Hybrid batteries vs. the environment

Probably more guess work and fear.

How much more does the extra gas cost to make, ship, and use in pollution costs?

 

My father insists that he saw an article in the 70s which "proved" that the energy used in making a new car was more than used in keeping an older car fixed up. If that's true you should never buy a new car.

Sounds to me more like an excuse not to get a hybrid. You can tell her that the batteries are recycled at the end of their lifecycle. That may take a while, some have gone over 200K miles on the same battery pack.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Whitestar @ Jun 27 2006, 02:12 PM) [snapback]277554[/snapback]</div>

It's MOSTLY crap. Of course there is some manufacturing issues with making batteries that don't exist in conventionally powered cars (strictly because they have less batteries). But, the process is contained in a single (give or take) location with hopefully some environmental controls. Certainly the amount of energy expended in making and disposing of the batteries over the life of the car is less than the difference in energy saved in driving the hybrid vs. a conventional car.

Here's a good article on recycling batteries:

http://www.hybridcars.com/hybrid-battery-toxicity.html

Steve

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Jun 27 2006, 06:49 PM) [snapback]277633[/snapback]</div>

And don't forget that plastic manufacturers might pollute the environment - we all oughta have plywood dashboards.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jeannie @ Jun 27 2006, 03:57 PM) [snapback]277649[/snapback]</div>

Plywood's full of chemicals.

While the price of energy is skewed by misguided energy policies, if there was really that much extra involved in making the batteries, they'd be a lot more expensive. It is true that there is an environmental cost involved in any manufacturing process, but certainly not enough to outweigh the lifetime difference in gas burned.

Also, battery technology holds the promise of opening up the possibility of large-scale use of solar and wind power, as alternatives to fossil fuels, thereby reducing, and eventually eliminating the environmental consequences of dumping all that carbon back into the atmosphere.

 

Stop eating cows. Do you know how much pollution they create and how much land and grain is wasted on them?

 

This has been shared here before. The concensus was the "think tank" who came up with this conclusion was merely a lobby group. Follow the money and you can always discover the true reasons why certain groups say the things they say. Money can always pay for a conclusion.

Now can anyone here think of a group who doesn't like less gas being used? Hmmmm.

 

The Wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Prius states that while it does take more energy to manufacture a Prius this is more than made up by energy savings during its operating life. The article references Toyota's lifetime energy assessment for the Prius at http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/k_forum/tenji/pdf/pgr_e.pdf (I've seen that document before and recall that it made a good case, but am now having trouble opening it.)

I recall reading that the original design intent of Prius was to minimize lifetime pollution, not lifetime energy consumption.

 

I would guess that the figures about the manufacture of the Prius being greater than the energy savings may be correct. There are a few other thing that need to be considered. First that is true of any new car. Second the Prius has be designed to be recyclable, to a greater extent than other cars. Some of us can not afford to have a car that may be questionable in its reliability, no mater how much maintenance has been done, some of us have mission critical tasks for the car. Having a reliable new car is not an option. I think that all of this must play in the equation. Some people can wait plus or minus 30 minutes for public transportation and others can not. All of these "practice" items come into play. As for cows they fart and the Methane causes global warming!! Kill all mammals!!! BTW do lizards fart?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(NuShrike @ Jun 27 2006, 08:32 PM) [snapback]277757[/snapback]</div>

All the more reason I should continue eating them

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(NuShrike @ Jun 27 2006, 06:32 PM) [snapback]277757[/snapback]</div>

Does anyone still eat cows? That's disgusting! It's like using your stomach for a graveyard.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(brandon @ Jun 27 2006, 11:24 PM) [snapback]277849[/snapback]</div>

I can see the bumper sticker: Save the Planet: Eat a Big Mac

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rancid13 @ Jun 27 2006, 04:01 PM) [snapback]277547[/snapback]</div>

It's a very common undermining tactic. The anti-hybrid force analysis with the perspective of "today" only, persisting the false belief that there will never be a technological or production improvement later on.

A disturbing number of people fall for that trap, getting stuck in the mindset that nothing will ever change. We saw countless of examples in the past with hybrid expense analysis articles, where they mislead you into believing gas would never cost more than $2 per gallon the entire lifetime of the vehicle. Obviously, they were grossly incorrect.

We already know for a fact that a next generation Prius is on the way. So how can a "today" analysis possibly be objective?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jun 28 2006, 09:29 AM) [snapback]277999[/snapback]</div>

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Beef. It's what's for dinner!

 

I get this all the time regarding EVs as well. Yes, there is much energy needed to build the batteries. But nothing exists in a vacuum. Everything is interrelated, and each of our choices must be compared to the other options to make a valid comparison. Most folks would love to just ignore all the energy input required to make gasoline - much less of which is needed to power our cars than the average car sold today.

Bottom line: Bull Pucky.

I get so tired of the uninformed detractors. There are those who insist that a battery car will create more pollution (as well as use more energy in its lifetime) than a gas car. The same people proclaim that rescue personnel will leave you for dead rather than risk getting shocked. They're all just handy rationalizations to continue with the status quo. The bad news is that before I got so damn smart, I used to think the same thing! In fact, I remember once saying with some authority that electric cars would do nothing to clean our air - that we're just relocating the pollution. Hey... at least I can learn!

 

Well at least we have a forum here to educate and inform people. I too believe it is hockey puck (errrr Bull Pucky) with all that mis-information. That is why I wrote above about "following the money". If you have enough money you can write all the White papers you want to prove conclusions you wish to legitimize. Thankfully, there are people like you who have the experience to tell them what they can do with those white papers.

By the way, darelldd, I am very impressed with your EV knowledge and look forward to hearing more about your experiences each time I see one of your postings. I'm willing to learn too.

Cheers

 

your friends assertion, true or not is laughable. cordless power tools and other devices (i have the exact same battery size and make for my RC cars) SOLD EVERY YEAR use 20 times more batteries than every Prius ever sold