You may get 100mpg, but if you have to plug it in, then you're paying for (and polluting with) electricty from the power company. Anyone know if you would pay (or pollute) more or less by using more electricty from the power company rather than by burning gasoline?

Great if a majority of your electricity comes from renewable sources, but assuming it doesn't (it doesn't), is there any point to this? I can't see how it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, rather it would seem likely to increase them. Maybe cost to the customer would be slightly less due to using low-rate 'overnight' electricity (is that enough to make up for the reduced efficiency?), but if everybody started using these, the price differential would vanish...

Many people bring up the point that plugging in us just getting your energy from another 'polluting source' (like coal or nuclear). But people don't often realize that these plants are vastly more effecient at generating energy than an internal combustion engine. And to me, anyways, it seems like an easier task to convert over several thousand power pants to renueable/sustainable sources, and then build more plants than to try and cope with the enormous amount of pollution are cars are putting out right now.

what you have to realize, is that this hybrid technology, is not the final answer. its really not even a good answer - more smoke and mirror right now than anything. This is simply the fisrt stepping stone away from pure gasoline. E85 ethanol is another. For those of you who can use calculators, you know that for the most part, Toyota Hybrids are not saving anyone money, and it takes YEARS to recoup the premium paid for it (the new lexus RXh comes a $10,000 premium). Most cases take longer than people will keep the vehicle. These products, currently, are more of a political and ecological statement than anything. This one is no different - they're robbing Peter to pay Paul.

What happens to all the spent batteries and the toxic chemicals within? Even on the regular hybrids isn't this a problem that has yet to hit people? According to Edrives website the batteries will last 6 to 8 years...then what? Replace the 250lbs of batteries with a new pack (Hmm...wonder if they will be around to do that?)... This conversion costs $12,000 over and above the inflated cost you are already paying for the Prius in the first place. If travelling at a speed of 34mph or less (city driving) the extra batteries ($12000/250 lbs) give you an extra 35 miles range before the gas kicks in. Want to really save the environment? Drive less, Drive smaller.

i was just going to mention the irony behind the battery exchange every 5-8 years. What we really need is a car utilising the BFG technology :) ;)

right on, KsprayDad. get a bike, people.

haha, suddenly this is a related topic ;) http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/parlee-z3s1-custom-bike...

A few comments on the comments: 1. If you live anywhere that gets most of the electricity from hydro-electric, wind, solar, or nuclear - then a plug in automobile is the best option for the environment. Frankly, the best way to address the environmental issue is if we all were driving fully electric automobiles. But, the primary issues there are distance, top speed, and vehicle weight. Still, it is the direction this is going. 2. The battery argument on hybrids is NOT an issue. Studies now conclusively show that the batteries in the hybrid vehicles will last the life of the vehicle (despite their 6 year guarantee). In addition, the type of batteries being used are highly sought-after for recycling. So, all this talk about how the batteries in these vehicles being huge environmental disasters is, essentialy, baloney. At the very least, they are no more of an issue to the environment than any other vehicle. 3. Yes, hybrids are a step in the right direction, but ultimately not the final outcome. Ultimately we need to be driving zero emissions vehicles. However, focus on automobiles only is a mistake since airline travel is, mile per emissions, more dangerous to the environment than automobile travel. We need to reduce airline travel, and find other transportation means if we are to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Stepping down from the silly soap box now.

"In addition, the type of batteries being used are highly sought-after for recycling." Right, ok so assume they will last the life of a vehicle...and ok, maybe the person will get them recycled. But recycling still uses those valuable resources we are all trying so diligently to avoid. I'm still not sold...

None of this will save us from "Peak Oil". Wake me up when they have the "Mr Fusion" conversion kit, then we might have something.

thrillhouse, how are the Prius' oustanding MPG, smog, and CO2 ratings at the EPA's Green Vehicle Guide "smoke and mirrors"? rainfever, how is recycling a battery pack any worse than recycling a gasoline engine? Toyota should make the Prius so you can plug it in to trickle-charge it! There's no downside to this except their fear of confusing car buyers. Then they should let you choose how many (heavy) batteries to load into your Prius, from the current configuration for a 1 mile trip, or several hundred more pounds for a longer trip. (Tim Russell in the comments to the Treehugger story has the same idea.) The batteries you don't drag along can stay at home, recharging from your windmill or solar PV system and powering your home when it's calm or dark. The Prius isn't just a car, it's the first high-power mobile generator and storage system to reach the mass market, so it's great that rich environmentalists are experimenting with it. Honda makes this explicit, saying their next FCX can power your home. (Also, read the fascinating interview with Bert Rutan in Automobile magazine about energy efficiency and loving his EV1.) (I jogged to the shops and post office in the rain today, getting over 300 MPG :-)

Hmmm. If you park on the street, you'll need a long cable to plug it in...

The appeal of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) is not only due to their environmental benefit. Currently, the U.S.A. imports 60% of the oil it uses, and 69% of its oil consumption is due to transportation alone (http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/brochure/infocard01.htm). Nationally, only 3% of its electricity is produced from oil (http://www.eia.doe.gov/fuelelectric.html). Therefore, the widespread adoption of PHEVs would bring about a significant reduction in oil consumption and imports. While about 50% of U.S. electricity comes from coal, the additional emissions caused by charging PHEVs could be cleaned with algae to produce biodiesel & ethanol (http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0111/p01s03-sten.html). If Toyota or GM don't bring out a PHEV by 2009 or so, I'll buy one from Venture Vehicles for commuting & roadtrips, and save my gasoline car for when I absolutely need more room (http://www.flytheroad.com/ & http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/ventureone-is-one-quick...