Electrical engineer uses Toyota Prius to power its house

"Its" house? I didn't this man was a machine and not a human. Run! The Terminators are here!

TurboSpyder, I think LexusBeautyQueen is talking about HC, NOx, particle matter(that's probably why he used word "dirty", CO2 isn't "dirty") which diesels emit a lot more than petrol engines. And in American magazines tests hybrids do a lot better than in German( Autobild) or owned by Germans(Autoexpress is owned by Autobild) magazines. And look here:------
http://www.spritmonitor.de/de/die_sparsamsten_autos.html------
Correcting the fuel economy for Prius becouse of the different volumetric energy density of diesel and petrol will place it in 6th place with equivalent to 4,8 l diesel/100km beside very small cars like Seat Arosa diesel, Peugeot 106 diesel.

Becouse we should compare energy consumed(or in this case kilograms or pounds-->quantity of matter) , not volume of fuel that is dependent from temperature. Diesel is emitting more CO2 per gallon than petrol becouse it's more dense. We have some amount of kilograms of crude oil under ground, not volume. Consumption of cars that are running on hydrogen is also calculated to the equivalent of petrol.--------
And yes, steel OF THE SAME WEIGHT, THICKNESS,... as carbon fiber isn't as strong that's why it's worse.----------I was talking about comparisons between diesels and hybrids done by US and European magazine, not rare criticism of hybrids by American magazines which is indispensable.

"Why isn't the figure of grams of CO2 per kilometer that the magazines use (in the comparisons I provided above) the best measure?"

It is a good measure. Than you don't have to correct becouse it is actually "corrected". You have than reasults as same as when you correct the fuel economy (in miles per gallon) becouse of the different volumetric energy density of diesel and petrol. That is why we should correct fuel economy in miles per gallon units, if we do this we can compare CO2 emission. Where did I say it's bad measure? I've only said that they emitted less in German magazines. Why you always try to distort what I say? Here you have example comparison between diesel and hybrid from US magazine:...............
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=133730
.............

"I can rarely follow your convoluted thinking."------
What can I do when you don't know simple rules of nature(or you don't want to say anything against German cars-->more probable) and I must tell you every single trivial detail?

Inappropriate is to measure fuel effeciency in mpg (or liter/100km) and I already said why. That's like saying that if you fill up your car with cold fuel it will be more fuel effecient than filled up with warm fuel becouse you can do more miles per gallon on cold, densier fuel but in fact you will burn the same amount of matter. And that's not any inherent advantage of diesel fuel in this case becouse our goal is not to have more energy in less space but to have better fuel effeciency and less CO2 emission.

Lexus RX400h = 24.6mpg petrol = 9.5 litres per 100kilometres = 220 grams of CO2 per 1 kilometre -------------
Mercedes ML320 bluetec = 21.2mpg diesel = 11.1 litres per 100kilometres = 290 grams of CO2 per 1 kilometre ............ http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=133730/pageId=150607 ................. Kilograms of CO2 emission per litre of burned diesel - 2.63 and petrol - 2.3 : http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/envrp/pdf/envrpgas-annexes.pdf

burning gasoline to power your house....how green.

3 Gallons of gas to run it for 3 days is nothing at all !! Good for him !!

why spend money on a back up generator if your car can do the job?

1UAW this article is not about having a generator and how he should go out and spend money. It shows the ingenuity of a person to find a solution to the problem with what they currently have.