This should delight the climate-denying, anti-EV brigade. Although will they believe a left-wing source?

Plug-in hybrids pollute almost as much as petrol cars, report finds
Analysis of 800,000 European cars found real-world pollution from plug-in hybrids nearly five times greater than lab tests.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-hybrids-pollute-almost-as-much-as-petrol-cars-report-finds

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

I would be curious to see the actual study and methodology.

Last time something like this came up it turned out it was based on extrapolating from figures in the US that still use coal fire plants.

The problem with that is not all countries have an 18th century power grid anymore like WV.

Also it seems a bit irrelevant since hybrids are already a dying market and were only ever intended as a stop gap solution till battery tech improved.

wishforthenight · M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow https://www.transportenvironment.org/articles/smoke-screen-the-growing-phev-emissions-scandal

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@wishforthenight A couple of issues I see right from the very beginning. Their classifications of vehicles don't even make sense.

It talks about plug in hybrid electric vehicles consuming the same amount of fuel as "conventional hybrids." That makes no sense. A dual propulsion electric/ICE is literally what hybrid means. So they have two categories for exactly the same vehicle type.

This is a mess.

wishforthenight · M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow The report also states that "Even when the cars were driven in electric mode, the analysis found that levels of pollution were well above official estimates. The researchers said this was because electric motors were not strong enough to operate alone, with their engines burning fossil fuels for almost one-third of the distance travelled in electric mode."

wildland

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I've read the report too and I think you've misunderstood the terminology. “Hybrid” just means a mix of electric and combustion power but there are two distinct types:

Conventional hybrids (HEVs) can’t be plugged in. Their small batteries recharge only from the engine or braking.

Plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) can be charged externally and should, in theory, drive many kilometres on electricity alone.

The reports point is that, in real-world driving, PHEVs often burn nearly as much fuel as conventional hybrids, because many drivers don’t charge them or the electric motors can’t handle typical journeys efficiently.

So the categories make perfect sense; the scandal is that the “plug-in” advantage isn’t delivering the promised emissions cuts, as the OP mentioned.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@wildland Sounds like a bunch of the issues are just poor engineering decisions making less efficient vehicles like the paper mentions putting in underpowered electric motors.

I mean a bloodly locomotive is a hybrid so it is not like we don't have powerful enough engines. Probably a profit margin decision was behind this.

Hybrids also will become less and less relevant. In fact they already are because they were always intended as a stopgap technology.

Perhaps that is why they have been half assed to begin with.

I noticed the paper also is not entirely honest in that it makes this out to be a bigger growing problem than it is like citing sales increases in China. In China 51% of all new sales are EVs, not hybrids.

Also I did not see any distinction between American and Chinese Hybrids. You cannot do an apples to apples comparison when 2 countries the USA and Canada ban the biggest vehicle manufacturer for the rest of the world.