Hybrid Vehicles Only Green When Lean

Thanks in part to tax incentives, the hybrid car market is gaining speed. But the full potential of these fuel-saving vehicles is being offset by the fact that 30 percent of hybrids sold in 2006 were SUVs.

"The average hybrid is growing rapidly heavier, more powerful, and as a result the fuel consumption benefits are reduced," said Conor Reynolds of University of British Columbia.

In the final analysis, "most small [ICEV] cars have better fuel consumption than most hybrid SUVs," Reynolds told LiveScience.
As an example, a 2007 Toyota Prius (HEV) gets on average 46 miles per gallon (mpg), according to an Environmental Protection Agency website, while a similar-sized 2007 Toyota Corolla (ICEV) gets 29 mpg. When you move up to an SUV, the 4WD Toyota Highlander (HEV) gets 26 mpg.


SOURCE:
Live Science

I'm sorry, but this should have been abundantly clear to people and car dealers
(it probably was to them) when they started making Hybrid SUV's.

The real problem stems from the fact that Americans seem to think they need
massive cars tog et around int, when in reality American cars are twice as large
or even more than they really need to be.


Comments, Opinions?

Thanks for locating news on this issue. I'll be buying a new car in a few yeras, and have been eyeing the hybrids with some longing (can't get one until I'm out of school, however.) Hopefully they'll have some sort of compromise design... we would have occasion to have six to seven people in one vehicle.

The whole industry seems to be on the cusp of some major changes, with developments in biofuels and hybridization. I'm eager to see how successful some of the new designs turn out to be.

Its nice to hear its affordable to use hybrids in some countries. Here in Finland they cost alot more than regular cars to begin with and you have to pay annual extra tax on top of the higher price just because youre clearly getting low cost mileage so its not really a surprise the hybrids aint really that compelling to buy.

Maybe some day we get a reasonable option to the regular combustion engine car that doesnt cost more than average person makes in a year. Ofcourse the regular combustion engine cars already do cost more than an average person makes in a year so I guess thats setting the bar too high, but im sure you get the point.

Originally posted by Gonjo
Its nice to hear its affordable to use hybrids in some countries. Here in Finland they cost alot more than regular cars to begin with and you have to pay annual extra tax on top of the higher price just because youre clearly getting low cost mileage so its not really a surprise the hybrids aint really that compelling to buy.

They cost quite a bit more then regular cars here too. But we don't get taxed for getting better mileage. That seems a bit insane to me.


This article seems silly to me as well. They compare an SUV to a small passenger car. Of course there's going to be a major difference, hybrid or not. How about comparing a hybrid SUV to a non-hybrid SUV. At least these people buying hybrids are making some sort of a difference, no matter how small.

And many people DO need an SUV or truck. I'm one of them, unfortunately I cant afford one, hybrid or not . No doubt there are plenty of idiots out there just trying to out do each other and/or show everyone how masculine they are. Northern CA is a PRIME example of these sorts of people.

Efficiency will eventually get much better on these hybrid vehicles and the high cost will finally be compensated by your wonderful mpg. Right now its its almost not worth it. But at least all the people spending big bucks on these cars are helping the rest of us out by using less fuel. I give em props for that

Originally posted by PlausibleDeniability
This article seems silly to me as well. They compare an SUV to a small passenger car. Of course there's going to be a major difference, hybrid or not. How about comparing a hybrid SUV to a non-hybrid SUV. At least these people buying hybrids are making some sort of a difference, no matter how small.

They did compare a normal SUV and a Hybrid one, there was a small difference
of .6 gallons per 100 miles, but it's such a small amount that it does'nt matter much.

And many people DO need an SUV or truck. I'm one of them, unfortunately I cant afford one, hybrid or not

.

There are those who do require heavier vehicles, yes, but people who live in cities
and primarily drive in sub/urban areas have no requirement for them, I mean even
if someone goes driving in the mountains or what not once a month, they could still
just buy an older (and strangely sometimes more fuel efficient) truck for doing that,
and drive a small Hybrid car in the city.

My real gripe is that people think cars need to be huge, when they really don't need to be.

Originally posted by iori_komei
They did compare a normal SUV and a Hybrid one, there was a small difference
of .6 gallons per 100 miles, but it's such a small amount that it does'nt matter much.

I just reread the article for a second time and I'm not seeing where they did this. All I see is a regular Toyota Corolla (passenger car) being compared to a Highlander hybrid (SUV). I am pretty darned tired tonight so forgive me if I'm totally missing it.

My real gripe is that people think cars need to be huge, when they really don't need to be.

I 100% agree with you on this. Like I said, here in the Shasta county area the problem has run rampant. EVERYONE has a huge truck/suv lifted 20 feet off the ground and half of those are running straight pipes (no cat). I work on far more trucks then I do cars here. I can guarantee you most of these people have no practicle use for them either. Especially if you can walk under their tailgate

[edit on 8/10/2007 by PlausibleDeniability]

[edit on 8/10/2007 by PlausibleDeniability]

I thought I had ijncluded the part where they comparedthe SUV's, but I did'nt, so here's the paragraph entailing it;

Specifically, when normal ICEVs scale up 1,000 pounds in size, they require on average an extra 1.3 gallons of gas to go 100 miles. For HEVs, the same weight gain would correspond to an extra 0.7 gallons per 100 miles.