Hybrids consume more energy in lifetime than Tahoe

[ohiocityprius]

Anyone agree with this?

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060331/sff031.html?.v=38

Wonder where the Camry Hybrid comes in? I would think that any hybrid vehicles "life dollars" would begin to drop once the initial drivetrain is worked out. For example, was v 1.0 Prius more expensive than v 2.0? Interesting......

[efusco]

It's an interesting question, but the results will vary a lot depending upon what variables are measured. And although the total amount of energy consumed is important, the source of that energy and environmental impact are probably more important.

I do think it's something to take into consideration but I don't know that one article like that will convince me that hybrids are bad.

[darelldd]

I'll gladly call BS on this. We hear this ALL the time in the battery EV arena.



As usual, they seem to be ingoring the energy costs of the actual fuel consumed. And they ignore the energy costs of the environmental and health damage created. And they are NOT comparing apples and apples, but have biased it toward vehicle miles driven, and even how far plant workers have to drive to build the things??? If a particular type of vehicle is normally driven fewer miles (let's say a Prius is only driven 100 miles/year and the Tahoe is driven 20k miles/year - the Prius will be MUCH more energy-expensive per mile - duh. There's not much here that is logical or relevant.

[dipper]

[That is the gist of my reaction]

This is another way to spin in justifying not to buy a hybrid.

When anything new is created, new manufacturing process needs to be created... and hence the extra cost/energy. If that manufacturing process becomes the norm, there is no extra cost than building a Ford Focus.

Okay GM/Ford/Dodge lovers, go back to your lovefest of status quo. I guess you should invest a few penny more in making the cupholder more EFFICIENT instead.

[sub3marathonman]

The story is ridiculous.

Quoting, "CNW Marketing Research Inc. spent two years collecting data on the energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage."

The plan part is the interesting area to focus on. Did CNW Marketing Research Inc. calculate the time and energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of the internal combustion engine?

The fact that CNW Marketing Research Inc. spent two years on this project is what is really ridiculous.

[JackDodge]

uh boy not this lame-assed topic again I get so bored with Prius-bashers. Oh, let's throw caution to the wind, H - E - double toothpicks with the lot of them! Pay no attention to the Prius-basher behind the curtain. :P

[priusblue]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ohiocityprius @ Mar 31 2006, 02:25 PM) [snapback]233048[/snapback]</div>

Anyone agree with this?

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060331/sff031.html?.v=38

Wonder where the Camry Hybrid comes in? I would think that any hybrid vehicles "life dollars" would begin to drop once the initial drivetrain is worked out. For example, was v 1.0 Prius more expensive than v 2.0? Interesting......
[/b]

OK - This article may actually be true, but it is because of the way the math is done. This is one of those cases where they are using the statistics in an invalid manner just to make a point that supports whoever gave them the money to do the study. The hybrids are new and there have been relatively few produced, and would have had high development cost because of the totally new systems and the dual systems. So if you take the total development costs/energy inputs and divide them over the number that have been produced, you will naturally get a higher cost for a newer model with fewer units sold, especially a completely new model and paradigm. The Tahoe has been around for longer, and even when it was a new model, it would have had relatively low developmental energy costs, because honestly, it's a truck with a camper shell on it. So therefore, this might be true, but it doesn't mean hybrids will be worse in the end, it just means they're new. So really, they should encourage people to buy more, to help lower the developmental energy cost per unit!

[JackDodge]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusblue @ Mar 31 2006, 02:56 PM) [snapback]233066[/snapback]</div>

OK - This article may actually be true, but it is because of the way the math is done. This is one of those cases where they are using the statistics in an invalid manner just to make a point that supports whoever gave them the money to do the study. The hybrids are new and there have been relatively few produced, and would have had high development cost because of the totally new systems and the dual systems. So if you take the total development costs/energy inputs and divide them over the number that have been produced, you will naturally get a higher cost for a newer model with fewer units sold, especially a completely new model and paradigm. The Tahoe has been around for longer, and even when it was a new model, it would have had relatively low developmental energy costs, because honestly, it's a truck with a camper shell on it. So therefore, this might be true, but it doesn't mean hybrids will be worse in the end, it just means they're new. So really, they should encourage people to buy more, to help lower the developmental energy cost per unit!
[/b]

Well, yeah, but they ignore how much energy has been wasted over the years by the American automobile industry. How much energy is going to waste as that fleet of Tahoes sits on a dealer's lot going unsold? How much energy was wasted on propping up dying brands Oldsmobile and Buick while ignoring Saturn? There was an article in one of the Detroit papers this morning, that I can't find now because of Delphi, that showed that it costs close to $10,000 per year to operate a large SUV and only three or four thousand to operate a small car. If you really don't need that SUV, you are expending a great deal more energy than the amount used to produce a hybrid.

[subarutoo]

Mark Twain had a quote that fits a lot of special interest articles: "Figures never lie, and liers never figure".

[finman]

Idiots. Gaahsh. (a little Napoleon Dynamite, in case it matters).

Can we have a show of hands as to how many of us hybrid owners will give up their hybrid for a more "energy-efficient" H2 or 3 or whatever they're up to now...I thought so.