How do we get more hybrids on our roads?

Getting rid of the car/truck distinction would be impossible. Like it or not, to be able to do heavy towing and hauling work, you need the heavy duty frame and engines. I can see 23 mpg out of my truk. For a 6600 pound 3/4 ton truck, that's posting some pretty good numbers. The laws of physics cannot be broken, and it takes more energy to move a larger vehicle. Because of this, graduated standards are a requirement to allow for vehicles that are capable of performing their designed purpose.

 

Some people have legitimate requirements for larger vehicles. One solution would be to have some complex system of exemptions for gas guzzler tax for this, or that... But I agree with some earlier posts here: the simplest way is to increase federal gas taxes, with no differential (beyond the amount of gas used and thus tax paid) for hybrid owners or Hummer hogs. This will increase the economic incentive for purchasing more fuel-efficient vehicles. Those who need, or simply want badly enough, to use heavier vehicles can get them but it will help encourage a trend for the average buyer to use less fossil fuel. It will also provide more incentive for manufacturers to develop more fuel efficient vehicles.

 

Getting rid of the distinction between cars and trucks doesn't mean they meet the same standard, but that they should be averaged together to get the CAFE figure. That way, a company selling more trucks would also have to do better on its cars to make up for it.

The vast majority of "trucks" and SUVs are used as passenger vehicles 99% of the time. Letting them get off not meeting CAFE, safety and emissions standards like cars is nothing but a copout to domestic automakers.

I'm all for CAFE (CORPORATE AVERAGE Fuel Economy) being just that, a corporate average.

 

I agree with the physics. But just look around on the road. The truck (or SUV) that is hauling more than can be handled by a small car a few and far between. Most are carrying only one or two people.

 

The problem with CAFE is that the automaker, who pays the tax is driven by the people who buy the cars (or at least their market research expectation). They produce what sells and CAFE becomes a hidden tax paid by the buyer.

Also since the tax is over the corporate average, who knows how this cost of doing business is distributed across the cars sold. If they take a simple approach of x dollars divided by y units sold and apply that to each car, the tax falls heaviest on the small car and least on the huge SUV.

That is why I favor dumping CAFE and having the purchaser pay the tax. Then it becomes part of his decision on what to buy.

 

I don't think it's fair to levy extra taxes on, say, a van or bus that regularly hauls a dozen or more people around at 12 mpg. Any way you slice it, that's a lot better than a few dozen extra cars on the road.

Similarly, hauling cargo is necessarily going to guzzle gas, but tractor-trailers do it more efficiently--and perhaps with lower emissions--than would the army of automobiles that would be required to replace each.

Insurance companies classify vehicles according to how they are to be used, as well as how expensive and safe they are. For instance, my Prius is insured at a rate specified for "commuter, over fifteen miles to work." This is how we could tax gas-guzzling, by taking into account the activities the vehicle is used for.

What ticks me off are all the trucks, minivans and SUVs I see being driven by lone commuters. Perhaps these drivers have legitimate needs for all that fuel consumption, sometimes, but geez, what a waste just to haul one office worker back and forth.

 

That may be on the surface, but the reality is this, if I for one would ever have to go back to owning only one vehicle, I'd be keeping the truck. Why? The truck is the only vehicle capable of doing every conceivable task I need out of a vehicle, outside of carrying multiple passengers. Having a choice is very much a luxury, and an expensive one at that. I could easily dump off all of my vehicles except the truck, and save a small fortune in car payments, insurance, maintenance, and registration fees. All of the above would far offset the $200 to $300 per month that I would be spending on fuel, with my current 50 mile one way commute.

Instead, I choose to leave the truck at home and use it only for towing and hauling. I take on a $400/mo payment for the comfort and ease of a small commuter car, pay the full coverage insurance on it, as well as the added maintenance on a car that I've chosen to not service myself. Not everyone wants to do this.

It's for this reason, that I get irked when people start passing judgement on others for their vehicular choices. People have no way of truly knowing why that lone driver is driving that big ol' honkin' vehicle. Furthermore, that person won't know why they own it, unless they start stalking that driver everywhere they go.

Now, if they're bitching and fuming while filling the tank, then they are deserving of a bit of ribbing. IMO, you gotta pay if ya wanna play. I'll be looking at $200 to $250 fillups when I get the bus finished, and that's if fuel prices remain somewhat stable between now and then. This will be on a vehicle that will likely be netting 7 to 9 mpg on the highway. It'll be the price I get to pay to take my house with me on a vacation.

 

We are learning that lack of CAFE standards that include trucks is that sales have soared because they are subsidized by the rest of us. There are costs associated with these large vehicles that are borne by others than the owners: smog, highway deaths, dependence on foriegn oil and resultant 1600 deaths, environmental damage to coastlines and Alaskan wilderness...

Sure, it's a tax... one the big boys should own up to paying, since they do the most damage. If they cost what they cost to society, and not just the owner, they'd be priced high enough that either (a) carmakers would find ways to make then more efficient and avoid the tax/CAFE penalty, or (B) sales would decrease and the above damages would be lessened.

 

I understand Wolfman's point. One may not be able to afford more than one vehicle. I know I couldn't. But one might asses that he/she only needs the capacity of a van or truck say a dozen days in a year. Then they could get an economy car, and either borrow or rent a van/truck when needed.

 

Took the survey...best of luck., and we should all keep on and point out ALL good points. The Prius is unique, because this is one car that can do both, it can save the gas and pay the hybrid difference by itself, and also satisfy both the GREEN ones and even the ones who just want to save that gas for whatever reason. Your survey needs to look at those issues closely, the environmentalist left need not highjack the car as their own. This is because you want the masses to buy such a product, and you won't do it by telling them the end of the world is here. Most Americans, in general would gladly look at such a car because it saves the gas, pays for itself compared to other choices, AND if you are environmentally aware it also satisfies your desires to save all from the "fate" of a dirty world.

 

There are increasingly more Hybrids on the road actually. Year over year it's amazing. The Prius could prob sell at 200,000 if you actually still have waiting lines at production of 100,000. Virtually every manufacturer has not jumped on the hybrid bandwagon. I for one am investing in the battery technology, if you think there's a shortage now wait till the hybrid camry & altima arrrive. They are sure to be followed by the hybrid "suv by honda etc". I believe you have an ahead of it's time techy car that is worth the money reqardless of how many time they calculate vs. a corrolla. I personally doubt many on this bored would have chosen a corrola with just a hybrid over the prius for the same price.

 

Wolfman figured out the same thing., dumped the expensive big thing, traded for the Prius, then will get a "box" with 4 wheels for heavy haul duties. Leaving all unecessary insurance off the truck, my agent will turn it on and off, liability only. Thus when I do find the cheapie it will sit mostly, license fees only will be the expense, insurance will be minor. As for the CAFE and GAS taxes, I think there despite my conservative leanings, that the U.S. consumer must be slightly pushed into these smarter ways to save the fuel BY THE Federal and even State governments. From a strategic point this makes good sense, and to boot it is accepted by environmentalists also, a win-win situation, which is rare among such diverse groupings. I am sure the Governments can figure out a good way, heck a negative one is already on the boards about Oregon or State of Washington wanting to tax by the mile...NO that's not the way, go for the CAFE first for ALL cars, trucks and especially SUV's, let the manufacturers pass the costs, then just tax the gas a little too, that way the less you can use the beter, just don't tell people what to drive, let people decide by COST if they desire the confort and space and capacity. So see an arch conservative agrees with the greenies..what a gas!!