However, it seems the rest of our country is sold on the idea, including the automakers that sell to our market. In the past few weeks quite a few announcements have been made about more hybrids that are getting ready to roll down the assembly line: the Chevy Volt, the (new) Honda Insight, and the Mercedes-Benz S400 Hybrid. Call me skeptical, but I’m still not convinced …

2011 Chevy Volt

The one that seems to have people most excited is the Chevy Volt. Due out for the 2011 model year,  Chevy is hoping to break new ground in the hybrid market with the first mass-marketed plug-in hybrid. The Volt is different from other hybrids on the market now in the fact that the gas engine is not connected to the drive wheels in any way, but instead only serves as a generator to recharge the batteries and supply electricity to the electric drive motors. By plugging in the car over night, it is capable of driving up to 40 miles on electricity alone. Therefore if your average daily driving amounts to less than 40, you could go for long periods of time without ever using any gas.

While this sounds great at first blush and is definitely innovative there are some issues that could throw a wrench in whether the Volt is ultimately a success. The first is its cost. Early estimates show that the Volt could cost up to $40,000. That’s a lot of money for a 4-door 5-passenger Chevy. The company is currently lobbying congress (ack) to give Volt buyers a sizable tax credit for their green-ness that would help offset this initial cost, but that still remains to be determined.

A technical issue that could come into play is the fact that if buyers were to spend several months only making short trips and never using the gas engine they could run into gasoline stability problems. Without added stabilizers, gasoline only has a limited “shelf-life” before it begins to deteriorate. As gasoline ages and breaks down it becomes dirtier when it is combusted and provides less energy. In worst-case scenarios Volt drivers could find themselves with a tank full of fuel that produces excess pollution, causes the car’s engine to run poorly, or even not run at all!

Finally, there are also environmental implications of such a plug-in hybrid. While GM estimates that it would only cost 40 cents per day to charge the Volt, thus making it much less expensive than powering it by gasoline, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is more environmentally friendly. When charging from the electrical grid most of the environmental impact is transferred from the car itself to the power plant that generates the electricity. If everyone were to start using plug-in hybrids the electrical infrastructure would need to be updated and potentially cause more pollution from power plants. I therefore repeat my mantra that “hybrids aren’t as green as you think they are.”

My final comment on the Volt is that it truly embodies “love it or hate it” styling. You can see more pics using the link above, but I’ll simply say that I fall into the “hate it” category.

2010 Honda Insight

Set to be officially launched at the 2008 Paris auto show, the new Honda Insight is supposed to be on the road in April 2009, probably as a labeled as a 2010 model.  Honda has revived the Insight name from its first foray into the hybrid world.  The original Insight was actually the first hybrid sold in the US and remains one of the most fuel-efficient vehicles you can buy, despite the fact it has been out of production for several years. The new Insight is being billed as Honda’s “Prius fighter”, though I would call it more of a Prius clone. If you swapped the front grille and emblem you could probably convince people this was the next-generation of the Prius.

The Insight will likely be a bit smaller than the Prius, and is supposed to undercut it in price. Some reports have said it will debut with a starting price of $19,000. Of course, that’s before dealers mark up the price because if the fact that everybody will be clamoring for one.  Honda is hoping to sell somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 Insights annually, so prepare yourself to start seeing these everywhere.

2009 Mercedes-Benz S400 Hybrid

Why would I include the new Mercedes-Benz S400 Hybrid in this lineup? For two reasons: It is significant because it marks Mercedes’ first foray into hybrids. Prior to this model, Mercedes-Benz was sticking to super-efficient diesels, which they happen to do very well. In fact, the S-series diesel model returns approximately 40mpg, whereas the S400 Hybrid is expected to get about 30mpg. Ah, but diesels aren’t as sexy as hybrids, despite the fact that most other world markets have been gravitating towards them for decades.

The second reason I include this car is because it marks the first mass-market application of lithium-ion batteries in a hybrid. Lithium-ion batteries are more expensive but much more energy-dense than nickel metal hydride batteries, which are used in most other hybrids. That means that lithium-ion battery packs can be much smaller and lighter while producing the same performance. I must admit I don’t know as much about lithium-ion’s environmental impact as compared to nickel metal hydride, but I’m sure there is still some impact to be considered when taking into account the overall impact of the vehicle during it’s lifespan.

Make no mistake, this car marks the beginning of a new era of hybrids. In a few years I expect that all hybrids will be using li-ion batteries, or even something that is developed that will surpass them. Making battery packs lighter and more powerful will allow for increased efficiency which might make hybrids a more compelling environmental argument than they are now.

My take

I’m still not sold on hybrids. Yeah they have cool technology. Yeah they’re more fuel efficient than gasoline-only powered cars. But in my mind there are better, more environmentally friendly ways of reaching the same efficiency. I remain a big fan of diesel technology, in part because most modern diesel-powered cars can easily run on bio-diesel, unlike gas-powered cars and E85 (ethanol).

I’d love to see companies start selling cars like the 65-mpg Ford Fiesta ECOnetic here in the US, however the facts that their engines are built overseas and the dollar is so weak means that they aren’t economically viable. One vehicle I will be watching closely is the 2010 Volkswagen Rabbit TDI, due here in the Fall of ’09. While it’s not as efficient as the VW Golf (aka Rabbit) BlueMotion for the European market that gets about 62pmpg, it should still return mid 40′s to low 50′s depending on driving conditions.

Now the question is how long can our family get by with only one car, and can we wait for automakers to get around to selling more small efficient diesel cars here in the U.S.? I guess we’ll have to wait and see!

What’s your take on the seemingly ever-increasing hybrid hype?

Serve God, Save the Planet is written by J. Matthew Sleeth, a former emergency room doctor, ER director, and chief of medical staff. He writes primarily out of his experience in evangelical Christianity, which is reflected by many of the theological assertions in the book. While I don’t necessarily agree with all of the theology he espouses, I do think that his core tenets of tying the care of creation with our love and service of God and fellow humans and are sound.

Though it’s not an incredibly long book (~250 pages total) it does cover a lot of ground. There are 16 chapters in all, so rather than summarize each one I’ll simply hit some of the book’s high and low points and provide some general reflections:

High Points

Style & Format – Sleeth writes in a very readable style, making this a book that can definitely be enjoyed by anyone who has a basic background in Christianity. As I mentioned there are 16 chapters, only 10-15 pages each, and 5 helpful appendices including a workbook, an energy audit, and an environmental to-do list. I could definitely see this book being used as the basis of an ongoing discussion group using the included workbook questions as a starting point.

Global emphasis – An important consideration when talking about the environment is that many of those who suffer the greatest from the damage that is done to the earth live in poorer countries around the world. Sleeth provides global insight into the problems of pollution and overconsumption through both facts and figures as well as personal anecdotes from medical misisons trips.

Practical – This book definitely appeals to my practical side. Even though many of the examples Sleeth shares from his own life are far more drastic than most people will be ready to undertake initially, he does provide other, smaller suggestions that are more easily incorporated into every day living. So while his story of living in a house that is the size of his previous garage may seem like an unattainable goal for some (depending on the size of their garages), his suggestions to use compact flourescent light bulbs, plant vegetable gardens, and hang laundry outside to dry are all more easily incorporated.

Inclusive – I think that too often we focus simply on the actions that are beneficial or detrimental to the environment instead of focusing on the attitudes behind those actions. Sleeth addresses this by grounding creation care in love of God and love of neighbor. He discusses how our attitudes about child-rearing, population control, and even our modern, western fixation on fitness and medical wellbeing can have a large impact on the natural world.

A call to simpler living – I have a theological and spiritual appreciation for simple living. The Church of the Brethren, the denomination I am a part of, has historically emphasized simple living in community as how we are called to live out our faith as Christians. As I read this book, much of what Sleeth said resonated with me not only because of my interest in the environment, but also because I value the quest to seek out a simpler way of life in the midst of modern busyness. What he says about rampant consumerism, our sense of entitlement, and our ignorance of how disproportionately wealthy we are compared to the rest of the world is not new. However, it is something we need to be reminded of often since our commercial-driven media is constantly trying to make us forget.

Low Points

Theological & biblical issues – As I mentioned earlier the theology of the book is more on the evangelical side, and I found my theological hacklesraised by some of the assumptions he puts forth as facts (like some issues of biblical authorship) and some of his choices regarding biblical translations. He uses the King James Version, which in my opinion is based on outdated scholarship and is often contextually irrelevant in the 21st century, and the New Living Translation, which is more of a paraphrase, for many of his scriptural quotations. While I had no trouble reading around these issues and didn’t see them as affronts to my own beliefs, others who have less familiarity or are less comfortable with the diversity of Christian belief may find it more difficult to do so.

Too broad? – I know that just moments ago I praised how inclusive Sleeth is when dealing with the issue of environmental care, yet I wonder if he’s possibly a bit too broad in his approach. Let me explain. Many of the things he writes about do have an impact on the environment, yet some are much more tangential than others. For example, he has entire chapters on his thoughts about television, work patterns and sabbath rest, family dynamics and child rearing, and even a chapter on childhood misconceptions and Santa Claus! While there are no doubt some environmental implications to each of these, the way he writes about them sometimes seems to lack the emphasis I might have hoped for.

Anecdotes – While Sleeth is a very readable writer and a pretty good storyteller, I sometimes found his anecdotes to be a bit much. Almost every chapter seemed to have at least one story from his experiences as an emergency room doctor, a medical missions trip, or his family life. While these stories often serve to prove a point, other times they are a bit graphic and shocking. Maybe that’s what he was going for, turning our stomachs to turn our thought patterns. I’m sure others may appreciate these stories more than I did, so this one I might just chalk up to personal preference.

To Read or Not To Read

Over all I found this to be a very enjoyable and thought-provoking book. I would suggest it to anyone who has an interest in learning how care for the environment can be a natural outgrowth of Christian belief. I also think this would be an excellent read for Christians who might be having a hard time figuring out why so many other Christians are jumping on the environmental bandwagon. They may even find themselves jumping on too!

Those who are already theologically-grounded Christian environmentalists may enjoy reading about Sleeth’s personal lifestyle changes in light of his conviction for creation care. Though I can’t recommend all of his theological nuances, I think his overall reasoning is very sound and I found myself greatly appreciating how he portrays saving the planet to be a natural outgrowth of serving God.

For my earth day post about cars I’m choosing to blog about how some of the current trends in the automotive world aren’t as green as they may seem to be: hybrids and corn ethanol. I’m excited about the fact that our car-loving culture is trying (pretending?) to find ways to reduce its impact on the planet. However I have some serious doubts concerning whether hybrid vehicles and ethanol derived from corn will be the saviors they’re sometimes purported to be. In some cases they may not even be any better for the environment than the cars we drive right now …

Hybrids

A while back there was a bit of a stir when an article appeared in a college newspaper alleging that the Prius outdoes the Hummer in overall environmental damage. While I don’t necessarily agree with everything the article says, I do think that some folks who are trying to be environmentally friendly conveniently overlook the environmental implications of manufacturing hybrid cars. All current model hybrids use some type of nickel-metal hydride battery pack. Manufacturing such batteries requires a great deal of energy and resources. While the specific process outlined in the original article may be somewhat dubious, there is no denying that some amount of damage is done to the environment in the manufacture of these batteries, even if only from generating the energy used to produce them. Therefore, each hybrid car sold bears some amount of additional environmental burden that it must overcome before it can be considered better for the environment than a traditional car.

Hybrids are en vogue right now, with new models popping up every day. Everything from full-size SUVs (Chevy Tahoe Hybrid) to large luxury sedans (Lexus LS 600h) to “mainstream” family cars (Saturn Aura Green Line.) What’s more is that often these hybrids, despite all of their illusions of environmental grandeur, barely get better gas mileage than their gasoline-only counterparts. The Saturn Aura Green Line is a prime example of this, with the hybrid version achieving an EPA average only 2 miles per gallon better in both city and highway ratings.

I’m sure there may be ways, such as “plug-in hybrid” technology, to make hybrids more eco-friendly with regards to the big picture. However, most current hybrids seem to be little more than an attempt by the automakers to cash in on the latest marketing fad. Unfortunately, this is ultimately happening at the expense of the environment.

Corn Ethanol

This country has more corn than it knows what to do with, so why not try turning it into a fuel source? Flex-fuel cars capable of running on ethanol have been around for years, however it has only been within the past few that automakers have begun touting this capability on a large scale. At first blush it seems like a good solution. It gives corn growers an additional opportunity to sell their crops and it helps reduce our dependence on foreign oil, right?

What we consumers don’t often hear is the fact that refining corn-based ethanol only results in roughly 25% more energy than it takes to produce it. In addition, even though ethanol has a higher octane rating than gasoline it contains less energy per gallon, which means that vehicles running on E85 ethanol (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) only achieve about 75% of the fuel mileage they would on gasoline alone. That means your car that gets 28 MPG using gas would only get 21 on E85 and your SUV that gets 15 MPG on gas would drop to 11 MPG. Ouch.

The government currently subsidizes the production and sale of corn ethanol so that it can be priced attractively less than gasoline. But unless it is priced 25% less than gas it still ends up costing the consumer more. According to the Daily Fuel Gauge Report the energy-adjusted price of E85 is currently about 30 cents per gallon more than regular unleaded gasoline. And that still doesn’t reflect the actual cost of ethanol because of the government subsidies.

So if corn-based ethanol is such a lost cause, what other options might there be? Soy-based fuels, such as soy biodiesel, often have a better energy balance than corn ethanol, but involve some of the same risks with regards to over-farming and competing with food sources. One alternative that I think has some merit is cellulosic ethanol, which can be refined from just about anything that has ever been alive. This includes products that are often discarded like corn stalks and wood shavings from lumber yards. Many proponents of cellulosic ethanol are currently looking towards switchgrass, a perennial grass native to the North American plains, as a viable source for ethanol production. Current estimates put the energy yield from refining switchgrass at 540% (compared to corn ethanol’s 25%.) The first cellulosic ethanol refineries have yet to come online, but when they do ethanol may finally become a truly viable alternative to gasoline.

Personally I find myself most excited by efforts like the smart fortwo where auto manufacturers are being ecologically mindful at all steps of the production process and seeking to create very efficient “conventional” cars. Even though I have my doubts about whether I could personally justify getting a smart car, it would be great if more car companies would follow a similar model of environmental management and recycling in their own business practices.

So what are your thoughts on the current (not-so) green fads in the auto world? Think I’m being a bit too critical? Want to voice your hearty support? Hit up the comments and speak your mind! You can also check out Scientific American’s article on switchgrass ethanol and Popular Mechanic’s article on converting cellulose directly to gasoline for more reading on this subject.

All natural, organic, whole, free range, grain fed, locally grown, the list goes on and on. I often find myself wondering what is just marketing hype and what may actually impact the world we live in. I’m far from an expert on this, for sure, but I can offer what little wisdom and insight I’ve managed to glean. First let me disclose that I buy organic foods when I can, I’m a member of the local food co-op, I do a little gardening of my own, and I try to avoid red meat most of the time. I am not in any way a radical environmentalist, but one of the primary reasons I shop and eat the way I do is because I think it is important for those of us who are able to be mindful of our impact on the environment and act accordingly. Read on for why I think my decisions reflect such mindfulness …

I know some folks tend to think the whole organic movement is all about people being afraid of ingesting fertilizers, pesticides, and other not-so-pleasant byproducts of the modern industrialized farming movement. While I don’t deny that this is definitely part of the allure of organic problems, it is not my primary motivation. By and large organic farming is much more sustainable than most modern industrialized farming practices. Such modern farming practices rely heavily on fertilizers and other chemicals to grow more than the land can naturally bear. It is my hope that by supporting the organic movement that I am supporting farmers and a way of life that will help preserve the earth’s capacity to food for future generations.

I support the local co-op not only because I happen to be good friends with many co-members there, but because I believe in the ideals of being member-owned and operated and providing products that are natural, whole, organic, vegetarian, and environmentally friendly. I also appreciate the fact that I can buy things like flour, sugar, oil, rice, and sugar in bulk in order to cut down on excess packaging. There are also items like locally-produced butter, cheese, eggs, and milk that come from people who care about the environment and not just profit for profit’s sake.

As a small child growing up in Virginia I remember a few years when my family did some gardening. I’m not sure how old I was, but I know it was before I started high school. It wasn’t until last year that I ever did much gardening for myself, starting with a small 4′x8′ plot in the back yard. Last year we grew more yellow squash and tomatoes than we could possibly eat, in addition to some smaller crops of green beans, beets, green peppers, and salad greens. Locally-grown produce doesn’t get much closer than your own back yard! My wife and I both learned a lot about gardening last year and are looking forward to doubling the size of our garden plot as we begin the growing season in the next couple weeks. By growing a few things in our garden I know that we used less gas driving to the store, made better use of the land we live on, spent less money on food, and ate better too!

Many Americans’ diets center around large amounts of red meat. I recently read that raising a 1,200 pound beef steer requires almost 800,000 gallons of water, 35 gallons of petroleum, and 8,000 pounds of corn! I’ve also read that it takes about 15 pounds of grains to produce a pound of beef and only two per pound of poultry. This is hard for me to hear, because I like eating meat.

Recently I have come to realize that enjoying meat can still be done in an environmentally mindful way. One popular way to do this is to change the way we think about meat in relation to the rest of our meal. If we treat meat as more of a condiment, something we add to the meal to make it more flavorful and enjoyable rather than the main focus of our meal, then it becomes easier to reduce our consumption. So what does this all mean in terms of practical application? I most often use ground turkey in place of ground beef, if I’m hankering for a hunk of meat I’ll go for a small portion of lamb or pork before beef, and I intentionally try and eat vegetarian a few times a week to help balance things further. I used to really miss steak, and I still enjoy a nice hamburger every now and then, but I do so with a mindfulness of the impact of my food-related decisions.

I’m trying to include some links for additional reading at the end of all of my earth day posts, so be sure to check out New Community Project’s educational materials, Eco Eats at Ecologue, information about locally grown products at Local Harvest, and The Simple Dollar’s post on Planning a Kitchen Garden.

Do you try and eat in an eco-friendly way? Maybe you think this is all a bit ridiculous. Let’s hear about it in the comments.

What do things like word processing and surfing the ‘net have to do with saving the environment? More than you might realize. In this day and age of constant connection it is increasingly common for households to have multiple computers left running 24/7. In addition, the marketplace’s push for us to constantly upgrade our computing equipment means that there is a lot of “e-waste” with lead or other toxic chemicals that is not being disposed of properly. Here are some quick tips and links on how you can make your computing experience a little greener:

Power Down

I’ll start off with a tip that I admit I could do more often. Currently we have three computers in our house (a server, a workstation, and a laptop) that stay on all day and all night. My excuse for doing so is that they are all set to back themselves up to the server overnight. Some folks also leave their computers on at night to do things like update virus protection or run system updates. To help counter this practice a little bit my wife and I have instituted a practice of going “unplugged” on Monday nights, powering off our two main computers (and the television) around 6pm and leaving them off all night long. In the near future I plan to rework our backup server’s schedule and set up our computers to initiate a timed shutdown automatically (using GShutdown) after we have gone to bed. Windows users may want to look into Poweroff for the same sort of functionality.

Also, powering off peripherals such as speakers, monitors, and printers when you’re not using them can help cut your power consumption as well. All modern operating systems will allow you to set up your monitor to automatically enter a low power “sleep mode” after a predetermined amount of time. Instead of setting your computer to display a screensaver when it goes idle, which means your monitor continues to use the same amount of energy, you can set it up to cut your monitor off after 5 minutes instead. After all, do you really need a screensaver to remind you that you’ve stopped using your computer? You may also want to check out the SmartStrip, which is a surge protector that will automatically cut the power to accessories when you power down your computer.

Reuse or Recycle Old Hardware

There is an increasing amount of e-waste being generated by our society. A great deal of this comes from old computers. Knowing that many computer parts like circuit boards and hard drives can contain hazardous chemicals, I have never thrown away any computer hardware (much to my wife’s chagrin.) In addition, I try not to replace hardware unless it physically fails. This recently happened when my server’s motherboard and power supply literally melted down, fusing to one another and shorting out in the process. Both parts were about 7 years old and had been running nearly 24/7 since they were purchased. Not too shabby. But instead of going out and buying all new hardware to rebuild my home server, I instead walked out to my garage and disassembled an old computer I had been using for web surfing and streaming music while I worked on cars. It only took a day or so of work to get my server back up and running, and with no additional cost.

One of the things that allows me to get by without using cutting-edge hardware is the fact that I run Ubuntu Linux on all of our computers. Like most versions of Linux, Ubuntu can run comfortably (and quickly) on older hardware. It has been my experience that most installations of Windows become bloated to the point where they slow to a crawl after a couple of years. Meanwhile, I recently replaced my garage computer with one that was saved from a local dumpster (how’s that for reusing!) and it runs Ubuntu quite easily, despite the fact that most of its hardware is at least 10 years old! Sure, I won’t be doing as much multi-tasking or complex number-crunching on that computer, but for surfing the web and listening to music it works just fine.

So what should we do with all of our old computers that have either died or we no longer need? My recommendation would be to find a local charity or other organization that will recycle (or reuse) your old computer for you. You may be able to find such places by calling up some locally owned computer shops in your area (who may also be willing to take your old hardware off your hands.) The church I currently attend has recently started a computer “hardware co-op” that does this. For a small processing fee they will take nearly any old computer parts and either properly dispose of them or rebuild them into functioning computers that can then be redistributed to those who may not be able to afford computers otherwise. It’s a great idea, and one that I hope catches on.

Greener Hardware

Finally, when you do find that it’s time to replace aging or failing hardware, you can do so with more environmentally friendly products. I recently replaced the power supply and motherboard in our workstation, and in doing so I was sure to look at products that were RoHS compliant, meaning that they contained less toxic chemicals, and when possible I tried to look for solutions that used less energy. One way of getting computers to use less energy is to start from the source of their energy, the power supply. The 80 PLUS program is an effort to certify and recognize high-efficiency power supplies that may use up to 33% less energy than similar, non-certified models. The model I ended up settling on is an Antec EarthWatts EA380, which at the time had a mail-in rebate that made it nearly the same price as other similarly-sized units.

Another consideration when upgrading hardware is the fact that LCD flat-panel monitors are much more power efficient than old-fashioned CRT monitors. LCDs are more efficient not only when they’re in use, but also when they are turned off in sleep mode. Depending on how much time your monitor spends “awake” or “asleep” you could use between 60% and 90% less energy by switching from a CRT to a flat panel of a similar size.

If you are looking to replace your entire computer system, a popular low-energy solution is to get a laptop. In general, laptops use much less power than desktops, plus you have the added convenience of being able to pick up your computer and take it wherever you like. Just don’t forget to properly recycle those batteries! You may think that getting a laptop would cost much more than getting a desktop, but that’s not necessarily the case, especially if you’re willing to look into the possibility of getting a slightly used model (reuse and recycle, remember?) I recently helped acquire a lightly used IBM Thinkpad laptop for my mother-in-law for less than $500. Though it may not be brand new, after loading it with a fresh install of Ubuntu it has been a great system for her to use on a regular basis.

I hope these ideas help to spark your interest in the growing “green computing” movement. If you’ve got any additional ideas of how to make our interactions with technology less environmentally intrusive I’d love for you to share them, so post them in the comments section below.

Update: Here are a couple links for further reading on this subject …

• Easy Ways to Go Green with Your Computer @ Lifehacker
• 8 Ways to Easily Reduce the Energy Consumption of Your Computer – and Save Big Money @ The Simple Dollar

As we contemplate what car to buy when it is time to replace this one, we are facing many of the same factors as other car-buyers in the US. Gas prices are high and are only predicted to go higher. The economy is heading downwards and that means there is less money to go around in general. I also worry about the continued detrimental impact on the environment of burning so much gasoline and the amounts of hazardous chemicals that go into making the batteries of all these new-fangled hybrids.

Since this will be our first “big” car purchase, we have already begun contemplating some of the options that will be available to us.

Option 1: Used VW Golf (or Jetta) TDI

We really like the small diesel-engined Volkswagens, such as the Golf and the Jetta. We have known some people who have had such cars and they report regularly getting between 40 and 50 miles per gallon. There is a local fueling station that carries soy bio-diesel, which would further help with environmental impact issues. However, these are very popular cars right now and they are quite difficult to find in the used market with low miles and reasonable prices. In addition, VW has yet to release a diesel version of the new Rabbit, which replaced the Golf a couple years ago. And so, while this remains an option, our chances of finding one of these in our price range in good condition with low miles are very slim.

Option 2: 2008 smart fortwo passion coupe

Though the smart fortwo is a rather unorthodox little car, we are both open to creative solutions to our car needs. We have actually gone so far as to visit the smart dealership in Indianapolis to test drive one of these. (You can read about our visit at my wife Becky’s blog.) I’m impressed by the engineering that has gone into making this tiny little 2-seat micro car. It has boatloads of technology such as brake-assist, traction control, stability control, etc. It is even relatively fun to drive!

The fortwo is not without its shortcomings however. I was less than impressed by the sometimes-sluggish gear changes from the “automated” manual transmission. In addition, its EPA mileage ratings aren’t really that impressive (33/40) considering all the sacrifices you make for such a small car. The first owners of the new-to-the-US 2008 fortwo have just begun taking delivery of their new cars, and so I am anxious to see what sort of mileage they experience in the real world. I am also a bit put off by the fact that they only come with a 2 year warranty and I fear that parts for them could be rather expensive. Another potential downside of the smart is that they are currently in very high demand. There is currently a long waiting list and it could potentially be a while before we would be able to get one.

Don’t get me wrong, I really like the smart and all that it stands for. It’s truly all the car that most folks would need for the chores of daily commuting and running around town. I also really like that they are concerned with environmental issues surrounding the entire production process. However I am interested not only in the environmental aspects of getting a more economical car, but also the financial aspects. The smart fortwo, with the options we would want, retails for about $15,000. There are quite a few cars in that same price range that get 75-80% of the gas mileage the smart gets, but have amenities such as cruise control and a back seat.

Option #3: 2008 Nissan Versa Hatchback SL

Since I’m not feeling very confident that we’ll be able to find a Golf or Jetta TDI, and I’m having second thoughts about the smart, I’ve started doing some research on other cars in the same price range. I still want something small and very fuel efficient, but also able to go on weekend road trips when we might want to leave our larger car at home. My research has recently led me to look more seriously at the Nissan Versa hatchback. For about the same money as the fortwo, the Versa SL with a 6-speed manual transmission is rated for 26/31 miles per gallon. Not too shabby for a small wagon with a back seat and a usable trunk. If you opt for the CVT instead of the manual the mileage rating rises to 27/33. Part of the draw of this car is the 6 speed though, so the CVT would have to be really good in order for me to forgo the manual.

I’m drawn to the Versa because it doesn’t come across as your typical, stripped-down econobox. In other markets, where it has been sold for several years as the “Tiida,” it is actually marketed as an entry-level luxury car with options such as navigation and leather seats! With all this in mind, the nagging questions that I keep coming back to are long-term cost of ownership and practicality.

I imagine that whichever car we choose it will be driven approximately 20,000 miles a year or less. After doing a little research and some math, the Versa looks like it would probably cost about 20% more annually for fuel. At a pessimistic $4 a gallon that translates to about $500 a year. At $3.50 a gallon it becomes a $400 difference annually. Real-life numbers would inevitably more complex than this little exercise however. Getting a slightly larger car like the Versa would mean that we could use it for longer trips, thereby saving money by not taking our larger car which only gets about 28mpg on the highway. It’s not a huge difference, but every bit counts. Once you start to account for driving a somewhat more efficient vehicle more often rather than a much more efficient vehicle less often, it is difficult to discern what vehicle would make for the best overall “fleet economy” for us.

So how wise of a purchase would a smart be, all things considered? For now the answer seems unclear. There are many factors that will play into our decision that are still a bit murky. How high will gas prices go? What kind of mileage will drivers really experience in the new smart? How difficult will it be to get one? Would we be comfortable taking it on day trips to Indianapolis or Dayton on the busy interstate? Only time will tell. I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts in the comments section. Stay tuned over the next few months, because I have a feeling this could be a bumpy ride.