So what? If it drives a few 10s of miles without burning gas, if everyone used them, that would eliminate probably 90%+ of emission pollution in cities.
I feel that the obsession with pure electric has crippled the fight against pollution and CO2 emissions. Every car with 20 miles of battery range is probably a lot more impactful in the fight against climate change than 10% of cars with 200 miles of battery range, and has fewer major tradeoffs (cheaper, limited range/recharging is not an issue, much less need to build an entirely new charging infrastructure).
Upthread context is someone positing/supporting a total ban of all ICE in their city and someone arguing that’s disproportionately harmful to the poor because pure EVs are more expensive. In that context, it matters quite a bit that the Volt has an ICE, even though I overall agree with you on the Volt being environmentally beneficial.
Upthread context: “If I had a vote whether to ban combustion engines from my city (cars, trucks, mopeds, leaf blowers - everything), with a relatively short transition period (say 5 years), I'd be in favor.”
In that context, the Volt (and other hybrids, plug-in or not) would either be banned or be required to disable their ICE engines in the city.
Indeed, and that was for the reason of ending emissions within a city. A poor person who commutes with one is likely (even though not guaranteed) to be using it over the sort of distance where the tiny battery is sufficient, so with regard to achieving that goal rather than that method, I think hybrids would probably be sufficient.
We're very far away from crossing under 30K, much less 10K