> Hybrids, plug-in hybrids, parallel and series drive trains are all different as clarified in the other daughter comments. While they use differing percentages of electric power, I still think the key is using electric for 0-10 mph and for regeneration. Once you do that, you can overcome some of the inefficiencies of the ICE.

That is true but it doesn't really change the fact that they are still dependent on fussil, which is not the way forward.

> The article doesn't go into the details of how the subsidies are allocated, so it doesn't make sense to assume one way or the other. I do like your suggested allocation, but for all we know, that could be how they are planning on doing it. Or if you are German, write to your representative to suggest it.

You're, right the article doesn't say how the subsidies are allocated but what the article is hardly new. The deal was first confirmed on April 27th 2016 and you could read it in almost every German newspaper. And they confirmed that only the first 400,000 vehicles get the subsidies, no matter if they are hybrid or not.
Secondly, they will also build 15,000 charging stations, and tax breaks for electronic cars (the news paper called them E-cars, but don't go into detail if hybrids are included).

> Finally, I have driven the Nissan Leaf and totally disagree with your dismissal of it. It drives way better than equivalent ICE cars of similar size and price range (after US gov't tax credit). For suburban driving, the range is sufficient, it just requires a home charger. Looks are subjective and I agree I find it a bit odd, but there are alternatives. There is a Kia Soul, Ford Focus, and Mercedes B-class that are electric and identically-styled to their ICE equivalents. So I really think your exaggerated claims are based on ignorance.
I'm glad you like the Nissan Leaf, and when it was first introduced, it was great news because it was really forward thinking at the time (2010 if I remember correctly). Unfortunately, they have not improved much in the past 6 years (comparing how fast the completion improved). And since the range is only sufficient for urban driving, a Nissan Leaf can never be a first car for most families (because, at one point, you want to take a road trip and renting a car for the weekend, I have to pay about $200 just for just 2 1/2 days. In my city, a lot of people drive to the Baltic Sea on weekends and a Nissan Leaf wound not be sufficient for that road trip (it's about 250km/150mi).
Furthermore, the Nissan Leaf is frowned upon in Germany because many people think it looks like a golf car (German car manufacturers have had their fair share of it too).

Because of all those arguments, the Nissan Leaf is not an ideal car for most people and most Germans I know consider 30,000€ cars luxury cars (in 2009, the average price of new cars was 22,000€ and I know many people who only buy used cars because they think 22,000€ is too much for a car). And if you want to buy an expensive car, most Germans want a good looking BMW or Mercedes (they are cheaper in Germany then in the US because they are not imported).

My rant is mostly how this deal has been reached, considering we could have done so much better. If this subsidy was only for electric cars, German manufacturers would finally start producing good-looking electric vehicle with proper range (i don't get why it is so hard to make a compelling electric car anyways). This way, electric cars could have been adopted quicker but instead we chose a slower adoption path (this is typical for Germany). What really needs to happen is that car markers start producing proper electric cars, and this subsidy could have changed a lot, if properly implemented.