Please sign this petition

[MegansPrius]

Originally Posted by Scarface

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. Before we delve into the seedy underworld of hybrids, you must first understand how a hybrid works. For this, we will use the most popular hybrid on the market, the Toyota Prius.
The Prius is powered by not one, but two engines: a standard 76 horsepower, 1.5-liter gas engine found in most cars today and a battery- powered engine that deals out 67 horsepower and a whooping 295ft/lbs of torque, below 2000 revolutions per minute. Essentially, the Toyota Synergy Drive system, as it is so called, propels the car from a dead stop to up to 30mph. This is where the largest percent of gas is consumed. As any physics major can tell you, it takes more energy to get an object moving than to keep it moving. The battery is recharged through the braking system, as well as when the gasoline engine takes over anywhere north of 30mph. It seems like a great energy efficient and environmentally sound car, right?
You would be right if you went by the old government EPA estimates, which netted the Prius an incredible 60 miles per gallon in the city and 51 miles per gallon on the highway. Unfortunately for Toyota, the government realized how unrealistic their EPA tests were, which consisted of highway speeds limited to 55mph and acceleration of only 3.3 mph per second. The new tests which affect all 2008 models give a much more realistic rating with highway speeds of 80mph and acceleration of 8mph per second. This has dropped the Prius’s EPA down by 25 percent to an average of 45mpg. This now puts the Toyota within spitting distance of cars like the Chevy Aveo, which costs less then half what the Prius costs.
However, if that was the only issue with the Prius, I wouldn’t be writing this article. It gets much worse.
Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius. As already noted, the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.
The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.
“The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,” said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail, a British-based newspaper.
All of this would be bad enough in and of itself; however, the journey to make a hybrid doesn’t end there. The nickel produced by this disastrous plant is shipped via massive container ship to the largest nickel refinery in Europe. From there, the nickel hops over to China to produce ‘nickel foam.’ From there, it goes to Japan. Finally, the completed batteries are shipped to the United States, finalizing the around-the-world trip required to produce a single Prius battery. Are these not sounding less and less like environmentally sound cars and more like a farce?
Wait, I haven’t even got to the best part yet.
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.
So, if you are really an environmentalist - ditch the Prius. Instead, buy one of the most economical cars available - a Toyota Scion xB. The Scion only costs a paltry $0.48 per mile to put on the road. If you are still obsessed over gas mileage - buy a Chevy Aveo and fix that lead foot.
One last fun fact for you: it takes five years to offset the premium price of a Prius. Meaning, you have to wait 60 months to save any money over a non-hybrid car because of lower gas expenses.



http://clubs.ccsu.edu/Recorder/edito...asp?NewsID=188
http://www.google.com/search?q=prius...ient=firefox-a

Since you're too lazy to follow a link, here:

The original article is an opinion piece (i.e., no fact-checking) for a college newspaper that publishes wild claims in a pathetic attempt to draw attention to itself. In February, The Recorder published "Rape only hurts if you fight it" ( http://www.nbc30.com/news/10992118/detail.html )and now in March, "Prius outdoes hummer." This newspaper and this article are garbage.

1. Regarding new EPA mileage estimates, Demorro claims the Chevy Aveo's mileage puts it within "spitting distance" of the Prius. The new EPA combined mileage put the Chevy Aveo at 26 mpg, the Toyota Prius at 46 mpg. So I guess 20 miles more per gallon is "spitting distance."

2. The "Dust-to-dust" study is from a marketing firm, not a science journal. It arrives at an artificially high cost for the Prius by assigning it an arbitrary lifespan of 100k miles, and a Hummer 300k miles. There's Prius being used as cabs that have 200k on them now: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8839690/

And, insofar as a car lasting, what car do you expect to repair less? A Toyota Prius or a GM Hummer? You can check Consumer Reports for the answer to that one. A good analysis of the flaws in dust-to-dust is available at:
http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?p=48

3. The Sudbury info is seriously outdated, and the comment about moon buggies (like, when did Nasa test moon buggies — early 1970’s) ought to have given the author a clue. Sudbury was polluted by a century of mining (1870 on). In fact, some of Sudbury’s nickel went into making the Statue of Liberty. Currently, the mine is owned by INCO (not Toyota), and produces 100,000 tons of nickel a year, of which Toyota buys 1% (1000 tons). Blaming Toyota for the pollution at Sudbury is ludicrous. Nickel, by the way, is primarily used to make stainless steel. The Mail on Sunday newspaper, which ran the story the college article is a thin re-write of (visible here http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/...n_page_id=1770 ), used a stock photo you can buy online taken in 1994 to illustrate the pollution (visible here http://www.photoboy.com/bin/Cklb?vmo=1173985067754 ). There were, of course, no Prius in existence or being manufactured in 1994.

Furthermore, Sudbury is no longer this polluted, as INCO and the city have planted over 8 million trees there since 1979. The best history online of the Sudbury devastation/reforestation comes from GM Canada -- that's GM, maker of the Hummer, ahem, writing about how Sudbury was polluted and how it has come back. Really, one should blame Chicago more than Toyota, as Sudbury's trees were all cut down in 1871 to help rebuild Chicago after the fire. GM provides telling photos of some of the reclamation from 1979 to present.
http://www.gmcanada.com/inm/gmcanada/english/about/MissionGreen/Daily/Sep22.html

Canadian news recently broadcast a show on Sudbury's regreening (the acid rain problem David Martin of Greenpeace is talking about is the situation pre 1972):
http://www.cbc.ca/clips/rm-hi/mackinnon-sudbury070312.rm

The author of this article, Demorro, is so fact-challenged that in his follow-up piece, wherein he admits CNW's Dust-to-Dust is suspect, he continues his Prius-bashing by recommending people buy a Tesla Roadster instead for a mere $30,000. ( http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/edito...asp?NewsID=203 ). The Tesla Roadster actually costs $92,000. The guy can't even get the list price of a car right; I seriously wouldn't trust his opinion on hybrids.

For further info, see Prius Versus HUMMER: Exploding the Myth at http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto...96.A12220.html

[Proco]

Originally Posted by MegansPrius

Since you're too lazy to follow a link, here:

The original article is an opinion piece (i.e., no fact-checking) for a college newspaper that publishes wild claims in a pathetic attempt to draw attention to itself. In February, The Recorder published "Rape only hurts if you fight it" ( http://www.nbc30.com/news/10992118/detail.html )and now in March, "Prius outdoes hummer." This newspaper and this article are garbage.

1. Regarding new EPA mileage estimates, Demorro claims the Chevy Aveo's mileage puts it within "spitting distance" of the Prius. The new EPA combined mileage put the Chevy Aveo at 26 mpg, the Toyota Prius at 46 mpg. So I guess 20 miles more per gallon is "spitting distance."

2. The "Dust-to-dust" study is from a marketing firm, not a science journal. It arrives at an artificially high cost for the Prius by assigning it an arbitrary lifespan of 100k miles, and a Hummer 300k miles. There's Prius being used as cabs that have 200k on them now: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8839690/

And, insofar as a car lasting, what car do you expect to repair less? A Toyota Prius or a GM Hummer? You can check Consumer Reports for the answer to that one. A good analysis of the flaws in dust-to-dust is available at:
http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?p=48

3. The Sudbury info is seriously outdated, and the comment about moon buggies (like, when did Nasa test moon buggies — early 1970’s) ought to have given the author a clue. Sudbury was polluted by a century of mining (1870 on). In fact, some of Sudbury’s nickel went into making the Statue of Liberty. Currently, the mine is owned by INCO (not Toyota), and produces 100,000 tons of nickel a year, of which Toyota buys 1% (1000 tons). Blaming Toyota for the pollution at Sudbury is ludicrous. Nickel, by the way, is primarily used to make stainless steel. The Mail on Sunday newspaper, which ran the story the college article is a thin re-write of (visible here http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/...n_page_id=1770 ), used a stock photo you can buy online taken in 1994 to illustrate the pollution (visible here http://www.photoboy.com/bin/Cklb?vmo=1173985067754 ). There were, of course, no Prius in existence or being manufactured in 1994.

Furthermore, Sudbury is no longer this polluted, as INCO and the city have planted over 8 million trees there since 1979. The best history online of the Sudbury devastation/reforestation comes from GM Canada -- that's GM, maker of the Hummer, ahem, writing about how Sudbury was polluted and how it has come back. Really, one should blame Chicago more than Toyota, as Sudbury's trees were all cut down in 1871 to help rebuild Chicago after the fire. GM provides telling photos of some of the reclamation from 1979 to present.
http://www.gmcanada.com/inm/gmcanada/english/about/MissionGreen/Daily/Sep22.html

Canadian news recently broadcast a show on Sudbury's regreening (the acid rain problem David Martin of Greenpeace is talking about is the situation pre 1972):
http://www.cbc.ca/clips/rm-hi/mackinnon-sudbury070312.rm

The author of this article, Demorro, is so fact-challenged that in his follow-up piece, wherein he admits CNW's Dust-to-Dust is suspect, he continues his Prius-bashing by recommending people buy a Tesla Roadster instead for a mere $30,000. ( http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/edito...asp?NewsID=203 ). The Tesla Roadster actually costs $92,000. The guy can't even get the list price of a car right; I seriously wouldn't trust his opinion on hybrids.

For further info, see Prius Versus HUMMER: Exploding the Myth at http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto...96.A12220.html

Y'know, Scott, there's something I think you need to hear ... You have a very bad habit of challenging peoples preconceived notions with actual facts. This confuses them. I just thought you should know.

[MegansPrius]

Originally Posted by Proco

Y'know, Scott, there's something I think you need to hear ... You have a very bad habit of challenging peoples preconceived notions with actual facts. This confuses them. I just thought you should know.

Yes. Terrible things, facts.

[SSimon]

We don't do anything with them.

http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/environme...ery/index.html

Toyota offers financial incentive to ensure that this program is utilized.

[Danny Hamilton]

Originally Posted by Scarface

Tell me this...what do you guys do with your batteries?. . . .

It's not so much a matter of maturity as it is exhaustion at repeatedly dealing with lies, inaccurate information, and bad math over and over evertime someone comes here stating "facts" about the Prius that they assume are true because it tells them what they want to believe.

It's sort of like if someone were to show up declaring that the earth is flat quoting some ancient and obviously inaccurate writing, and then accuse people of being immature when they all laugh at him.

As for my batttery, I'm not sure I fully understand the question. I mean, I keep it in the car where it belongs. The car works better that way. I fully expect the battery to last 10 years and probably longer than that. After that, considering it is a relatively clean NiMH battery, there isn't any reason the components couldn't be recycled.

[patsparks]

One can only assume the scar of scarface's face is where the thinking part of his brain was extracted. That crap from a marketing company CNW was discredited long ago and they have even retracted it.

Where do they breed these ignorant people?

[MegansPrius]

Originally Posted by Scarface

Fuel-efficient Ford for California meets hybrid standards

Gregory J. Wilcox / Los Angeles Daily News

You don't have to drive a hybrid to display an eco-friendly conscience.
Here in Los Angeles, motorists can tool around hydrocarbon central in a Ford Focus Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle.
What you get, according to Ford, is an affordable, fuel-efficient car that meets the same emissions standards as the industry's "best hybrids."

And a car that can get up to 37miles per gallon and is available in a variety of body styles and transmission choices. What you won't get are tax credits or a free pass to drive solo in the diamond lanes. You can literally extend the green theme to the exterior. The test model sported a kiwi green clear coat metallic paint job. The PZEV badge is affixed to the right rear of 2007 Focus models sold in California with the 2.0-liter Duratec 20E engine. It's Ford's way of letting the buying public know about the company's clean-air choices.
There's an audience, too. Ford said this model accounts for about 97 percent of Focus sales in the Golden State. (This certification badging is also available on some Mercury, Volvo and Mazda models.) In a Ford news release announcing the program last summer, the California Air Resources Board noted that not all hybrids meet the PZEV standards while some non-hybrids, such as the Focus, are cleaner. And car companies do have to meet three air board standards to earn the designation.
They are requirements that a vehicle's tailpipe emissions must meet the Super Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle standard, which is more than 80 percent cleaner with respect to smog-forming emissions than the average 2007 vehicle; eliminate the escape of fuel vapor; and warranty coverage to ensure that the vehicle will meet PZEV requirements for 15 years or 150,000 miles.
Ford also put together some fun facts about PZEV.
Grilling one hamburger emits more hydrocarbon emissions than a Focus PZEV would on a three-hour drive (about 180 miles). (I pumped out twice as many hydrocarbons doing this Thursday night.)
A Focus PZEV would have to be driven more than 2,100 miles, or five trips between Los Angeles and San Francisco, to equal the emissions generated by the leading 5.4-horsepower lawn mower in just one hour of use.
The Focus PZEV is so clean it would take 330 of them running at the same time to equal the smog-forming emissions of one typical 1971 car, the first California emission-controlled vehicle.
You get the point.
In addition to showing the environment a softer side, the Focus also offers a pleasing driving experience in a small package.
The 136-horsepower, 2.0-liter, Duratec 20 dual-overhead-cam in-line four-cylinder engine, while not a screamer, provides adequate power. More horsepower is available if buyers want additional oomph. This was the SES model, and the package included 16-inch, five-spoke alloy wheels, fog lamps, enhanced suspension with rear stabilizer bar, automatic speed control, overhead console, tilt and telescoping leather-wrapped steering wheel, and a tachometer. Inside, leather seats offered good support and enough leg room for drivers more than six feet tall. A CD- and MP3-capable player is standard across the Focus lineup.
And there is lots of internal storage for such a small car. There is a drop-down drawer for six compact discs -- located by the driver's left knee -- and an open space just below the climate-control dials.
A center console houses the shifter, two cup holders, the parking brake lever and optional features, including the traction-control system and heater switches for the seats. There's also an overhead console with sunglasses holder, and space for a garage-door opener is optional.
And the front doors include molded-in beverage holders.
The rear seats fold down, but not completely flat. That can make for awkward stowage, and the Focus better accommodated a golf bag across the rear seats.
All in all, the Focus lives up to its billing. It's an affordable, clean ride that doesn't take a big bite out of your bank account or the planet.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...304/1149/rss26

Wait...you mean a compact car...with a combined MPG of 28 MPG can have low emissions? I'm shocked. I'll take my mid-sized Prius that's roomier and averages another 18 miles per gallon while maintaining low emissions.