detnews.com — Organization will push for the existing and new incentives for users of alternative fuel cars. Hybrid vehicle owners have it pretty good: tax credits, unlimited access to car pool lanes and free parking in some places. Now they'll have their own lobbying group in Washington.
Aug 18, 2006 View in Crawl 4
gmillerdAug 18, 2006
Daimler Chrysler need to get off its ass and start selling these cars in America. <a class="user" href="http://www.smart.com/">http://www.smart.com/</a>
blameblaAug 18, 2006
Oil companies have more lobbyists than the greenies could ever hope to have. So until the system changes and all lobbying is outlawed, they have to play by the rules of the game. In that regard this group represents the opinions of citizens rather than companies so it is inherently more democratic. All that being said, I would much prefer that all the subsidies for oil be removed. With the true cost of oil exposed to consumers (including emissions costs), market forces will be able to create truly efficient decisions. <a class="user" href="http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/subsidizing-big-oil.html">http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/subsidizing-big-oil.html</a>
velocipenguinAug 19, 2006
City-dwelling people who buy massive SUVs are asses. How's that? SUVs are designed to fill a limited niche, and they do it well; what bothers people is that they're being used instead of cars in areas where they are wholly inappropriate, often by people who don't understand that they do not drive like normal cars.
velocipenguinAug 19, 2006
Yes, actually. Those pro-CO2 ads were created by the Competitive Enterprise Group, a think tank whose major source of funding is ExxonMobil. Cute, isn't it?
moonshnAug 19, 2006
not everyone resells vehicles, personally once i buy a car i drive it until it will go no further. so no, not everyone "must" factor in resale value
tjblazeAug 19, 2006
I'm in the camp that doesn't like the idea of a lobbying group for this but sees the need for lobbying groups in general. Plus, I am paranoid enough to believe that the oil interests and their lobby groups would actually take action to make hybrids more expensive and/or harder to get and run.I think we can and should preach carbon neutrality in our lifestyles, but I am absolutely against legislating it in any way shape or form. I'm a coaster with an urban lifestyle and I own a hybrid. But I have enough imagination to understand the need for an SUV. Sure I paid more for the hybrid and I'm pretty sure that on pure math it doesn't work out. Still, I think it might be fair to compare my hybrid civic with the other choices I could have made at the same price level. Lots, maybe even most people buy cars based on emotions, not on economics.To me the bigger issue is carbon neutrality and trying to contribute to reduce our national dependence on foreign oil. I know my few drops in the barrel don't go very far, but I'm hopeful that there is a wider movement of like minded people.It is more economic than environmental. I spend a few more dollars I can afford in the hope that I use less fuel. Just one of many decisions that I try to make mindfully. Part of my hope is that by reducing oil demand in the short term, prices would come down, reducing inflation and contributing to a stronger economy. Plus less of the military budget would have to be used on fuel purchases (maybe more for good body armor). Yes, I see those decisions as a better way to support the troops than some car magnet.I also hope that trying to reduce my personal fuel consumption contributes in a small way to reducing the trade deficit and the overall national debt. In the long term it is a small thing toward leaving a little better economic situation for my kids.And there is the environmental aspect. Most of the evidence I've seen suggests that human driven climate change is real and not a good thing. Maybe wrong there as we only have hard data (other than ice and sea floor cores) for several decades.My last analysis. I can't see any harm in a lifestyle that tries to minimize impact. My decisions for me that I'm not trying to impose on anybody else. I know what "utility" means and I also know that you can't spell "conservative" without "conserv(e)". Who the hell isn't "smug" about the decisions they make?
bedarfAug 21, 2006
The battery issue is a red herring. These are not AA batteries that people will just throw out in the trash. They are NiMH batteries that are large and will most likely be recycled with little impact to the environment. The main question on the batteries is whether they will last a long as they claim and how much they will cost to replace.<a class="user" href="http://www.hybridcars.com/faq.html#battery">http://www.hybridcars.com/faq.html#battery</a>
meuserjAug 21, 2006
@sam1729I realize that the oil companies are subsidized too, and I'm against that as well. I find it really messed up that the government both subsidizes and taxes oil. The answer to unfair subsidies isn't more subsidies.
brstilsonAug 26, 2006
Hybrid technology isn't practical today, but neither were automobiles for the first 30 years of their existence. It took the Ford Model T to get it in the hands of the common man. Hybrids have to become simple, reliable, and cheap before they truly take off