Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "FanJet" > wrote in message
> news
>> John Horner wrote:
>>
>>
>> It's as though adding a bunch of batteries, an electric
>> motor/generator & all the electronics to run them results in a
>> significant saving that wouldn't be realized if an equivalent effort
>> were made to the gasoline engine only vehicle. Really doesn't make
>> much sense. Basically, it takes X amount of energy to get a vehicle
>> moving and then to keep it moving. Whether gasoline engine only or
>> today's 'hybrid', all of that energy comes from gasoline. The only
>> possible savings must come from an increased efficiency of the
>> hybrid.
>
> Or much more simply - you make the vehicle lighter. Which means
> making it smaller.
>
> But we are getting away from the topic of discussion. The issue
> wasn't whether
> hybrids are better or not. The issue is that the tax credit was
> originally intended to encourage the development and sale of the next
> generation of economy cars with the assumption that the only way the
> market would
> accept an economy car again was by doing a hybrid. Giving the tax
> credit to non-economy cars that just happen to have a hybrid design
> is contrary to the original intent of the credit, and is a loophole,
> and should not be allowed.
>
> Ted

Actually, an answer is already slated to be available in Canada:

http://www.smartcar.com/

why isn't this available in the US - Honda, Toyota, GM, Ford, Chrysler,
Anyone?