right. (But that's no knock on the Prius.) Which is why the only answer to that part of the "oil equation" is for DOT to raise the CAFE standards---substantially (say, 30%, phased in over 6-7 years).

 

To me, it is like seeing a nice bicycle sitting in an abandoned lot, unlocked. I think to myself, "Somebody is going to steal the bike anyway - it might as well be me."

Is there some sort of problem with doing the right thing for yourself... and maybe hoping that others will see things the same way?

 

That's a positive, refreshing look at the situation. And quite valid I think!

 

galaxee,

I can't remember exact details, but the original argument was part of an monograp regarding conservation per se, and it has been 'adopted' by the truck/suv crowd.

Market economics will insure petrol's consumption at maximal rate based on price. So decreased utilization will require a higher price (or loss of subsidy, or indirect credit).

In the meantime, we let our conscience guide us -- and enjoy brilliant tech along the way.

 

This topic that somebody just posted explains partly why this guy's proposal of trying to incentivize potential large SUV buyers to buy not-so-large SUV's will not happen.
http://priuschat.com/index.php?showtopic=16089&hl=

American car buyers don't care about enough about saving fuel when vehicle shopping--if it appeals to them and if they can afford the monthly payments then that's all that matters.

I'm okay with his idea of taxing gas but to do that to the point where it will incentivize the large SUV buyers to go smaller it will have to be a big enough tax to really get people's attention. Do you think ANY administration will commit political suicide by doing this?

The hybrid incentive is a concession and a lot more effective things could be done but when you look at the situation Americans, by and large, don't want to be inconvenienced by taxes or denied personal satisfaction to save fuel.

 

I read it with skepticism but I agree on balance it does give a realistic view of several problems, government policy, EPA standards, public perceptions, etc. OTOH he did report a very realistic driving experience of about 45 mpg on NYC roads.... and... he made a huge point but missed the opportunity of emphasizing it.

Big SUV's and trucks. Increase the FE of Escalades or Sequoias or F150's from 18 to 25 mpg across the board and the country will save many more millions of gallons of Fuel than 100,000 Prius' a year.

The huge savings are in the 7,000,000 Lt trucks sold here every year.

 

Yep.

Get 5,000,000 of them off the road, and you will see a dramatic drop in fuel consumption, hybrid or not.

 

Actually the law is not targetted at hybrids alone, but any vehicle that meets fuel economy standards AND emmisions standards. Other vehicles *are* allowed for the tax credit - Volkswagon had a slew of diesels that were in the running, but they failed the required emmision levels. http://www.aceee.org/transportation/taxcredits06.pdf

I'm not sure, but I think they only fail because of the lack of low-sulfer diesel in the states...


Dave