When I saw the headline, I thought this was clickbait, since the headline and the linked article avoided quantifying how much CO2 the vehicles said they consumed vs the real world usage.

If you dig into the cited materials, it turns out it wasn’t hyperbole.

That said, I still consider it extremely poor form to omit the information the study was centering its argument around.

They are a less than full gas vehicles, but they output considerably more CO2 than they are tested and marketed to output.

Many people buy them because they believe they are a green form of transportation based on the marketing. But the real world pollution they cause makes them not very green at all.

This is a significant report, especially when you consider the source.

That and from what I understand of them they only cover about 25 miles. The reason to get a plug in hybrid vs a full plug in is generally because you need to drive more than that on average. I have a full electric from 2015 with a horrible battery, and on a single charge I can get ~50 miles at most in greater Atlanta area, GA, USA.

That’s mostly fine for me, but I once looked up the plug in hybrids for trios etc, and I sometimes forget to charge and have issues having to charge on the road. A plug in Hybrid would have saved me those minor problems, but not because of the electric part. I have a feeling anyone using a plug in hybrid is barely using the battery part of it. I get by because I mostly use the car for shopping, so on average it’s once or twice a week, all within 1 battery’s usage a day.