Hybrids are worse for the Environment than Hummers

The Toyota Prius, the flagship car for the environmentally conscious, is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America, and takes more combined energy to produce than a Hummer, says the Recorder.

Consider:

• The nickel contained in the Prius' battery is mined and smelted at a plant in Ontario that has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the 'dead zone' around the plant to test moon rovers.
• Dubbed the Superstack, the factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist's nightmare.
• Acid rain around the area was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside, according to Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin.
• After leaving the plant, the nickel travels to Europe, China, Japan and United States, a hardly environmentally sound round the world trip for a single battery.

But that isn't even the worst part, says the Record. According to a study by CNW Marketing, the total combined energy to produce a Prius (consisting of electrical, fuel, transportation, materials and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime), is greater than what it takes to produce a Hummer:

• 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 almost 50 percent less combined energy doing it.

Source: Chris Demorro, "Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage," The Recorder, March 7, 2007.

 

Interesting.

I'll be driving by the SuperStack in a few weeks acutally.

 

Somehow, I imagine some eco-freaks brain going into meltdown, after reading that. Whatever happened to the "environmental" nonsense of "it's the thought that counts?"

But it's hardly surprising. Doing something, just to be "green," being too lazy to do any research as to the "green" claims, is bound to have such "unindended consequences."

Why don't people listen to more good talk radio? They point out such things on programs like Rush Limbaugh all the time. Rush has played this funny/sad song, about some enviro-weenie who drives a little tin-can Yugo car, thinking he is "saving the environment" or whatever nonsense, to which he soon gets creamed by a truck. And the song ends something about, across town, another deluded idiot is buying ... a Yugo.

Yeah, I'm into some of the "environmental" BS, like carpooling, combining trips, or just stay home more often and boycott the greedy price-gouging oil monopoly corporations, but for different reasons. Because I am frugal and like for life to be in some respects, simpler, which it isn't simpler if I am always having to "go somewhere."

I think another common phrase Rush uses about liberals/enviro wackos, is "symbolism over substance." Just the other day, somebody was telling me about how they have a lot of stuff on their PC, to make it look more like a Mac. And yet it doesn't run like a Macintosh. Obvious question: Why not just buy a Mac, the real thing? What good is symbolism, if it has so little depth or reality to it?

But shouldn't the "common sense" man, have known there was something "wrong" with hybrids, just from seeing the "sticker shock" at the higher price, at a car dealership? Why pay a premium upfront price, for a trendy new technology car that performs almost as well as conventional and time-proven technology, just to go from point A to B? Is there really any reason why a car must cost almost more than a house? Considering that cars are much more mass-produced and put together by robots, far more than houses are?

If hybrids are to become more common, they really need to improve the battery technology, include more "green"-consistant options standard as the missing "power cord" for short urban commuting trips, and a solar panel to boost gas milage slightly or eliminate gas usage altogether for dear old granny who all she does is drive to the supermarket twice a month. And stop this "environmental" nonsense of "my car is greener than your car," and make them blend in more. If I drive a hybrid, do I really want it to be "obvious?" Why can't I have a dash that looks normal and doesn't exxagerate the "hybrid" function? If it's a real car, make it even more like a real car.

And I have been wondering, when the shoe is going to drop, and those "green" hybrid owners, get hit with a hefty battery disposal "environmental" tax?

 

It sounds to me like you should be ranting against the Toyota Prius instead of ALL hybrids.

 

<----- Bio Dieseler Here

 

I just thought the that the statement of the Hummer lasting 300,000 miles was quite comical in itself....I havent come across many (any if all) GM cars that last to 300k....speaking of the Hummer....so far this year I have seen not one, not two, but three fully engulfed in flames on the side of the highway....

 

Yes, limbaugh is just a fountain of knowledge.Wonder if he's still on the downers.

 

You provided a dead link. Not much debunking going on here. I wonder how he's supposed to comment on a link that goes nowhere. What was that about asshats?

And, this college article isn't the first time I'm hearing this. The wild claims of environmental damage around the factory may be new to me (and highly dubious...if someone turned the area suddenly into what looks like the surface of the moon, you'd think someone would have brought Canada's environmental protection laws into play).

But the rest of it...are you claiming, Mama, that there aren't a couple of hundred pounds worth of nickle-cadmium batteries in every hybrid on the road? Or perhaps that hundreds of pounds of extremely toxic batteries is something easily dealt with when their time has expired. I guess we can just bury it in the backyard, eh?

And the bit about the lifetime of the car...that's pretty indisputible. The car costs an awful lot to make...so much so that the US Federal Government has to offer hybrid owners kickbacks in order to sell them...and even then they're still not competitive with other cars! They definitely have a shorter vehicle life than other cars, due in part to the battery/electric motor being a less fit design over time than internal combustion. The tiny straight 4 engine in them is not as tried and true a design as other Toyotas, and due to the incredible weight of the engine, motor, and batteries always being dragged around by an underpowered engine it will wear out sooner. This is just common sense. What all that adds up to is also simple to understand...your hybrid, which is costly to manufacture, won't last as long as many other cars...so you need to buy a new car sooner to replace the expensive one that didn't last very long to begin with.

Hybrids are a prestiege item...a novelty. They don't save the environment...and as cars go they actually kind of suck, especially for the price. Buy a corolla instead. You'll only get about 35 miles per gallon instead of 45...but your car will last a long time and won't need to eject your body weight in nickle cadmiun at the end of its run!

 

Probably because you don't know many people who own hummers...except the anecdotal information that, in your wealth of experience, they seem to spontaneously burst into flames. You realize these vehicles were built to go into combat, right? Your little story is cute, but bullshit.

Comparing a top tier engine like the one in the hummer to "many GM cars" shows that you're not very car savvy. I guess we'll compare the shitty domestic 4-cyl engines people you know drive to a 3.5 liter V8. And then we'll compare both to a 6 liter v12 in a Jag. Hell...they're all engines, right? If you drive them around the same amount of time, they'll all burn out at the same rate, right? :bs:

 

Instead of buying "green" hybrids, shouldn't they be researching better battery technology, so that I won't have to buy a new cordless phone battery every year or so?

And it's also quite annoying, when my cordless shaver goes slow, and slower, even though there is no "Go slow" option on its controls. Where's the "Go normal" or "Speed up" button or switch? Lousy undersized, always-going-dead "rechargable" batteries.

Battery technology is so pathetic, it makes me think twice and thrice and even more times, before dare buying some battery-powered electronic gadget. Especially if it has some non-standard, over-priced, can't-be-found-in-stores, proprietary "rechargable" battery that obviously won't last very long. At least the throwaway common batteries like AA or AAA, are reasonably easy to deal with. My graphing calculator lets me play around with it and program it for months, before needing a new set of commonly available 4 AAAs.

 

I absolutely agree. Better battery solutions would go a long way towards solving a lot of problems...most importantly my electric razor. That thing has turned to crap as time's gone on.

 

I grew up in a stock car / drag car family....my grandfather opened the first Ford dealership in our county and I attended school for auto mechanics / engine performance....I also worked for many years as a fleet operations manager for the largest emergency vehicle network in the state (all GMs and Fords).....I have two vehicles....a 1961 Ford Fairlane with a rebuilt (by me, thank you) 292 Y-Block that has been pushed over to a 304 with a toploader 4-spd....and my daily driver is an 04 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins Turbo Diesel V6.....

Making assumptions is a terrible thing.....

And by the way, the new hummers WERE NOT built for the military....they were built to boost GM sales by giving civilians the oppurtunity to drive something LIKE the military issued Humvee....the M998 that was first being designed in the late 70s and the Hummer that was being designed in the early 90s for civilians do share the same basic drivetrain....the differences are in the bodies, interiors, Cooling Systems and Electrical Systems (24v sys. in the M998), the Fuel System (electronic vs. mechanical) Exhaust System (the M998 has no cats).....we have two H1s and a surplus M998 on our apparatus list at the firehouse....my aunt drives the H2 and two of my coworkers just got the H3 when it came out....I know what they are about, thank you.


I've done alot of work with a GM steelworker who is creating a tubular frame for the military Humvee to combat the problem of the vehicle "giving in" to upward forces from roadside bombs....its a pretty cool idea.....his opinion is that the M998 is outdated and tired....with all the technology we have out there our soldiers are still sitting ducks in those vehicles.


Are you talking about the 6.2L diesel in the Hummers? You consider that top tier? In what? Speed? Torque? Longevity? Hahaha.....you apparently have not driven a Cummins Turbo or an International, huh?

 

I tried to repost the correct link for what mama was trying to put up here, but it did the same thing.....copy and paste her link into google and the article pops up....

Delco batteries like the two I run in the truck are 7 year batteries....then you turn them over as cores and they are reman'd.

 

Ouch---can't remember when I've seen a more perfect and unexpected comeback Autumn!!!--BURN!!

 

Yeah, and on that note, lots of devices suffer from poorly performing batteries.

What's the deal with overheating laptop computer batteries? Could it be, that most everything that sells laptops, consumes power? Brighter screens, bigger screens, whirring DVD drives and hard drives, faster CPUs. By trying to pack ever more power into batteries, does that increase the risk of internal short circuits?

I heard that Nokia developed some cellular phone, with all sorts of gadgets within it. They shelved it. I wonder why?, asks the author of some Popular Science article on why does my battery go dead, or something or other. It started off with some notable line, about somebody desiring to buy some "nuclear" AA batteries.

About your shaver, that's a reason to look for "cordless/corded" shavers. At least when the battery turns to crap, you can still squeeze a few more years out of it, by always plugging up the coiled cord.

Consider: It's a new millenium, the year 2000+, and yet why do we have still so many, battery-powered analog watches? Isn't it high time for most everything to be digital? Well today's battery watches are technically digital, regulated by a computer chip/vibrating quartz crystal, and yet made to look analog. With a tacky "jumping" second-hand, rushing to the next second, and then time freezes, for the next whole second. Why such a "jerky" second hand? Any ideas why there aren't more digital watches? I have a theory. While I think digital watches are much more cool-looking, and have far more practical features, such as the 24-hour time mode that I prefer, digital watches usually suffer from low contrast. In poor light, they are hard for some people, to see, and thus, perhaps less fashionable in a sense? While liquid crystal displays have the extremely high efficiency required by tiny watch batteries, they are viewed through a polarizing filter required to make the "black" regions appear as a voltage potential across the liquid crystal number segments, causes the polarization of the light to perpendicularly cross that of the polarizing filter, thus reflecting no light. But that means that the non-dark regions, are filtered polarized light. And the light passes through twice? So 0% or 1% versus 25% or 30% light reflected? That equals low contrast.

There is a solution: But it won't work for digital watches. The solution, you can see on most any cordless Caller ID phone, with a backlit display. Just light it from the back! Easy to do, with a far bigger rechargable battery, but not realistic with a tiny watch battery. That's probably why the old digital glowing LED digital watches, quickly disappeared from the market. Who wants to always push a button, to see what time it is? There are glow-in-the-dark chemicals, but the glow quickly fades after the bedroom lights are turned off.

With better batteries why couldn't a digital watch have a faint backlit glow at night, and a brighter glow during the day, switched by a handy photocell?

 

i had a chevy astro with 211,000 on the clock that was as good as the day it was made, and the tail pipe sniffer at inspection time said it ran clean enough to pass as a new car.

there is so much 'greenwash' regarding cars its unbelievable, the reason the dust to dust theory has been the subject of a poor attempt at a ridicule, is because it was just a bit too close to the truth..

my concience is clear about my vehicles. i commute to work on a motorcycle (70mpg - beat that with your prius) and use a 96 ford mustang V6 at weekends for pleasure. my combined fuel usage is lower than most people driving a run of the mill civic.

 

oh yeah, well my penis is bigger.

 

An attempted solution to global warming or nihilistic dribble. The simple solution to the above problems, genocide. Human genocide mind you