You don't think that a hybrid SUV is a bit pretentious?

Well, then I'm not sure why the government is putting its support behind E85 fuel, because it requires a new vehicle as well. It's going to take more than a few taxpayer dollars to create the infrastructure to allow for a new way of getting gasoline. At least with electric we've already got a convenient and relatively stable delivery system.

Not at all. People who drive SUVs are arguably the ones who save the most money, as they're getting the biggest boost in mileage, assuming of course that the hybrids SUVs are just as good (or at least close).

Now if those soccer moms claim to have gotten the hybrids SUVs "in order to protect the environment", that would indeed be pretentious. Heck, I would call that an outright lie. Hybrids are about saving money. You aren't saving the environment, we already have plenty of vehicles with low enough emissions that the environment isn't in any real danger from emissions from cars. People who would make such claims, those are the pretentious ones.

Me, I'm gonna be honest. I only want a hybrid to save money on gas. Lower emissions, that's just a very very small bonus.

The minute I clocked on this topic, I thought of the "Helloooo, I'm an electric car, I can't go very far, or very fast, and f you ride in me people will think you are gay" thing from the simpsons. ._.

They would save the most money by not fucking driving an SUV altogether.

Also: They're not really saving ANY money. You forgot to factor in the cost difference between a standard SUV, and a hybrid one.

Think you and everyone else. I don't think many people claim to have bought a hybrid car for the environment. They may have used it as a bonus, but not many (and by not many, I mean none) people claim to use that as their first and foremost reason.

There's not many legitimate reasons for owning an SUV. As a matter of fact, I can think of none.

What about large families with say... 4 or 5 children? There aren't many sedans that can accomodate a large family. Then of course you could argue that they should drive minivans instead. Consider, however, families who live in rural areas that have dirt roads that turn to mud in the rain, or perhaps they live in an area where they could easily be snowed in? 4wd on a SUV could definitely come in handy.

I don't understand exactly why SUVs are demonized as much as they are. Sports cars with large engines and big trucks are just as bad on fuel economy. Most SUVs are nothing more than trucks with extra seats instead of a pickup bed.

Does anybody know about the self sustaining fusion reactor that they're supposedly constructing in France. I remember reading something about it recently. (I just hope that Doc Ock isn't on the project. ;)) It might be possible to use such a reactor to generate enough electricity to increase the efficiency of water electrolysis. (This of course is much easier said than done.) Through this process we could, in turn, extract pure hydrogen from ocean water. The current process for producing pure hydrogen results in more pollution and is more costly than the burning of fossil fuels. Hydrogen powered internal combustion engines aren't anything new... the first one was developed in 1807. A great benefit to an internal combustion engine that runs on hydrogen is that the direct by-product is pure water. In addition to this, hydrogen combustion is much more energetic than traditional gasoline. Problems with hydrogen powered internal combustion cars arise in the storage of the hydrogen in the fuel tank. If the hydrogen is in the form of a gas, filling the volume of a normal sized fuel tank wouldn't take the vehicle very far. The fuel must be in a liquid form, and therefore must be extremely cold. However, scientists and engineers have been working on finding a way to make hydrogen powered vehicles a reality despite the overwhelming complexities.

Yeah, that's true. I figured there would have to be a reason for it, it's just that I couldn't think of one off the top of my head. For some reason, however, I don't think this is the case with most SUV owners.


Because they're unnecessary. If they're just trucks with extra seats, then why not drive a mini-van? I mean, besides the reason stated above... let's think city wise.

I'm not saying that there aren't other forms of gas guzzling going on that should be put to a stop, but the SUV in particular is just ridiculous, especially with how popular those things are.

I think most SUV owners purchase them cause... well, many times a person's choice of vehicle is a reflection of their personality as much as a meeting of their transportation needs. American auto owners are members of a very specific culture. Many people worship their cars, hell, Pixar just made an entire movie about Cars and American car culture.

Also, a few years ago when the SUV craze started to take off, gas was cheap. I remember in about 1998, getting regular unleaded for about .88/gal. When gas was that cheap, people didn't care if their vehicles were fuel efficient. They purchased them for style purposes only. Also at the time... with gas being so inexpensive, what was the point of developing an alternative?

Are they unnecessary? Sure, in most cases. But so is every sports car. In fact, we don't need cars to be of different colors or stylings at all. People rarely only purchase what they need... they purchase what they want.

So where exactly do we get electricity from?

It's a deferred cost. It's not oil directly, but the energy has to be generated through some means, which undoubtedly is probably as bad as burning gasoline on sight. This is an "out of sight, out of mind" argument.

Aren't there lots of methods of getting eletricity that could be used far more than they are being used now?

We get electricity a number of ways: from dams, windmills, burning of fossil fuels, coal, and natural gas, nuclear reactors. We've pretty much derived a way to convert almost any source of potential energy into electricity.

The next big step would be a self sustaining fusion reactor that would generate an insane amount of heat that could be used by a steam engine to generate electricity; then the electricity used for electrolysis of water, then bam, hydrogen for everybody! Much easier said than done though.

Actually it just has to be held under a shitload of pressure. And you need somewhat special materials to contain hydrogen because it has this bad property of making lots of materials brittle over time as well as diffusing much much faster through materials than any other gas (that's why you need those special silvery helium balloons over the latex ones you can blow up).

Tal, what you said is true, but one thing is that power plants are much more efficient users of the fuel than your car is. They can take advantage of scale and get more energy per volume out of the fuel as well as release less polution into the atmosphere by using better carbon dioxide scrubbers and such. Still not that huge of an improvement, though.

I agree there, definitely. Many people do see their car as a reflection of themselves (or perhaps what they would like to be, but I'll leave the psychoanalysis to someone more knowledgable), however in times like these, it's a bit... silly. If they can afford the gas, then by all means, blow the money. It's not hurting my bank account. It'll fuck me over in the future, once oil's peaked, but meh. What can you do?

Purchasing a car just because you're attracted to it is a bit silly, though. Then again, I'd imagine that the Automerican culture is a bit silly altogether (i.e. the hummer, wtf?)

Yet, the funny part is, dealerships were offering thousands over kelly blue book as a trade in, then turned around and sold them for even more. Even after the craze was over, those people that lagged and didn't quite make it the first time are guzzling gas WHILE paying an outrageous car note.

I agree, most sports cars are, however most sport cars (depending on which brand, make, year, ect.) don't cost as much as the average SUV, are more fuel efficient, and generally last longer. Now I'm not saying that we should make all cars uniform; rigged for fuel efficiency, but I do feel that those that purchase SUV's are either ill informed, or just don't care. That's why I feel a hybrid SUV is pretentious.

I've been interested in the development progress of hybrids. Every day I have to drive through downtown Orlando and it's a hell of a trip and a major abuse on a vehicle. I've seen some people mentioned maintenance costs in regards to hybrids but I haven't found any facts to back up anything that might imply additional costs. From what I've researched, all hybrid specific components in current models are backed by manufacturers for 8 years/100k miles depending on what state you live in. Now, the "what state you live in" part might factor in a lot, but I'm curious to hear what others have heard that might condradict this claim. I'd also like to hear some other variables that could make a hybrid vehicle costly, because right now at a glance it looks like a hybrid would be more suitable for my commute. Some of them get very good city mileage and the regenerative breaking system would be beneficial for that constant annoying stop-and-go traffic.

I've read that one of main problems is that making hydrogen produces as much (or more?) waste as traditional cars produce.

Did you actually take 1/4 of a second to actually read this thread or any of the posts in it?