A Toyota Prius causes more enviromental impact than a Hummer

[Sulako]

Rockie, just fyi my Civic Hybrid doesn't care if I'm city driving or highway driving. Maybe the Prius does, but for the Civic it's all the same (give or take 1-2 mpg).

Actually, now that I look at the charts, the Prius is supposed to get about 15mpg more on the highway than in the city also. Not that it really matters, I just wanted to let you know that my hybrid is highway-friendly.

[Topspin]

Hybrids get much better mileage in the city than on the highway and is really their arena. The notion that hybrids have a bigger environmental footprint than a hummer is outright laughable.

The real gold in hybrids though is in developing technology that reduces and eventually eliminates our dependence on oil. If we don't start somewhere it will never get done, and if hybrids aren't all they are cracked up to be yet consider this...the Wright Flyer wasn't a very good airplane either.

Well Rockie here is the one place I will actually agree with you. The place to go in solving this problem is technology. Not carbon tax, and carbon offsets, and gasoline tax.

[Hotel Tango]

http://www.automobilemag.com/features/c ... index.html

True or not, this is a fun read. Look up Hybrid Rage on google and you'll see just as many ppl who hate hybrids as much as hummers.

Dyer Consequences: Hy-Tension

By Ezra Dyer

I have come to the conclusion that EPA fuel-economy ratings are self-fulfilling prophecies. If you think your car gets great mileage, you'll drive it in such a way as to make that supposition a reality, and if you think your car is a giant fuel hog, then you'll adopt a fatalistic attitude as you drive everywhere with your right foot welded to the floor. I've averaged 45 mpg in a diesel Saab 9-3 (in Europe), and I've averaged 10 mpg in a Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8. In both cases, I was exploiting the vehicle's primary ability - in the Saab, economy at the expense of speed, and in the Jeep, speed at the expense of my relationship with my in-laws.

See, my wife's parents were in the back seat of the SRT8 during a few exciting, high-rpm miles. Now they think I'm a deranged felony speeder whose eyes spin in opposite directions while I rev the engine menacingly at nuns who are taking too long in the crosswalk. And they're right, that's exactly who I am - when I'm driving a 420-hp SUV. If they'd caught me while I was testing a Toyota Prius, they'd probably have discreetly inquired how long I've been addicted to prescription sedatives. Because, as aggressive and profligate as my style becomes when I'm behind the wheel of the SRT8, the exact opposite happens when I buckle into a hybrid. Hybrid drivers have a way of turning into economy zombies, and that's even worse.

Before you get indignant, hybrid people, and begin setting pen to post-consumer-recycled pad to enumerate the myriad ways in which I am a slope-browed cretin, let me ask you a few simple questions: When behind the wheel of your hybrid, do you drive in such a way as to maximize the time spent in electric mode? Do you pay fetishistic attention to your little miles-per-gallon video display? Does your driving style differ at all from your driving style in a conventional car? If you answered yes to two or more of those questions, you're part of a problem I shall now dub, in sound- bite-friendly manner, "hybrid rage."

Hybrid rage happens when a hybrid driver infuriates the rest of the world by driving like a stoned, nearsighted geriatric who's also lost and confused and allergic to g-forces higher than .01. The other day, I witnessed a textbook example of hybrid rage. A woman in a Prius was waiting to turn left onto a busy two-lane street. Miraculously, a driver in the oncoming lane actually stopped to let her out (I should mention that this was in Boston, where local driving protocol was established in 1775, when Paul Revere rode straight to Lexington without yielding). The Prius driver surveyed the situation and knew immediately what had to be done: pull out into traffic as quickly as possible, while throwing a grateful wave of acknowledgement to the benefactor in the other vehicle. So what did she do? She sat there.

I stood on the sidewalk, amazed. Would Prius Lady dare decline an invitation to turn left? A Boston driver, a malevolent creature fueled by hate, instinct, and blind ambition, had overcome his innate contempt for humans long enough to let her out, and she wouldn't go? That's like winning the Powerball lottery and deciding you don't feel like claiming the prize.

The other driver, perceiving that the Prius was staying put, threw his hands up in disbelief and, foot to floorboard, closed the hole in traffic quicker than a falling guillotine. He didn't know what just happened there, but, having driven hybrids, I did: Prius Lady, recognizing that she'd have to pull into traffic with some semblance of urgency, thus activating the car's gasoline engine and affecting her precious miles-per-gallon display, opted instead to stay on the sidelines until there was a sufficient gap to allow a leisurely, carbon-neutral merge. And if you think that decision angered the guy who tried to let her out, you should have seen the faces of the people behind her in line. Come to think of it, you probably can see those people's faces, if you're interested, as I suspect they're still there, waiting to turn left.

Based on that obviously representative example, and since there's no way to verify this assertion, I'll take the liberty of declaring hybrids a zero-sum game. That's right: for every gallon of fuel saved by a hybrid, another gallon is burned by infuriated drivers racing to get around that hybrid, which is gliding along at 25 mph in a 35-mph zone, its driver coaxing every possible inch of battery-operated travel out of his electron-fortified steed.

I've been on both sides of this fence, so I should know. Last summer, I was driving a Nissan Altima Hybrid and came to a stop in traffic next to a guy in a Prius. I asked him, Hybrid Dude to Hybrid Dude, what kind of mileage he was getting, and he instantly shot back, "Sixty miles per gallon!" I believed him, because he drove like he was towing an invisible trailer full of chandeliers. If this guy worked as an EPA test driver, the Toyota Sequoia would be rated at 35 mpg, city. But I have to wonder: how much of that guy's heroic fuel economy was a result of Toyota's engineering prowess, and how much was due to the psychological manipulations of the car's in-dash fuel-economy display?

Driving that Altima, I, too, became a slave to the bar graphs, pie charts, and hourly PowerPoint presentations emanating from that dashboard video screen. At green lights, I accelerated with all the verve of a Nebraskan Soap Box Derby racer. I began slowing for stop signs as soon as they appeared on the horizon. If I had an appointment at the bottom of a hill, I'd drive there and walk home. Anything to please the fuel-economy oracle.

It wasn't until I got back into a nonhybrid that I snapped out of the trance and realized that I'd been driving like a man possessed - possessed by Mr. Magoo.

The solution, as I see it, is to remove all the fancy economy-quantifying displays from hybrids and put them into pickups, muscle cars, and mammoth SUVs. Free from the torment of seeing their mileage to the thousandth decimal place, hybrid drivers will be able to keep up with traffic while knowing that their economy is on the right side of the overall spread. As for the gas-guzzler owners, perhaps a giant, luminous, single-digit fuel-economy number staring them in the face will cause them to think twice before doing a brake-stand launch from each traffic light. That's all we need for harmonious traffic flow and maximum fuel economy for all - a little less righteousness for hybrid drivers, a little more shame for everybody else.

[2R]

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaa

[the_professor]

Follow this link from tonight's National (June 9) and watch the report about the Civic about 15 mins in.

$10,000 extra for the hybrid version. Do you know how far you'd need to drive in order to realize the "savings"? It is a false premise, period. End of story.

http://www.cbc.ca/national/

[the_professor]

Go look at Consumer Reports or Car and Driver results if you don't believe me.

Ok:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars ... -cars-206/

1 Toyota Prius Base 44 35 50 48
2 Toyota Prius Touring 42 34 47 48
3 Honda Civic Hybrid 37 26 47 45
4 Toyota Camry Hybrid 34 28 41 37
5 Toyota Yaris Base (manual) 34 26 42 41
6 Honda Fit Sport (manual) 34 26 39 40
7 Toyota Yaris Base 33 23 44 40
8 Nissan Altima Hybrid 32 27 36 35
9 Toyota Corolla LE 32 23 40 39
10 Honda Fit Base 32 22 43 38
11 Honda Civic EX (manual) 31 22 40 37
12 Hyundai Accent GS (manual) 30 23 36 35
13 Kia Rio5 SX (manual) 30 23 36 35
14 Mini Cooper S (manual) 30 22 38 36
15 Mazda3 i (manual) 30 21 42 36

Hey, look, the top 4 are hybrids. Wonder how that happened if they suck. The answer is that car manufacturers inflate ALL mpg ratings, not just those for hybrids.

At no point did I say that they are not more efficient. But under most driving conditions they are not as efficient as claimed.

You're wasting your time if you're trying to convince me otherwise. It's the media and the facts behind the real-world driving habits of most people that matters in the end, and the multitude of reports out there do not support the oft-made claim that hybrids will save the day.

[the_professor]

Hybrids are a crock of sh*t.

Eric Reguly, Globe and Mail, March 11, 2006...

Comparing initial cost - according to Honda.ca, the 2008 Civic Hybrid starts at $26,350. The 2008 Civic Sedan EXL (the closest comparable model) starts at $23,480, which is $2,870 less than the hybrid. We want to attempt to compare apples and apples as much as possible, so I'm not comparing the base-model Civic with the Hybrid as they have a very different set of features.

Your pricing data is inaccurate. The comparable Civic & Civic Hybrid models discussed in tonight's CBC report showed a $10,000 difference between the two models comparably equipped.

In the meantime, there is a still carbon cost behind the manufacturing of all the added hybrid components. And that is what matters in the end. A car's impact is not solely measured at the tailpipe after it rolls off the lot.

Apparently you haven't heard of globalization. Nearly all cars are manufactured with components made from all over the world, not just hybrids.

Uh, so what? We all share the planet's air. I didn't say it mattered where the components are produced, because it doesn't matter. The fact remains there are lots of extra emissions created by a hybrid's production process before the gasoline engine is ever fired up.

At best they are a net-zero difference product that low consumers like yourself to feel better when you get behind the wheel. Watch tonight's CBC report.

[the_professor]

Hybrids are a crock of sh*t.

Eric Reguly, Globe and Mail, March 11, 2006...

The article you are quoting is more than 2 years old, and gas prices have changed the economics completely. The fuel savings pay for themselves a lot sooner than they used to.

Great, so you use corporate joe's tactic of discounting any information that was not published yesterday...

Two years ago hybrid manufacturers like Toyota were still spouting the so-called environmental benefits of the cars, irrespective of the supposed massive fuel savings (at the prices of two years ago).

What you and grimey are missing is that hybrids make a small dent in fuel consumption. Then, when you factor in the extra manufacturing emissions associated with their production, plus the cost (environmental and financial) of renewing the batteries periodically, plus the financial costs associated with a hybrid, it makes little or no difference to either the consumer or the environment.

But you go ahead a pat yourself on the back every time you manage a battery-only start in normal city traffic. (A theoretical possibility that I have not yet witnessed as a passenger in one of Winnipeg's cabs, virtually all of which are now hybrids). Because hey, you're saving the planet!

[the_professor]

1 Toyota Prius Base 44 35 50 48
2 Toyota Prius Touring 42 34 47 48
3 Honda Civic Hybrid 37 26 47 45
4 Toyota Camry Hybrid 34 28 41 37

Turns out my Consumer Reports suggestion wasn't the most reliable for you to be quoting. The Hybrids perform even worse in real-life than the claims made by the EPA and Consumer Reports. Gee, how can I buy a car that takes five to ten years to see any benefit?

From MacLean's:

"The only problem is that hype is driving the market. Experts warn that hybrids' fuel effiency is overstated by more than 25 per cent. The vehicles won't actually save consumers much money, and they won't save the planet either.

He's not alone: according to industry watchdog Consumer Reports, hybrid cars actually achieve less than 60 per cent of their government ratings in city conditions. While all cars studied fell short of their published scores, Consumer Reports found the biggest discrepancy among the hybrids, whose main selling point is fuel thriftiness. Their test showed that Blackshaw's Civic Hybrid averaged 0.09 litres/kilometre in the city, significantly less than its estimated 0.05 litres/kilometre.

The problem, really, is in the way hybrids work. They combine two power sources -- gasoline and electric -- under one hood. Most can't operate solely on electricity. The combination is meant to reduce the car's overall consumption of gasoline -- and it does, but not by much, because the battery-powered electric engine works only at low speeds. "The hybrid's electric engine only kicks in under 50 km/hour, so when you drive slowly, you're not using gas, but people rarely drive those speeds, even on city streets," says DesRosiers. Congestion has increased, so drivers tend to jackrabbit through the city, braking more and accelerating faster, which EnerGuide's tests don't consider.(Hybrids use a combination of gas and electric power when accelerating at low speeds.)

The bottom line for consumers is to beware the hype. Hybrids cost an additional $5,000 to $15,000 over their gasoline-only counterparts, and their fuel efficiency isn't as promised, meaning far higher operational costs and environmental impact than advertised. And it takes a lot longer -- five to 10 years -- to recover the premium paid."

[. ._]

My 1981 Cadillac has an MPG Sentinel- which tells you instantaneous MPG as you drive. With the price of gas, I glance at it every once in a while, and drive like a grandpa. (10km/h over the limit with slow acceleration)

But every once in a while if I have to, I nail it to the floor, she downshifts and revs to the sky. With the window open you can hear the 368 V8 just a hummin', and if I look out the rear view mirror, sometimes I can see the black carbon getting burnt out of the system. When I do this, I glance at the MPG readout sayin' I'm getting 1mpg. That's pretty cool too.

I don't think it's the readout that determines a hybrid driver's grannyness, it's the personality. If I had a hybrid, she'd be pedal to the metal all day! They're pretty fast off the line, I've heard- and cheap on gas. They should make a hybrid Corvette or something.

-istp

[Sulako]

Turns out my Consumer Reports suggestion wasn't the most reliable for you to be quoting. The Hybrids perform even worse in real-life than the claims made by the EPA and Consumer Reports. Gee, how can I buy a car that takes five to ten years to see any benefit?

I'm not going by the EPA reports, I'm going by the 2 years I have spent driving my Civic Hybrid. The facts (again) are: The tank is 50l. If I drive like I normally do (129km/hr on the highway when I can), I get 900km on a tank. If I wanted to drive slower (read: under 120) then I would get just over 1,000km on a tank. If I wanted to drive really slow (read: 90), then I'd easily get over 1,100km on a tank. Nobody in their right mind would drive that slowly, as it would painfully lengthen the morning commute, and also result in road rage from other drivers.

I am not disagreeing with you that the EPA reports on the civic were initially exaggerated. The initial rating on the Hybrid was 4.3l/100km and I average 5.2 - 5.5. That's still pretty good though, and a lot better than Lisa's fuel economy in her regular Civic, where she gets 650km on the highway and closer to 500km if it's pure city-driving (I imagine the fuel economy numbers for the conventional Civic have been exaggerated also, just like every car out there).

Your pricing data is inaccurate. The comparable Civic & Civic Hybrid models discussed in tonight's CBC report showed a $10,000 difference between the two models comparably equipped.

Now as far as initial cost: Comparing 2 cars that share the same features is the only way to do a fair comparison as to the extra initial cost of the hybrid. The CBC report compared the absolute base model Civic with the Hybrid, which (again) is an unfair comparison because those cars have a very different set of features. The closest non-hybrid Civic to compare it to is the Civic Sedan EXL. They have essentially the same bells and whistles. Check out the honda.ca website (specifically the 'price a car' section) for a comparison.

If all you care about is paying the absolute least amount for your transportation, then just buy an old beater Civic from the 70's or 80's. They are essentially free, and you could burn through 25k of gas before you'd approach the initial acquisition costs of a new hybrid. I choose not to do that.

As far as battery replacement: I guess it depends on your definition of 'periodic'. Toyota guarantees all their hybrid-related components for 10 years, Honda for 8. I would assume they expect the batteries to last at least 10 years + 1 day and 8 years + 1 day respectively, so don't be thinking you'll have to replace them during the time period you will likely own the car for. A brand-new battery pack for either car is currently going to cost ~$3,000 so it is a consideration, but not for quite a while.

You may also want to take note that hybrid cars are retaining their resale value very well (first-gen Honda insight excepted), so when the time comes to trade one in, you are likely to see a decent return on investment. Kelly Blue Book lists the Prius as one of 2007's top-ten resale value award winners, indicating that the premium paid for a hybrid doesn't just evaporate into thin air once you drive it off the dealer's lot.

I guess my main point in all this is that you can't just discount hybrids as BS, nor can you trust the manufacturers to provide completely accurate information on the mileage. Do the research and you'll find out whether a hybrid is right for your particular transport needs. For a lot of people it is, me included.

[Wild Cat]

Oh and I guess drilling for oil isn't harmful to the environment right?
The oil industry, from rigs to refineries, destroy a bunch of land and sea. Land and ecosystem is permanently damaged. oil constantly leaks from rigs off the ocean. Tankers are always sinking in the ocean. Canada's lakes and ponds are dried up for the use of oil sand and other projects. lakes are also contaminated badly that birds drown in them. Refineries pollute the air all around.
And this article is gonna tell me that the hummer does very little damage to the environment?
And you know what, it does harm the environment to make a prius, I am sure of that. But I am positive it is Waaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than a hummer, in terms of environmental impact.
Why depend on oil?

[Captain Slog]

Whilst, so called, hybrid vehicles may provide a test bed for new technological developments, the use of the term hybrid is a misnomer and nothing more than marketing hype. So called hybrid vehicles rely on one source of fuel, namely gas (petroleum spirit) whilst arguable more efficient than a conventional vehicle they ain’t going nowhere without oil.

[Sulako]

Interesting little table from Edmunds.com, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal.

Some hybrids pay for themselves a lot sooner than others...

*one minor note* - the table doesn't take into account the $2,000 cash back you'll get from the Ontario gov't if you buy a hybrid in Ontario. I don't know if other provinces have similar deals...

[glorifiedtaxidriver]

Check out this link. I'm not sure how well this will work. A lot of the major automotive companies have poured a lot of money into Hybrids. This could render all that technology obsolete. If this things came into production, I'd buy one for sure. Maybe not great for highway driving at 80 km/hr but you could refill at any lake.


http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/ ... eo=1387733

[grimey]

I'm not sure how well this will work.

It won't.

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=315

"Science" reporters should really be forced to retake high-school chemistry, biology, and physics classes.

[grimey]

Tankers are always sinking in the ocean.

Please list 5 recent tanker sinkings.

[grimey]

Hey, look, the top 4 are hybrids. Wonder how that happened if they suck. The answer is that car manufacturers inflate ALL mpg ratings, not just those for hybrids.

At no point did I say that they are not more efficient. But under most driving conditions they are not as efficient as claimed.

Nor are any other cars.

Hybrids are a crock of sh*t.

Eric Reguly, Globe and Mail, March 11, 2006...

The article you are quoting is more than 2 years old, and gas prices have changed the economics completely. The fuel savings pay for themselves a lot sooner than they used to.

Great, so you use corporate joe's tactic of discounting any information that was not published yesterday...

You're unaware that prices change over time? Are you willfully ignorant, or are you retarded?

The bottom line for consumers is to beware the hype. Hybrids cost an additional $5,000 to $15,000 over their gasoline-only counterparts, and their fuel efficiency isn't as promised, meaning far higher operational costs and environmental impact than advertised. And it takes a lot longer -- five to 10 years -- to recover the premium paid."

Except it's not a $5000-15000 dollar premium. It's about a $1000-$2000 premium in Ontario for any hybrid that will give you significantly better gas mileage.

The Macleans article is from 2005, hybrid costs have dropped dramatically.

[ottawa,kan]

Sulako....I'd be cautious about believing that the batteries are covered for 8 years. Warranties are wierd. Even bumper to bumper won't cover tires, brake pads and often the clutch as these are considered "wear items" I can't imagine a battery lasting 8 years, much less 10. Lead acids sure won't, and I've never seen a NiMH make it more than 3. Course those were pretty abused.NiMH batteries have "memory" problems too. Lithium batteries for cars are going to be a huge huge market changer, IMO. I'd beat it down to your dealer and ask the shop guys if the batteries are replaced free...or prorated with some wierd voodoo, or not covered at all. Be interesting to hear your report.

[Sulako]

A quick call to a customer service rep at 866-9-HONDA-9 told me that the battery in my Civic Hybrid is completely covered for 8 years / 130,000km. If you are under those figures and the battery dies, you get a free replacement. It's not pro-rated, it's completely warrantied. I wanted to be really clear so I asked if I'd get a free replacement if it was 7 yrs and 11 months, and 129,999 km and the answer is 'yes, the replacement will be free. It's not pro-rated, and as long as you are under the warranty limit, all repairs are free. FYI it's not just the battery that's covered under this, it's the whole electrical motor / generator system.

I have heard about NiMH batteries developing memory problems, and I asked about that. The guy said that during normal servicing, they generally do 'battery re-learns' which he said mitigates the memory problems. He said sometimes the car asks for it - the car has a little annunciator panel under the speedometer that tells you what maintenance it wants - but so far I haven't seen that particular code come up on my panel.

[ottawa,kan]

That's pretty neat Sulako. Can you imagine GM or Chrysler working like that?? Of course I'd be over the mileage in 4 years, not 8. But I suppose the batteries would just keep on humming. Anyway it's food for thought. I always figured you'd be out some serious cash every three years for Batts.

[ottawa,kan]

I had a buddy with a Honda Minivan with a badly slipping, hard shifting tranny. It was past warranty in both mileage and years, but Honda totally replaced ( not repaired) the trany, and warrantied that one for 3 years 36K miles, FREE! They recognized that they had a real set of quality issues with that tranny and they took care of their customers, and their reputation. If only GM could learn the same. Honda is a damn good company, in my opinion. Wish they made big work trucks. But I'm going to Izusu's for our company.

[CID]

But I'll take a guess at an answer for you: Because finding a technology that replaces oil -- a centuries-old dominant "technology" for a reason -- has already consumed tens (or hundreds) of billions of dollars with no feasible results in sight. Look at the joke that is Ballard Power.

Solar and wind are too unreliable. Electric power (which still needs to be generated somehow), is a joke when it comes to the battery technology available today, as compared with the range offered by oil.

There are plenty of alternatives. Unfortunately, governments are under the influence of very strong oil lobbiests. Oil companies have been quick to buy out anyone who has tried to offer alternatives.

This isn't anything new. Oil companies have been doing it for decades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Mo ... conspiracy

[xsbank]

Do you really believe that stuff, CID? You didn't read that article, did you?

[Topspin]

A quick call to a customer service rep at 866-9-HONDA-9 told me that the battery in my Civic Hybrid is completely covered for 8 years / 130,000km. If you are under those figures and the battery dies, you get a free replacement. It's not pro-rated, it's completely warrantied. I wanted to be really clear so I asked if I'd get a free replacement if it was 7 yrs and 11 months, and 129,999 km and the answer is 'yes, the replacement will be free. It's not pro-rated, and as long as you are under the warranty limit, all repairs are free. FYI it's not just the battery that's covered under this, it's the whole electrical motor / generator system.

I have heard about NiMH batteries developing memory problems, and I asked about that. The guy said that during normal servicing, they generally do 'battery re-learns' which he said mitigates the memory problems. He said sometimes the car asks for it - the car has a little annunciator panel under the speedometer that tells you what maintenance it wants - but so far I haven't seen that particular code come up on my panel.

Keep in mind you are talking to a salesman. Take everything with a grain of salt, he may be telling the truth, he may not. We will yet see down the road. And in terms of lifespan of parts a lot of these technologies are relatively new on the scale of things. I would call it a pretty safe bet that a lot of the things under the hood are relatively new, and people don't really know how well they will perform down the stretch.