Washington Post reporter seeks help on hybrids

In regard to the hybrid article, I am glad it got published because this issue needs a lot more coverage. However, the tone of the article was generally pro hybrid, which doesn't surprise me. I believe the Post is also pro HOT. It did mention that the automakers are planning to swamp the US market with hybrids within a few years. It did not mention that some of us are trying to have the hybrid sport utes excluded before they come out this fall. The way this thing works, once something is allowed on, it MUST be legitimate... (NOT!)

Bob

BTW, my quotes, I believe, reflect what most of you (us) feel.
"I have nothing against hybrids, but I think it's time to get them to pull their weight,"
"I've never seen a hybrid with three people in it."

Jim

quote:

---

Originally posted by LisaDeanna
[br]

quote:

---

Originally posted by motownldy199

And for the people snickering and LisaDeanna, give me a break. None of us is too 'good' to take a bus.

---

Who said anything about people being too good to take the bus?

On days when I can get by without having a car in the city the bus between Herndon and West Falls Church is the best option. The vast majority of my fellow riders are very courteous and I've never had a problem with a driver.

My only complaint would be that the buses are so crowded sometimes that I can't get a seat...

---

Lisa, I was actually defending you and couldn't edit my comment, it should have read "snickering at LisaDeanna."

I'm on the same side as you are.

BTW, Chris Core did a radio show on this subject--and a rather misinformed one--tonight. (For example, he didn't know anything about the CF plates) Most of his callers, most of them from Montgomery County, think that the hybrid inclusion was OK. He thinks it should be recinded, too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by motownldy199

Lisa, I was actually defending you and couldn't edit my comment, it should have read "snickering at LisaDeanna."

I'm on the same side as you are.

---

Gothcha. Thanks. [8D]

What I love about this whole thread is that people keep using the argument that hybrids are cleaner so the HOV exemption makes sense. What people fail to realize is that the honda civic hybrid that gets the "SULEV" rating in California is a different car than the civic hybrid sold here. They have different emission systems and they are being run on different gas. Same goes for the Insight. Go read all the fine print on the honda website(http://www.hondacars.com/images/banners/2004/civic_hybrid/civic_hybrid_factsheet.pdf). The Honda hybrids around here are actually dirty compared to most new small and mid-size cars. The Prius sold here and in California is the exact same car, but the SULEV rating only applies when using gas that is only available in California.
The Prius is the cleanest of the hybrids, but there are regular cars that have the exact same emissions as the Prius. There are a ton of cars that have better emmissions than the Honda hybrids that are sold here.
If you are going to keep using the SULEV rated/cleaner emissions argument, you should first take a look at the list of all cars that are just as clean as the hybrids on this site:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ccvl/2004sulevpzevlist.htm

Some of these cars are available here, some of them aren't like the cleaner version of the Honda hybrids.
So for all the people driving hybrids by themselves in the HOV that think they are cleaning up our air, sorry you aren't. The person driving a Ford Focus with two other people is the one that is really making a difference.

Here's a nice quote from www.driveclean.ca.gov
"Gasoline vehicles meeting PZEV emissions standards sometimes have even lower emissions than hybrid or alternative fuel vehicles."
I suppose we should let all these cars have the HOV exemption also? It makes as much sense as the hybrid exemption.