The Truth About The Green Car of the Year
There’s something deliciously ironic about slogging through one of LA’s infamous rush hours to attend a “green” cars award ceremony. The multi-lane Harbor Freeway plays host to a long slow dance of cars and semis, tailpipes steadily churning out brownish plumes into a blue sky. The dominant hue is not green but red: the omnipresent brake lights mocking California’s long-abandoned promises of fast, efficient personal travel. It’s almost enough to persuade a driver to ride the bus. Like me, most just crank on caffeine and escape boredom via the stereo, instead.
Safely ensconced within the confines of the Convention Center, road rage gives way to the journalistic trough [fair disclosure] and a wander amongst enough exotic metal to give a 49er a heart attack. In my dreams, I can grab a fast steed from the floor and point it at a winding road and go. In reality, manufacturers employ Swiffer-wielding minions to dust the untouchables.
Anyway, back to this business of saving the planet. This year’s auto show has been transformed into an overhead cam version of Earth Day. Even our press room sponsor proclaims that it’s now “dedicated to a green future.” In past years, such unbridled vehicular earth worship from a tire manufacturer would be about as credible as Vogue promoting a positive body image to a bulimic support group. Today, auto industry types don’t as much play the green card as staple it to their forehead.
The third annual Green Car of the Year award comes courtesy of the Green Car Journal™; which is also the Green Car Journal Online™, GreenCar.com™, GreenCars.com™ and Green Car Online.com™. Whether or not Ron Cogan practices the TM that he preaches, the editor and publisher behind these ventures has fully grasped the marketing possibilities of cleaning-up the image of the [once and future] planet destroyer. Clearly.
If you were expecting a sneering panel of hippy judges drenched in patchouli and incense, think again. In addition to such green luminaries as Jean-Michel Cousteau (eldest son of Jacques, the original Fish Whisperer) and Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope, both Jay Leno and Carroll Shelby voted in this year’s eco-electoral college. Not that the (former) champions of unbridled horsepower bothered showing up. Still, had they attended, the erstwhile eco-converts would have been flattered (not to say intoxicated) by the substantial media presence.
Mr. Cogan’s buff book has yet to find an alternative fuel that it doesn’t like. This year’s five nominees amped-up the hybrid hype, but good. GM dominated the entries, with its hybrid versions of the Aura, Malibu and Tahoe. Hybrid variants of the Mazda Tribute and Nissan Altima completed the list of contenders.
The esteemed panel awarded the coveted prize to the Chevrolet Tahoe. Mr. Cogan burnished its halo with all the enthusiasm you’d expect from a man who jets around the world on someone else’s nickel to test “green” cars without disclosing the manufacturers’ contribution to his reports or carbon footprint.
The cynicism is warranted. The powerplant installed in this belle of the enviro-ball Tahoe hybrid begins with a 6.0-liter V8. GM opted to graft its hybrid system onto a motor that’s substantially larger (e.g. thirstier) than either the 4.8 or 5.3-liter conventional motors used in other Tahoes. Attach 400 pounds of batteries to this mammoth mill, and the resulting ecotank offers no improvement in highway fuel economy and slightly less towing capacity over the old-fashioned dino burner.
Employing a gasser 25 percent larger than the norm– instead of deploying a lighter motor of smaller displacement– only to weigh it down with nickel metal hydride, seems a lot more mean than green. Yet with battery acid on tap, apparently all is forgiven.
To be fair, not all of the runners-up deserve a slam. Both the Nissan Altima Hybrid and the Mazda Tribute Hybrid accomplish their missions: delivering relatively low emissions and strong fuel economy relative to their respective classes. If you want four-wheeled fodder for a general rant against gasoline-battery marriages, you won’t find it here.
Still, there’s no getting around it: this award is meant to be about “moving the bar forward” in the noble pursuit of slicing America’s overall fuel consumption through consumer choice. Unfortunately, the prize has delivered a less laudable lesson: how ecology-as-pop-culture can produce sub-optimal results.
The recurring theme of the awards presentation: sacrifice is wholly unnecessary. But the belief that one can pilot a big block V8 for a grocery run while doing the planet a favor is just as absurd as it sounds. Irrespective of where you shake out on matters environmental, the message of burn-it-big-but-with-batteries is overtly hypocritical, an idea worthy of a spin-crazed carmaker, not an [alleged] environmental crusader.
For the majority of those with a desire to save fuel, swapping your ride for a smaller car remains the obvious and most effective solution.
EJ_San_Fran on Nov 19, 2007davey49: Brownie- SUVs are “fun” because they hold a lot of people (family or friends), haul a lot of stuff like camping gear or hunting and fishing equipment and tow things like campers, boats, motorcycles, 4 wheelers, etc… The high riding driver position is also an aid while driving in traffic. EJ- The Tahoe Hybrid is rated to tow 6000# and the Highlander is rated at 5000#. Towing that much weight with a FWD based vehicle has never been an ideal situation. Davey, Personally, I do all of this towing with a FWD minivan that gets 24 MPG on average. My minivan is rated for 3500 lbs towing and it works fine. Getting a Chevy Tahoe Hybrid to tow 6000 lbs seems kind of ridiculous to me (this spec is probably even exaggerated, so in practice you probably can tow only slightly more than my minivan). I see a lot of people doing heavy towing with something like a F-350 pickup truck. But that's far beyond the capability of this Chevy Tahoe Hybrid...
EJ_San_Fran on Nov 19, 2007EJ: This Chevy Tahoe Hybrid gets about the same MPG (21/22) as the (non-hybrid) Toyota Highlander (18/24). Both vehicles have similar towing capacity and cargo volume, but the Highlander is much cheaper and drives better. Phil Resler: These aren’t the same class of vehicle. The Tahoe is body-on-frame and the larger of the two. The Highlander is unit-body construction. The truck buyer will prefer the Tahoe. I'm talking about the new Highlander. That one is quite similar in size and capabilities to the Tahoe and it's probably more rugged (who would take a hybrid on dirt roads? I wouldn't) For most people (i.e. suburban kid schleppers) the unit-body construction is the better choice.
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- Kcflyer Guess we know who didn't give enough bribe money (aka campaign contributions) during the latest cycle. Got to pay to play boys and girls.
- Ima65688420 I'll consider an EV when it can do what my ZR2 diesel can do with similar range and refuel times.
- SCE to AUX Irony is everywhere:[list][*]The mfrs come to Washington asking for a steak, but get a burger instead. Gov't says "we gave you a meal."[/*][*]The alleged purpose behind EV subsidies is to clean up the air, but domestic content requirements means it's really an American nationalist agenda.[/*][*]Tesla lobbied against more subsidies on philosophical grounds, but got them anyway.[/*][*]Rebates on used EVs will drive up the price of used EVs.[/*][*]EV startups necessarily start with higher models, then work down-market. The new rules shut out Rivian and Lucid just as they are trying to get traction. But maybe - as with Tesla ca. 2018 - they won't lose high-dollar customers over a 'few bucks'.[/*][/list]What a mess.
- Ajla Much like with CAFE I think the new MSRP limits should be set to a single level instead of $55K for cars and $80K for "trucks".
- Bullnuke There was an interesting comment from the chief of a fire department made today concerning EV fires. "They're like trick birthday candles. They look like they're out and then they're on fire again.". I haven't noted a special subsidy or funding for the nation's fire departments regarding fire suppression training or equipment to combat "trick birthday candles".