Just demonstrates how clueless "tree huggers" are.
There is nothing new here. The known advantages of turbocharging are hardly new; and turbochargers have been around for generations, even in vehicles that were anything but loud, souped-up, environmentally obnoxious cars. (My sister's SAAB, hardly a hot-rod, had one)
The main downside to widespread adoption of turbocharging was the added cost and complexity to the engine, as well as the additional maintenance and repairs required over the long haul.
It's all about scalability. Turbocharging merely make an engine of a certain size more powerful. The concept works the same for smaller engines as it does for larger ones. Since smaller, lighter engines mean better fuel economy, they made sense on those grounds. It remains to be seen of the overall cost of ownership makes them worthwhile, however.
