Print 46 comment(s) - last by JediJeb.. on May 23 at 11:14 AM

The website offers fuel costs and MSRP of 18 2012-2013 vehicles

The U.S. government just introduced a new section to its website that allows consumers to compare the payback of certain hybrids and their traditional gasoline counterpart.

The website offers fuel costs and MSRP of 18 2012-2013 vehicles. Consumers simply choose a hybrid model and move the sliders appropriately to see the payback period and fuel savings for that particular vehicle. The calculations are based on fuel prices, city-highway driving percentage and annual miles.

"Based on MSRP and fuel costs alone, hybrid vehicles can save you money versus a comparably equipped conventional vehicle," said

Some of the vehicles available on are the 2012 Ford Fusion Hybrid, 2012 Toyota Prius C One, and 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco.

An example of the information that the website offers is a comparison of the 2012 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid and the gasoline-powered 2012 Hyundai Sonata SE. According to, the hybrid Sonata costs $2,655 more than the conventional version and takes about 5.1 years to pay back.

The government is certainly looking to push consumers toward more fuel efficient vehicles, especially with the White House's recent proposed 54.5 MPG CAFE requirement for 2017-2025 model year vehicles. This standard would save customers $6,600 at the gas pump for the lifetime of a 2025 vehicle.


Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Good idea
By Mint on 5/22/2012 11:30:40 AM , Rating: 0
Don't be silly. The president isn't going to commit political suicide by raising prices, nor will any member of congress. Any policy he enacts is just lip service to appease his voter base, which is why production kept going up since he went into office without any effort from him to stop it:

It doesn't matter what Stephen Chu said. He's not going to get his wish. Obama didn't put an ounce of effort in pushing a carbon tax or cap-and-trade.

Policy won't have any effect on fuel prices. Even if Obama had the ability to wave a wand and magically increase US output by 10%, OPEC could cut production by 2% and restore the fat profit margins they've gotten used to.

When oil spiked down below $40/bbl after the recession hit, OPEC cut capacity until prices went up again. You'd have to be a fool to think they'd do anything else now. Even without the monopoly they'd cut production voluntarily if prices went down, as low interest rates make it better to wait and pump it in the future at $100-$150/bbl.

RE: Good idea
By knutjb on 5/22/2012 4:37:29 PM , Rating: 2
Open your eyes, he has those policies in place now. If you look at where our current oil production is coming from it's not from federal lands. He has shutdown future production on federal lands only. He is trying to stiffle the new private drilling through new regulations from the EPA.

Look a little deeper in the site and look at the trends on federal lands. They peaked last year and are falling. When government policy changes towards opening up production it can take five to ten years for most to impact. Negative policies, that we have now, have a much quicker impact. The riggs cost a million a day and idle time is money wasted so they leave the gulf. To replace those riggs takes seven to ten years manufacture and deploy. Once you apply those time lines to most, not all, drilling you will have high fuel costs for many years to come. THAT IS WHAT THE PRESIDENT WANTS AND IS GETTING. No carbon trading scam required.

There are a few exceptions: in California if drilling occurs in Santa Barbra and a few other locations production could take a year or two to impact the market since pipelines for transit are already in place.

The more we have to buy from the global market the more demand placed on those resources, hence driving up prices. There is more than one way to accomplish their publically stated goal.

FYI: Contrary to what extreme environmentist believe oil will not go away with a new, practical energy soure. Where do most plastics and lubricants come from.

Another issue you probably don't know about is:

The Law of the Sea Treaty calls for technology transfers and wealth transfers from developed to undeveloped nations. It also requires parties to the treaty to adopt regulations and laws to control pollution of the marine environment. Such provisions were among the reasons President Ronald Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982.

Yes the president has more than one socialist trick up his sleave...

"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki