Hybrid Replacement Fuel Cars: Cars of the Future?

Since fuel prices continue to rise, people will continue discussing the benefits of alternative fuel cars. Hybrid vehicles are presently the most well-known amongst alternative fuel cars but ethanol-fueled cars are appearing as well. Another kind of automobile can operate on the same oil that is used to cook french fries at McDonald’s, and this is a bio-diesel vehicle.


Since hybrid cars are seeking better gas mileage by integrating electric power with a fuel source, that makes them alternative fuel cars. Although initiatives to make cars that ran on alternative fuels have functioned in the past, gasoline fueled cars succeeded because of the power and speed. Early hybrid cars would probably top out at 25 miles an hour and work for about 10 minutes. Due to pollution and the persistent rising cost of fuel, the automotive industry has been investing lots of money into alternative fuel vehicles.


While you might assume the technology would be the same, there are numerous types of hybrid cars. The electrical portion of certain hybrid alternative fuel cars is used to present an extra boost to the car’s engine when starting the car or when its running. Other hybrid cars use electric power to drive the car in stop and go traffic. Hybrid vehicles are getting to be more and more powerful compared to what it was when they first came out. With the advancements in technology, the power should continue to improve, as well as the savings in fuel.


The auto industry happens to be making great strides in creating hybrid cars that not only improve in gas mileage but in power as well. Truck owners are also insisting on hybrids also so car companies are developing them as well. There is a good amount of power in these hybrid trucks and also the gas mileage is better and they can power electrical tools. It is difficult to find out what’s going to happen in the future regarding gasoline and hybrid cars. It really is probable that supply and demand will win and gasoline will be replaced by cleaner alternative fuels. Provided that hybrid car expertise continues to move ahead, the popularity will continue to grow.
They are going to continue to lower pollution, while they end up getting better gas mileage and improved power. There’s a demand for cars using alternative fuels, but their creation hasn’t caught up with the common vehicles, and that is why prices haven’t come down. Base rate for some of these alternative fuel cars starts at $20,000 but could get cheaper with US government tax incentives.

Sick of High Fuel Charges? Get A Fuel Efficient Motor vehicle

When buying a new car or truck, gasoline economy was a key factor for at least one-third of American car buyers. Because of the preoccupation today with smog, global warming and America’s dependence on foreign sources of oil, it’s actually shocking to learn that as long ago as 1992 a car that got 100 miles to the gallon was built by General Motors. There was also a car that looked a lot like the Geo Metro and weighed 1000 pounds, which boasted 75 miles per gallon gas mileage. Regrettably, as a way to meet American safety regulations, the 3-cylinder vehicle required reinforcement weighing 200 pounds, which resulted in further development being discarded.

This was not the only prototype developed by GM which ended up on the scrapheap. These vehicles include the GM Lean-Machine in 1982 at 80 MPG, and the GM Ultralite which got 100 MPG. As soon as Honda in 1992 reached 50 mpg with the Civic VX, GM was selling cars that got 20 mpg, while in the background they had vehicles capable of 100 mpg. Clearly this begs the question that explains why these cars that are capable of 100 mpg are not available to the public.

Why are traditional vehicles sold in the US, while at the same time, the same companies are selling different vehicles far away in other countries? Cars that achieve more than 70 mpg have been sold in Europe and Japan for a lot of years. The Lupo, a Volkswagen, is a perfect instance of a car that gets 78 MPG, but has never been sold in the US. Honda introduced to the US sector in 2007, a car called the Fit, but known as the Jazz in other parts of the world. The Jazz in Japan has ways to increase fuel economy and a smaller engine, but for the US, the Fit doesn’t even use a smaller engine as an option.

The auto companies tell Americans that they love big cars, and that is what they want to create big cars. Building a small commuter type vehicle doesn’t make the manfacturer big money, unlike with a large SUV. A Tank on Wheels is the thing to own – that’s the sales message that the commercials beguile the American public with. The reality that options have never been provided reveals where the big companies have their interests. Instead of being synonymous with SUVs, GM today could have been recognized as a leader in fuel-economic vehicles. Americans weren’t denied merely by GM, but also by all of those other manufacturers who have developed fuel-efficient cars.

American automakers haven’t ever given the US people an opportunity to acquire a fuel-efficient car, despite the world having been embroiled in oil wars and being severely polluted. The question comes up: how many Americans would have appreciated the option of getting a car with good gas mileage but weren’t ever offered it? Possibly the moment has come to restore building those cars that were developed only to be abandoned all those years ago.


NEW!-ZEV Backlash Articles
Everyone is encouraged to write a letter to the editor supporting the mandate and the explaining the benefits all Californians will receive ZEVs.

Pacoima Reality Check
What do electric cars have to do with inner-city air quality
Los Angeles Weekley. March 2, 2001 (Click here for contact information)

Other News Articles

Drivers of Clean-Air Cars to Get a Break
Los Angeles Time, February 23, 200

Electric Cars Get Green Light From Board
Los Angeles Times, January 26, 2001

Auto Makers Bid to Brake Electric Car Program
Los Angeles Times, January 25, 2001

A Clean California Needs Electric Cars…
Los Angeles Times, January 25, 2001

State Air Board Backing Off on Battery Cars
San Francisco Chronicle, December 8, 2000

State Board Holds Firm on Electric Cars
San Francisco Chronicle, September 9, 2000

Firms Told to Resume Making Electric Cars
Los Angeles Times, September 9, 2000

State Officials Show Off Technology, Signal Support for Mandate
San Francisco Chronicle, August 17, 2000

Electric Cars Gain Entry to Carpool Lanes
Los Angeles Times, June 16, 2000

EVs get HOV status
Orange County Register, June 16, 2000

Less than zero
Sacramento News and Review, June 15, 2000

Going for zero
Santa Barbara News-Press, April 10, 2000

Emission mandate: Regulators need to keep the pressure on for clean cars
The Sacramento Bee, Editorial, April 6, 2000

Calif. Faces Electric Car Decision
Associated Press, March 29, 2000

I Sing the Pickup Electric
San Francisco Chronicle, March 16, 2000

Buzz into the future with electric cars
Alameda Newspaper Group:
Oakland Tribune
Hayward Daily Review
Alameda Times-Star
Fremont Argus
San Mateo County Times
Tri-Valley Herald

Take Action!


Z E V N O W U P D A T E November 15, 2000


September’s decision by the Air Resources Board (ARB) to maintain the ZEV Program was a major victory for California’s environment and the health of its citizens. But the fight isn’t over yet. The final decision on whether to keep the mandate as is, or allow the auto-manufacturers more time to delay, will be made in January.

In spite of strong statements of support for the program by Air Board members in September, there has been intense lobbying since then by the car companies to get the ZEV program weakened or delayed. And that’s not all. Car companies have also nearly stopped the marketing and production of electric vehicles altogether.

A recent article in the LA Times detailed the new auto industry “line” regarding ARB’s recent decision. Major car manufacturer’s including Honda, General Motors, Ford and Toyota all said they would PROBABLY FAIL TO MEET the current ZEV program’s requirement that 4 percent of their fleets be zero-emission vehicles by 2003. By not meeting the ZEV requirements and paying the $2 million dollar fine, these companies believe they would actually pay less than they would to fully comply with the program.

Don Walker, West Coast spokesman for General Motors Corp. even went so far as to say, “We have not announced any products (that would meet the mandate),” adding that it is unlikely there will be any new production of the company’s popular EV1. Jeff Kuhlman, GM’s technology division spokesman said, “We are looking at various product alternatives and would like to move
forward. But we are not going to do so until we understand what the final rules will be.”

Los Angeles Times, Wednesday, October 18, 2000
“Electric Cars Will Get the Green Light”


Most corporations have policies of not operating in violation of the law, and these particular auto-manufacturers submitted compliance plans to the ARB staff this past summer. We can’t allow these companies to ignore the law and the will of Californians!

Please take a few minutes to write a letter to the editor supporting the current ZEV program requirements and strongly opposing this latest tactic of the car companies to basically ignore the law by stopping production of clean vehicles. Following is a sample letter you can use to write your local paper as well as the contact information for the major California papers:

First, I’d like to applaud the Air Resources Board’s (ARB) recent decision to maintain California’s revolutionary Zero Emission Vehicle Program (ZEV). The ZEV Program has already had an enormously positive effect on California by encouraging the production of a new generation of non-polluting vehicles.

Unfortunately, auto manufacturers continue to drag their feet, refusing to adequately produce or market these vehicles. A recent LA Times article detailed the new auto industry “line” regarding ARB’s decision. The major car manufacturer’s including Honda, General Motors, Ford and Toyota all said they would PROBABLY FAIL TO MEET the current ZEV program’s requirement that 4 percent of their fleets be zero-emission vehicles by 2003.

Don Walker, West Coast spokesman for General Motors Corp. even went so far as to say, “We have not announced any products (that would meet the mandate),” adding that it is unlikely there will be any new production of the company’s popular EV1.

Such blatant disregard for California law and the will of the people is a disservice to our environment and our health. The auto industry fought against mandatory seat belts and air bags and now they are fighting against Californians’ right to a clean air future.

By putting electric, hybrid-electric and fuel cell vehicles on the road we will cut our dependence on oil, prevent air and water pollution, and save consumers billions at the gas pump. We can’t allow the auto industry to circumvent the will of the people and the rule of law!

San Francisco Chronicle chronletters@sfgate.com

San Francisco Examiner letters@examiner.com

The Oakland Tribune pstinnett@angnewspapers.com

The Sacramento Bee opinion@sacbee.com

San Jose Mercury News jswartley@sjmercury.com

Los Angeles Times mary.cox@latimes.com

The San Diego Union Tribune letters@uniontrib.com

As January’s deadline approaches we’ll begin another all out effort to ensure the ZEV Program remains strong. In the meantime, please write those letters and periodically check out our website at www.zevnow.org for more information. We will keep you informed so that you can continue to participate in the fight for a pollution free future. Thank you!







Free ZEV Newsletter