You buy a "green" car to make a statement, not to save the planet. Or save money - they are proven money losers as you note. And check out the carbon footprint of hybrids - they're larger than normal cars because of initial production (including mining), battery replacement, and battery disposal.

Not entirely true.
Hybrid cars do, in fact, require more energy to produce than conventional cars. However, the conventional vehicle requires far more energy to operate and emits far more greenhouse gases over its lifetime, significantly canceling out any imbalance during the production stage.

Not much point to arguing with a guy who thinks that people buy green cars to annoy him.

There are two other considerations though that need to accounted for in the life cycle of the car: battery replacement and electric generation sources. The hybrid battery will not last as long as the car and will need to be replaced at least once. And when you charge the car (plug in models), if the electricity is produced by fossil fuels, then that affects the carbon footprint as well.

Ms. Parker: Green cars don't annoy me - I'm just not convinced they are what they are marketed to be. But I may be wrong. Time will tell. And I do think a lot of people buy them to make a statement.

Which is why it is ridiculous that this list does not include diesels. They are typically a $2-3000 more than comparable gas cars and get better real world fuel economy than many hybrids. By real world, I'm referencing the fact that most hybrids under most use do not get anywhere near their EPA rated fuel economy.

It is indisputable that the greenest car you can own is the one you currently have. In other words, the greenest thing to do is to keep your old clunker running rather than buy (and drive the production of) a new car. People who drive hybrids tend to come out of equally small cars, so this is doubly so. They trade in a 35 mpg Civic to get a 45 mpg Prius. This is not green. Its green posturing.

And an organ donor sticker! Recycle, reduce, reuse! ;)

I could probably use anew liver, are you donating

On the contrary, I'm trying to preemptively get on the transplant list. Know any teetotaling daredevils?

how many miles per cat do you get with that

My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way we likes it.

Earnhardt, you're going to need to look around a bit closer when you drive. Just under 2.5 million hybrids have been sold since 1999, and nearly every carmakers has at least one hybrid in its lineup.

They're not all Prius or Insight models.

Mike - for all practical purposes, they are all Priuses. Most hybrids that are not specific models, or "statement" cars don't sell well at all. One of the best value hybrids made, the Altima sold terribly. Its interesting that about the only place you see altima hybrids are in taxi fleets. Not flashy, but efficient. But nobody bought it because it doesn't make a statement.

Donald, no one bought the Altima because if you wanted a full-size hybrid sedan, it didn't offer anything that the Camry hybrid didn't do. I just checked some archival info and it also didn't help that the Altima has slightly worse mileage than the Camry despite having less HP and was only available in eight states!

The idea that people are only buying hybrids because they make a statement was very true in the early years, but is less of a factor in sales...

I'll agree that the need to feel and look "green" is a major reason people buy hybrids, but there several other advantages -- tax credits, preferential parking, HOV lane use, etc. -- that likely play a larger part in the decision to buy. And some people just don't want to drive rolling appliances like the Corolla or the Accord, so hybrids -- especially sportier ones -- are an attractive option.

I personally don't see the benefit, especially since new hybrids are so expensive and the older ones now on the market are likely ready for battery pack replacements -- a $5,000 to $8,000 tab!

I don't like what hybrids stand for. But I do like small cars. But I have to say I'm intrigued by the little prius variant. Its MSRP is about $19K. So you are paying a bit of a premium. But if it does better on fuel, it may be worth it. Its also a hatch, something I like.

I'm puzzled: What do hybrids "stand for," besides saving money on gas and being (relatively) cleaner for the environment? And why are those bad things?

What do pickup trucks "stand for?" Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and 'Murica? Five thousand flag-waving patriots bought hybrid Silverados, and I'll bet some of them listen to country music and Rush Limbaugh and don't have NPR as a pre-set Sirius station.

What do Porsches stand for? Cocaine-sniffing hedge fund managers and general douchebaggery? Maybe they're the ones who bought 500 hybrid Panameras, maybe to race the 2,000 Porsche Cayennes on the road.

Etc...

Generalizing about what cars "stand for" just based on pre-conceived notions about image is about as valid as generalizing about what people stand for by just by looking at them.

Even if you do believe climate change is real, and that we can do something about it, the hybrid or all electric car is a sham. Driven by politician's need to look like they actually are doing something and the manufacturers thirst for government money, they are hugely expensive, once you figure in the tax money that is poured into them as various subsidies, and the fact that they tax an already soon-to-be overloaded electrical generation and distribution facility, AND the dirty manufacturing of batteries, etc, they are actually an "anti-green" sham. The "feel good but don't look at that guy behind that curtain" crowd love them..

I completely agree Dan D.

Dan, cars were initially far more expensive than the horses they replaced, and subsidies at every level -- taxes from local, state, and federal sources -- were used to build and maintain the improved roads cars required.

The subsidies can be looked at as akin our support of NASA for 50+ years, only far cheaper. And most of the people who groused loudest about supporting space research probably sleep on memory foam, wear scratch-resistant eyeglass lenses, protect their homes with smoke detectors, and use cordless tools -- all offshoots of NASA research. Better batteries are coming, thanks to subsidized research, but you're right that the current battery manufacturing process is the opposite of green. Some studies have shown that the amount of harm is offset by the aggregate energy saved, but for now, it's still far "greener" to drive a small, efficient gas-powered car that's already on the road.

What's even more green -- and WAY cheaper than any hybrid -- is to run waste vegetable oil in a diesel car...

The "oil is running out" story has been re-told for decades. If memory serves me right (always somewhat questionable), in the 70's it was gone by early 2000's for example. The story is based on KNOWN oil reserves and does not take into account new discoveries and technologies. Currently it is estimated that the US will be energy independent in a few years, thanks to new technologies and discoveries. There is a oil for a LONG time.

**continued**
So back to the original question. Where do you get the electricity to make hydrogen? Thats the key question. If you burn coal to make that electricity, then you aren't solving anything.

If you use it to soak up extra electricity produced by nuclear plants at night, thats a good use. Same goes for Hydro. Solar and wind are of no use really because they make power when people use it.

The sad thing is that any group of 10 intelligent people could come up with an energy plan for the next 100 years, but nobody has the guts to make it work.

Oil for the next 30 years, with an emphasis on natural gas. Nuclear fills in the gap from 20 to 60 years out, and then hopefully microgeneration will be a reality. i.e. solar panels on everyone's house. No huge power station, but every house is nearly self sufficient. Excess electricity makes hydrogen at your house whenever its available, and that "free" hydrogen goes in yoru car. Its not really simple, but its not rocket science.

lafwnduh - this is the problem. People talking about this stuff don't understand the basic physics of the problem. Hydrogen is not a fuel source. There is NO elemental hydrogen on planet Earth. What hydrogen is is a relatively good way to STORE energy. You do this by splitting water into its two elements, hydrogen and oxygen. When you do this, you put energy into the system. Its the same energy you get out (minus conversion inefficiencies) when you combine the two back to make water. This can be done in a fuel cell or in an internal combustion engine burning hydrogen. The chemical reaction is the same.

Thats the funny thing. People think Hydrogen fuel cells are something special. They arent. They are cool. Really cool but they dont' do anything a plain old internal combustion engine can't do.
**continued***

Easy cheap oil is likely to run out in 30-50 years. That's true.

But shale oil and other forms that are more expensive and tougher to extract will be around for hundreds of years. The issue is really one of cost: will alternative energy sources become cheap enough to make oil production less profitable?

The answer is a strong, emphatic probably....

Just move over to Natural gas.

Yes because fracking is the answer.

What planet are you on? Where do you get your "reality".

What science do you read that says we need to replace oil in 30 years? Seriously? When you say oil, to you also mean we need to stop using natural gas?

Here's how everyone, including myself, should react to your fantasy. You should be free to pursue it. You should be free to buy the best electric car our economy can produce. But please don't try to get Government to force one of your cars down my throat. I'm willing to roll the dice. If we run out of oil while I have my car, I'll get one of yours.

But not until energy density approaches fossil fuels. Science? Do you know what energy density is? Its the amount of energy stored in a pound of fuel or in a pound of batteries. Right now there is over 10X more energy in a pound of gas than in a pound of batteries. Its not about power, its about energy. (more science, look it up)

Google"Milankovich wobble."

Ronald,
What do you think people are actually getting with their Prius when they take them out of the city. Not much better than your cmax.

If you wanted a real car that got good fuel economy, you should have bought a VW diesel. Nobody talks about them because the green dogma is HYBRID. But I know 2 people with VW diesels. One, with an older jetta gets 38 mpg.

The other with a much larger, new Passat. Big, luxurious and a real car, he gets 41 mpg!!!

You should have gotten a Diesel Jetta Wagon.

Don