Who said anything about diesel? Yeah, that's one option, but there's also:
the 40 mpg Echo
the 42 mpg Matrix
the 44 mpg Civic HX


These cars use advanced engineering like cylinder deactivation or lean-burn to squeeze out high MPGs. We should provide Tax Incentives for these cars too.

troy

Well, those cars are beneficial on the "MPG" side, but hybrids are more about "the whole package" of lower emissions, advancing the technology, and the future of cars.

A "plain ole Echo" with a tax credit is not going to stimulate too many buyers - PLUS, it means "same old thing" in regard to a fully ICE car.

We need help to stimulate interest in the newer, cleaner, BETTER technology, not the same old same old.

Now all they have to do is Hybridize the above listed vehicles, get the mileage into the Stratosphere, pass Go and collect their $2000 tax deduction.

I think the tax deduction is an incentive to get people to embrace the new technology. I believe it is working based on the number of Hybrids on the road today. It goes way down after this year and is gone after next - it's purpose having been served.

Besides, we all have an indirect tax incentive for running any high FE vehicle - the less gas purchased, the less gas tax paid.

In my own case, the tax incentive didn't influence my decision one iota.

Well, I'm one of those who's not yet convinced a gas-electric car is automatically better than a just plain gas car. I look at Europe, and I see the "plain gas" cars at 55 miles per u.s.-gallon, and I'm amazed. They're outperforming the hybrids with nothing more amazing than good aerodynamics, efficient engines, and smart engineering.

I'd rather encourage Americans to buy a 55 mpg "plain gas" car, than a 30 mpg hybrid car.





BTW, you said MPG is not that important, "just a piece of the puzzle", but I strongly disagree. I think MPG is *the* most important piece, that eclipses all other objectives. MPG affects the whole chain. High MPG cars reduce pollution by:
- burning less fuel
- requiring less tanker trucks carrying fuel to the station
- less refineries spewing chemicals
- fewer oil tankers crossing the ocean
- less need to pull oil out of the desert

We have to look past the car, and examine the entire pollution chain. Burning less gas, helps clean up the *whole* chain.

troy

I agree with most of all you said, but I would like to point out that I never said MPG is not that important. I only said it was one of the pieces which make Hybrids important technology. It's definitely not the only thing, and if you want to say it's the "most important" thing, then feel free to do so.

Personally, for me, I don't put any one piece above the others. You can get high MPG without hybridization, and you can have hybrids without high MPG which are still important cars.

There is kind of a paradox going on here. Cars with the California emissions get slightly less efficiency, yet they run cleaner. If we eliminated all the emissions systems on the cars, we could get better mileage. Cars also get lower mpg on the cleaner burning fuels. Ironinc.

Would this be a good tradeoff? I doubt it.

Are the European cars getting 55 mpg meeting the high standards for emissions? I doubt that too. Most European models can't be imported into this country without major modifications.

MPG is one measure that is important but if you are looking at the whole picture, how much it pollutes is another.

If the straight gas model of the Escape got better mileage than the Hybrid, I would be driving one of those now. I don't think you can say a car is outperforming a Hybrid unless you are comparing otherwise identical vehicles.