The pathetic irony of hybrids, fuel economy, and the automotive press

Hybrid critics make me laugh. Hybrid cars don't achieve EPA fuel efficiency numbers and they don't save money these critics keep harping.

Sure, according to Consumer Reports, hybrid cars often do not achieve the EPA's fuel economy estimates. Of course, the Consumer Report's study also shows that of the 6 hybrids available, 3 of them are the MOST FUEL EFFICIENT VEHICLES you can buy. More ironically, however, these critics glance over the fact that most vehicles miss their EPA estimates, and that in city driving, conventional vehicles miss their EPA estimates miserably.

So let's be clear about this. The Toyota Prius only achieves a pathetic 45 mpg in the city, the Jeep Liberty Diesel achieves a whopping 11 mpg, the Chrysler 300C achieves 17, and a number of Dodges achieve a stellar 8 mpg. Ohhh, those crappy hybrids.

Good thing hybrids only account for around 1 percent of U.S. auto sales otherwise America would be in real trouble! PHEW!

"Hybrids suck, man," these critics seem to say, "they don't achieve EPA estimates, so it's OK if I only achieve 8 mpg. The Prius only achieves 45 mpg, not 60! Thats the real problem!"

What's going on here? If foreign oil dependency is a problem, if oil consumption is a problem, shouldn't our attention be on the source of the problem? Why is the President asking Americans to conserve, as GM increases output of its most gas-guzzling vehicles?

Now I get it, cause we don't want more hyped hybrids on the road - they're dangerous! I mean, according to a recent study, if all vehicles achieved 45 mpg, not only could America end foreign oil dependency, but it could save as much as a trillion dollars. That would be blasphemous. Americans aren't supposed to save money, our duty in life is to spend money, dammit!

Fortunately, 9 out of 10 of the 'best' offenders, according to the CR study, were conventional vehicles. Almost every conventional vehicle is achieving less than 20 mpg when driven in the city, stuck at street lights and stop signs, caught in rushhour, etc. In fact, many conventional vehicles are only achieving around 10 mpg in these conditions. Now that's American, baby!

So, is it the fact that hybrids only achieve 45 mpg, instead of 60 mpg, that is increasing foreign oil dependency every year, or is it the fact the millions of conventional vehicles are only achieving 10 mpg? Damn those hybrids.

I wonder how much advertising money is spent on hybrid vehicles versus conventional vehicles? Hmm. Well, GM spends billions on advertising every year and they don't offer any hybrids - NO the current Silverado DOESN't COUNT - so I'd say hybrids are already at a huge disadvantage.

OOPs, I didn't just criticize GM. I better watch it, they might pull all their ads from my site like they did to the LATimes.

In reality, promoting hybrids is worth millions in advertising dollars, while promoting 8 mpg gas-guzzlers is worth billions, but I'm sure there isn't any connection. Just as there isn't any connection between 8 mpg and foreign oil dependency. Just as there isn't any connection between automobile pollution and lung cancer, and asthma, and allergies, and smog-influenced skin cancer, and global warming.

Hybrids are hype and everyone should drive a Hummer because oil dependency is a god-given, perfectly harmless action. Those that disagree are part of the oppressive, supremely powerful tree-hugging conspiracy.

If ending foreign oil dependency could save America a trillion dollars, how much does 8 mpg, or even 20 mpg, really cost America? Since there are billions of reasons not to ask that question, you can be sure that criticisms of hybrids will continue, but that question won't get asked.

Of course, what's a trillion dollars? Just add it to the deficit and let someone else deal with it in a decade or two. Now that's American! God bless us!