But then again ya gotta consider the source of this news
I stumbled upon this article completely bashing hybrid vehicles. I admit that some of the statements do contain a grain of truth. For example, hybrids do run on fossil fuel and the material in the batteries may be hazardous if not disposed of properly. Of course the working bits of any vehicle can be hazardous if not disposed of properly. Oh and they do cost a little more than a standard car.
The irony that this was sponsored by Hummer (at the time of writing this) is laughable. Consider that the author is knocking Hybrid fuel efficiency stating, “The best real-world mileage you can expect from the likes of many hybrids is around 48 mpg.” Um … what Hummer gets anything even remotely close to that. They average a mere 14 – 18 mpg! And, with the price of gas these days, this even makes my car that averages 27 – 35 mpg not sound that great.
This brings us to what the author considers to be a not very impressive savings over time. Driving a hybrid an average of 13,000 miles a year would save consumers about $770 a year. According to him this is, “…a savings, true — but not all that remarkable.” Well maybe for rich fuckers who can afford to by a Hummer, but what about the rest of us in the real world?
He even has the nerve to say, “As everyone waits for big business to catch up and prepare for the obvious and necessary hydrogen shift, we continue to place our national security at risk by sucking crude out of the Middle East.” Well what they hell are we supposed to do? The ideal would be to simply not drive at all. And some of us have tried to move to a more Mass Transit dependent existence.
Of course that kind of daily travel will only work in an area that can support such a life. Like NYC. At least for those who need to drive every day to work or wherever, buying a Hybrid would reduce the consumption of oil from Middle Eastern countries. Is he suggesting that somehow buying vehicles getting half (or far less) gas mileage is the right move? Where is the logic?
I love this line, “You could do more for the environment if you were to purchase $3,000 worth of trees and have them planted in the rain forest.” Well this is true no matter what you drive, but how would dumping money into some gas-guzzling monster help? While I appreciate the somewhat convoluted environmental message, I don’t see how this being sponsored by the absolute worst polluting vehicle on the road makes any sense at all.
Why is it the worst? Because no average citizen needs a Hummer. Why does anyone need a vehicle designed for the military to go grocery shopping? What possible point is there to driving this thing in a city that’s not currently being shelled? OK, I know that you may not want a hybrid. Fine. No one is forcing you to buy one. But if for some reason you need a lot of space, you’d be better off with mini van getting considerably better mileage and with more cargo room.
Now I don’t know if this author actually owns a Hummer, but even if you take the Hummer out of the equation, his arguments do fall short on almost every point. Nice try though, but there is no way he could ever convince me Hybrids are worse that standard combustion engines. I will agree with him that Hydrogen is by far the best choice and we’re not there yet. So why not at least cut our oil dependency down now while we wait to cut it altogether?
See Also:
No Hybrids: 7 reasons to not go green
