Hybrid Hypocrisy?

I've been thinking about the people I know with SUV's and each of them also owns a 4 cylinder car as a second vehicle (including me). Buying a Hybrid as a second car is just taking that one step futher.
 
To assume there is some "contradiction" is to assume the SUVs (or Hybrids) are bought purely for image which is nonsense.
 
We need 2 cars and one of them has be able to pull our travel trailer. Going off road now and then is a bonus too.
 
Makes for more sense then owning a pair of Accords even if the mileage averages out the same.
 
Of course if he thought of that then he wouldn't have been able to write yet one more "holier then thou" rant against SUV's.
 
Makes me wonder what Mr. Naughton drives.

There are some people (Sierra Club anyone?) who won't be happy until everyone is driving the "moral equivalent" of a Prius or Smart ForTwo. Which of course ignores the needs/desires of most of Americans. So bottom line, no matter what you drive, someone isn't going to be happy with you...

I have an S2000 (20,30) and a Chevy 2500 crew cab (8,20). Being in the military requires me to move, so the truck is absolutely necessary (not to mention if I need to move more than 1 person, the crew cab is a must). Do I get the best mileage? No. Do I care? Only when I'm dropping off a paycheck at the pump.
 
I don't verbally abuse any SUV owner, but I do speak out against the concept of people buying SUVs purely for status symbols. I would condemn a household for having an SUV for each family member (unless it truly were warranted).
 
Now recreation vehicles are different. Having an offroad vehicle for sport is just as acceptable as my owning an S2000 for SCCA, regardless of mileage.

mirth, it sounds like you're saying that environmentalists won't be happy unless we ignore our needs and desires, therefore we should drive whatever we want.
 
First, I don't believe that most environmentalists think we should ignore our needs and desires, just that those needs and desires could be met more intelligently and efficiently.
 
Second, the answer is likely somewhere between the two "all-or-nothing" choices you present. SUVs have their place in the marketplace. What needs to be done is to discourage behavior such as single-occupancy freeway commuting in Jeep Commanders.
 
Back to the article, it makes so much sense to have both an SUV and a hybrid for those folks who actually need SUVs. It allows them to use "the right tool for the job", commuting in the hybrid and towing in the SUV. The problem is when people who only need the SUV a fraction of the time use that as justification to highway commute 80 miles a day in it.

"First, I don't believe that most environmentalists think we should ignore our needs and desires, just that those needs and desires could be met more intelligently and efficiently."
 
Who gets to decide what is "intelligent and efficient"? You? Al Gore? George "W" Bush?

Oddly enough I think this makes sense.
 
If the SUV is truly used for the utility, i.e. you tow a boat or need 4WD and payload for work, then owning this for those purposes and a hybrid for other uses makes total sense.
 
In fact, my Miata and Forester are opposites, and comlpement each other well. This just takes the same idea to the extreme.