I think what we’re looking at is an extra tax to be levied on gas.
It certainly does. We’re still paying 85p per litre. Over half of that is tax and duty. And $30-$40 a barrel is still a lot. Cheap is < $15 a barrel.
Calling them “Green Cars” may not be helping. The term sounds vaguely silly to me, and makes me think that they’re for people who wear Birkenstocks, eat granola, and vote for Ralph Nader. I’d be much more interested in buying a “fuel-efficient car.”
Plus, I already drive a white Sable, which is ironic enough. If I were to drive a Green white Sable, that would just be way too silly.
I’d rather see a combination of Pelosi’s plan to give a tax credit for trading in guzzlers for parts or scrap, a “feebate” program (tax hits for buying cars with poor gas mileage and tax credits for those with above average mileage that vary dependent on how poor or good the mileage is), and getting credit loosened so people can make these purchases.
I live in the snow belt. Most vehicles are not made for it, and I haven’t seen a hybrid … yet … that can deal.
Most vehicles are, first and foremost, eye candy. I hate it.
[quote=“DSeid, post:34, topic:481293”]
Cost? Yeah that’s the main issue of the thread. There is a hybrid premium to be paid. QUOTE]
Cost is incredible. I can’t afford new cars, period. Detroit is doomed, since they have priced themselves into oblivion.
You can get a used Ford Escape hybrid for about $16K. And unless you believe that gas prices are gong to stay this low, now may be a good time to buy. As for handling the Snow Belt - if I can get through Chicago blizzards in my hybrid Honda Civic then you can manage the Snow Belt in a SUV. If you cannot then the problem isn’t the snow. Sorry.
True, even though now and then I walk the last mile home, and get my car the next day, when the snow plow comes through. Last year, a few times, the only reason I made it to the highway is that a monster truck cut a path. I don’t know who owns it.
I can’t afford the $16K. I will get the hybrid in about five years, used. 
As I recall, about 25mpg, which was “good” only compared with American land yachts. And taking into account the compromises, like performance beaten by my bicycle up to 20mph, far from impressive.
Yeah, there was a hill back home. No matter how fast I was going at the bottom, pedal to the floor … I could get 70 mph … I was going 30 mph at the top. A semi tractor could beat me up that hill. Propane heater for defrost was essential. A guy back home from Mitchell, Indiana had bored out a VW, and it could get it. It just takes some effort, and I think Detroit could do it. I still remember the Staff Sergeant who came in one morning bragging about eating a Corvette on the way in to work, and he was driving Richard Nader’s favorite … the Corvair. He had put a lot of work into that street sleeper. Seriously though, surely Detroit could find some combinations that work for decent transportation that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg. The VW was never about appearance. Just give me a box, with good ground clearance that I can work on. Keep the same body for 15 years, for goodness sake. I drove a Pinto to work, until the seat fell through the floor. They were awful in snow. Summer car. Stangely enough, I understand front wheel drive is nearly as good as four wheel drive, given some ground clearance. I haven’t owned one.
I have driven some of the ugliest, simplest vehicles available.
What I would like to see is the best of the ideas combined. Simplicity. Some of the improvements, like no breaker points. No in the tank fuel pumps. Good ground clearance … which is half of the snow battle … car maintenance in mind when design is done, not just someones idea of pretty. Heavy on the simple and durable.
The fully-independent-rear-suspension Corvairs were the greatest cars Motown made in The Day. Fast and best handling. NOTHING like swing-axle Beetles.
The Volt priced at 40 k plus will not sell. That is wrong in so many ways.
But 3/4 of the trips people make in their cars are 40 miles or less. The range Hybrids get now is useful. I am sure it will get better . They are a viable alternative for the majority of Americans. In Europe the trips may be shorter and the range may work out even better.
Well, yes and no. The tax breaks/hits would be pretty much the same.
The problem with an increase in the price of gas and these tax breaks/hits for buying these fuel efficient vehicles is that it hurts the poor (and what’s left of the middle class) a lot more than it would for someone who lives comfortably. Now, there’s not really anything inherently wrong with that, but that, coupled with the fact that it’s enough to keep the people that would drive these cars all over and benefit the most from them won’t be able to buy them.
I suppose this is a roundabout way of saying that “poverty” is the real problem here. Also, I agree with you.
I think I’d rather pump up gas taxes and then give income tax rebates. This can help poor people because they can save money by getting a high-mileage car.
I just spent $900 on a fuel pump, for the second time in 18 months.
Will the hybrids be as bad on maintenance?
The EV part is much lower maintenance. Much less wear and tear. The only potential big issue is if the battery wears out before the rest of the car does; that’s a big ticket item.
But the ICE part of the hybrid is subject to usual maintenance needs. Maybe a bit less if it is only used to charge the battery.
It’s one of the attractions of pure BEV albeit not enough to offset range issues for most.
In case any one is curious, hereis some information about the car scrappage bill. I had remembered wrong, it wasn’t Pelosi’s.