Posted on 03/20/2007 6:14:59 PM PDT by Riodacat
The Toyota Prius has become the flagship car for those in our society so environmentally conscious that they are willing to spend a premium to show the world how much they care. Unfortunately for them, their ultimate ‘green car’ is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America; it takes more combined energy per Prius to produce than a Hummer. Snip-------------------- When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis.
Through a study by CNW Marketing called “Dust to Dust,” the total combined energy is taken from all the electrical, fuel, transportation, materials (metal, plastic, etc) and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime of a vehicle. The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles - the expected lifespan of the Hybrid.
The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles. That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use less combined energy doing it.
(Excerpt) Read more at clubs.ccsu.edu ...
And, how is it these energy costs don't get into the price of the product? Is Canada being taxed to pay for it?
You are right. To the extent that costs are internalized, we should all just buy the car that best suits our needs and financial considerations (i.e., what we'd want to buy without any enviro-guilt). It is possible that energy has some real costs not internalized (e.g., much of our military budget, to keep the Mideast from falling into jihadist or Russian or Chinese hands), and perhaps these should be addressed with import or pollution taxes, but it is implausible that the "real" cost of energy is even twice its nominal cost.
Every recycled battery was once a virgin and has created horriric damage in Sudbruy. This deserves extra scrutiny only because the Prius is touted as the greenest contraption on 4 wheels out there. Each of the 4 processing steps in different countries add further pollution making the Prius a lot more black and brown than most people think.
The only actual point to hybrid vehicles is to move pollution out of heavily populated areas.
If we significantly shifted our electric generating capacity to rely more on nuclear, wind, solar, hydroelectric (yes, there is more potential using low-head hydro set ups), and geothermal (at least in Hawaii and the Pacific Northwest), and had plug-in hybrids, they could contribute to decreased use of petroleum (whether motivated by a patriotic desire to deprive Wahabbist Muslims of oil-revenues, or the dubious notion that human hydrocarbon use, rather than increased solar output, both radiative and magnetic, is driving warmer temperatures.)
Of course, we haven't shifted our electric generating capacity, thanks to the same pack of environmentalist wackos who are pushing hybrid cars--they killed our nuclear industry, and despite their calls for 'renewable energy' always block wind generation facilities on the plea that birds are too stupid or clumsy to avoid slowly rotating wind-turbines, and you can bet they'd hobble the installation of low-head hydro with pleas for some fish or other. And, I don't think any hybrid on the market has plug-in charging option (though I could be wrong on that).
You make a good argument that the study is absurd. What's interesting is that it's hard to see the ideological agenda of these guys. The top-rated cars were small cars like the Corolla. The worst cars were the luxury cars. Both Japanese and American cars can be found on the top ten list. There's no obvious backer of this study.
Of course, they may just have done a bad study with good intentions. I'm leaning that way.
---There are some flaws in the study but why ignore the plant in Sudbury---
Well, maybe because 61% of first use nickel is used to produce stainless steel, and because most of the damage done by the Sudbury plant occured prior to the nineties when major upgrades were carried out.
This article is bogus. It seems like a college prank to me.
"The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles. That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use less combined energy doing it. "
Having driven a hummer i would say it will never last 300,000. Maybe 100,000 if you baby it. After that it will be in the shop too much to make it worth keeping on the road. On the other hand, I could see a Prius easily lasting 300,000.
that's hysterical!
but you'd never convince a mind-numbed tv robot that it was true!
toyota pickups of the 1980s made 300,000 miles.
i've never kept a new vehicle longer than 125,000, i think, at most.
Most blogs say that hybrid batts go for 200+.
My honda is doing great at 74+.
This SUV driver ain't a Prius lover, but I scarcely doubt the typical life of a Hummer is 300,000 miles.
NiMH battery recycling only involves recycling the nickel, which is the most expensive component in the battery.
Hybrid cars are going to make absolutely horrible used cars; avoid them.
They're actually using the military grade H1 as their model, which I'm sure does last around 300k.
But of course, no one actually drives those. They drive the H2/H3, which are just the same GM SUVs with a "tough" body on them.
Reality? Hummers have nearly the worst reliability ratings of any vehicle. Prius has the best customer satisfaction rating and an extremely good reliability rating.
You can choose whatever you want and it doesn't matter at all to me, but this post is filled with fallacies.
I'm reading a thread over in slashdot.
They're saying that the Sudbury plant hasn't been an environmental hazard since the early 80s.
So you're saying that Toyota will not be able to improve it and make the older model out dated, so you're stuck, with a car with old technology. Since I doubt anyone that owns one would use it that much, what is the current average on a gas car today, 30,000 miles a year. So a ten year old hybrid ,if used that much would really be cutting edge. LOL
Carbon credits? This should be investigated for straight out fraud. I can not believe that people are sending money to these people. You might as well use US currency to warm your home.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.