Posted on 01/20/2006 10:58:08 AM PST by RWR8189
Detroit
WHEN TREASURY SECRETARY John Snow announced guidelines for a new tax cut for the rich here last week, liberals did not denounce him. That's because the proposed tax breaks were for gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles, the favorite ride of environmentalists this side of bicycles. But the dirty secret about hybrids is that, even as the government continues to fuel their growth with tax subsidies, they don't deliver the gas savings they promise.
Most cars and trucks don't achieve the gas mileage they advertise, according to Consumer Reports. But hybrids do a far worse job than conventional vehicles in meeting their Environmental Protection Agency fuel economy ratings, especially in city driving.
Hybrids, which typically claim to get 32 to 60 miles per gallon, ended up delivering an average of 19 miles per gallon less than their EPA ratings under real-world driving conditions (which reflect more stop-and-go traffic and Americans' penchant for heavy accelerating) according to a Consumer Reports investigation in October 2005.
For example, a 2004 Toyota Prius got 35 miles per gallon in city driving, off 42 percent from its EPA rating of 60 mpg. The 2003 Honda Civic averaged 26 mpg, off 46 percent from its advertised 48 mpg. And the Ford Escape small sport utility vehicle managed 22 mpg, falling 33 percent short of its 33 mpg rating.
"City traffic is supposed to be the hybrids' strong suit, but their shortfall amounted to a 40 percent deficit on average," Consumer Reports said.
The hybrid failed another real world test in 2004 when a USA Today reporter compared a Toyota Prius hybrid with a Volkswagen Jetta diesel, driving both between his home in Ann Arbor, Michigan and the Washington, D.C. area. Both should have made the 500-mile trip on one tank of gas.
"Jetta lived up to its one-tank billing," reporter David Kiley wrote. "Prius did not."
Kiley had to stop to refill the Prius, which ended up averaging 38 miles per gallon, compared with 44 miles per gallon for the Jetta (which met its fuel economy rating). And this occurred during spring weather without the extra drain on a hybrid battery caused by winter weather--which would have favored the diesel Jetta even more.
Customers complain about the failure to meet fuel savings expectations. There are web sites such as hybridbuzz.com and chat rooms of hybrid fanatics who bemoan their lackluster fuel economy. About 58 percent of hybrid drivers say they aren't happy with their fuel economy (compared with 27 percent of conventional vehicle drivers), according to CNW Marketing Research in Bandon, Oregon.
It's gotten to the point where Ford is giving hybrid owners special lessons on how to improve fuel economy, according to USA Today. They teach drivers how to brake sooner, which helps recharge the battery. But they also drill owners with the same tips that help conventional vehicle owners improve gas mileage: Accelerate slowly. Inflate your tires. Plan your errands better. And this eye-opener: Don't set the air conditioner on maximum. "That prevents the electric motor from engaging," USA Today says.
HYBRIDS ARE ALSO failing to pay for themselves in gas savings. A study by the car-buying website Edmunds.com calculates gasoline would have to cost $5.60 a gallon over five years for a Ford Escape hybrid to break even with the costs of driving a non-hybrid vehicle. The break-even number was $9.60 a gallon for a Honda Civic hybrid.
Hybrid automakers and their supporters have their defenses. They quibble with how some studies are done. They point out that even with their fuel economy shortcomings, hybrids achieve the best gas mileage in three of five vehicle categories rated by Consumer Reports. Hybrids are still far lower-polluting than diesels. Their sales are growing fast, even though they make up a small 1 percent of America's annual sales of 17 million vehicles.
Then there's the ultimate defense: They are just like conventional cars because drivers buy them for many reasons other than fuel savings and cost. There's the "prestige of owning such a vehicle," says Dave Hermance, an executive engineer for environmental engineering at Toyota, the leading seller of hybrids. After all, many vehicle purchases are emotional decisions, he says.
SO, HYBRIDS have become the environmental equivalent of driving an Escalade or Mustang. Who cares if they deliver on their promises as long as they make a social statement?
Taxpayers should. The federal government subsidizes hybrid fashion statements with tax breaks that benefit the rich. The average household income of a Civic hybrid owner ranges between $65,000 to $85,000 a year; it's more than $100,000 for the owner of an Accord. The median income of a Toyota Prius owner is $92,000; for a Highlander SUV owner $121,000; and for a luxury Lexus SUV owner it's over $200,000.
This year the government will offer tax credits for hybrid purchases ranging up to $3,400, with owners getting a dollar-for-dollar benefit on their tax forms. This beats last year's $2,000 tax deduction, which amounted up to a $700 benefit, depending on the driver's tax bracket.
JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, liberals criticized the Bush administration for allowing professionals to get tax breaks on large SUVs if they were purchased for business purposes. But evidently it's okay to subsidize under-performing hybrids.
Perhaps with more technological advances, hybrids will some day deliver on their fuel economy promise and truly be worth the extra cost. But the tax credits have become just one more welfare program for the wealthy. Let the fast-growing hybrids show that they can pay for themselves.
After all, when Snoop Dogg makes a fashion statement by buying a Chrysler 300 C with a Hemi engine, taxpayers aren't footing part of the bill.
Richard Burr is associate editor of the Detroit News editorial page.
Yeah, the smart key is fantastic. I figure I save about five hours a year not having to dig in my purse for the keys. I really like the car because it's so entertaining.
Fair enough. Some people just go by the car's calculator, which can't always be trusted.
But the suburbs are much more spread out and have trees and greenery which help mitigate the pollution.
I don't why you'd have to be any more vigilant than you'd normally be. If the pedestrian is in the street while you're driving, you should see him anyway. I'm sure hybrid cars still have horns, right?
I think you're right. Some work has been done on that (but not enough).
For example, my Hybrid Escape has what Ford calls an Atkinson cycle engine. It's not really that at all; what they've done is retard the timing of the intake valve to reduce pumping loss on the compression stroke (some of the mixture flows back into the intake runners).
Also, the throttle is fly-by-wire. You can't do things like rev the engine unnecessarily when the transaxle is in park. You can't power brake either, but then this isn't a performance car either.
Roughly half the time a pedestrian gets hit it is their fault, half the driver's. You still have control over your half, it's just that they can't hear you coming so sometimes they will step right out in front of you and there's nothing you can do to avoid the collision. Another problem is you can no longer run a yellow light in the city. With a conventional car, the pedestrian hears the car racing. In a hybrid they take their walk light right away and get hit. A hybrid driver does not have the high sitting visibility that an SUV driver has, so extra care is needed. Personally I wouldn't city drive in silent electric mode without buying a lot of ambulance chaser insurance.
So the poor folks downwind from the power plants get that much more fly ash from the increased kilowatt hours usage from everyone plugging in their battery chargers.
I'd rather the city folks keep their own pollution. It does not seem right that they import their power and let the neighbors of the power plants deal with their increased pollution.
Well, I don't know about this. I had a 2003 Escape V6 that averaged about 21 mpg overall. My new 2006 Escape Hybrid got 35.43 mpg on its first tank and I have gotten exactly 30.44 mpg in all driving at 1,500 miles. So I don't know where the author is coming from except he doesn't like hybrids.
I didn't buy it for the fuel economy but that is a bonus. I just happened to want to own it because I didn't see any downsides and it has plenty of power. And dead quiet at stoplights since the engine isn't running.
"Do I trust Consumer Reports to test cars? No. If I want to read about cars, I'll go get Car and Driver. Then there's this:
And the Ford Escape small sport utility vehicle managed 22 mpg
I don't know how the heck they managed that, but Escape Hybrid averages 30-31 MPG. And I drive to D.C. every day."
If they only got 22 mpg with the Escape Hybrid they must be the worst drivers in the world. Like you I get almost exactly what you get. The average is 30.44 mpg in all driving. I should know. I had a 2003 Escape with the V6 and the Hybrid is at least a 50% improvement and I haven't changed my driving habits.
Probably the delayed intake closure to which I was referring. It may be that doing that reduces throttle energy waste to the point that there's not much worth harvesting, but otherwise as I said the throttle, if harnessed, would represent better-than-free energy.
Maybe.
The Accord Hybrid one seems awfully low. They also managed something like 18 mpg with a Jeep Liberty CRD. Maybe they test cars with the parking brake set.
And if it's one of the newest ones, it no longer sounds like it's Cummins apart....
There is much to be said for high pressure injection... sure quieted those Cummins' down!
"prestige of owning such a vehicle,"
Um, maybe English is not this guys first language?
"prestige" should have been embarrassment!
I have owned a LOT of cars, and I am always looking for another, but I will NEVER own one those, and with any luck at all I will never ride in one either!
I notice I have owned several vintage sports cars that equal or better these losers mileage.
Yep.... The Empire of New York will not allow me to register a new TDI. Anyone have a good used one? Er.. never mind. Anyone with a good used one is keeping it.
Which is why I still drive my '97 Jetta TDI even though it has 327000 miles on it...
Which is just barely broken in, by VW Diesel standards... ;-)
I didn't buy it for the fuel economy but that is a bonus. I just happened to want to own it because I didn't see any downsides and it has plenty of power. And dead quiet at stoplights since the engine isn't running.
But if you plug it in to charge it up, aren't you displacing the pollution rather than eliminating it? Displacing it to the predominantly rural areas where power plants are located.
Why should those folks breathe the additional pollutants to reduce the same in the more urban area?
I would rather have a Bug-Eye Sprite, Triumph Spitfire, or even a Fiat 850.
I can probably buy any one of them, fully restored, for under $8,000
Classics don't depreciate, the modern junk is "upside down" the moment it leaves the dealer!
All of which can get better mileage than the hybrids in the article.
You left out PERFORMANCE!
It has to go, it has to stop, it has to handle.
Hybrids don't!
What would keep the air in cities even cleaner is a catalytic coating on automotive radiators, breaking down pollutants from other cars in the air as it passed through to cool the engine.
But since this technology had no effect on the vehicle's own tailpipe, it was disincentivized by the government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.