Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The reason i started this topic was to understand why when a buddy bought a Prius he was inundated with derogatory terms like Commie Socialist tree hugger,Left wing wacko etc. The guy just wanted to save some gas and he liked the car,he didnt go around preaching conservation but this is what he got from fellow factory workers and it seemed to be the brunt of much derision when talked about on various forums.
So after 25 pages of replies i havent learned much about the original question other than the Prius is the car thats been singled out to represent some form of environmental hypocrisy by its owner..
i've certainly learned something about peoples views on the environmental issues
Thanks
The Prius is the definition of environmental hypocrisy. It is a badge of an intention to be environmentally responsible but is not actually so. I doubt that buyers intend that when they make their purchase, but that is the result. I am not angry with Prius buyers, I am sympathetic.
As you know, a Prius barely beats its non hybrid competition in gasoline consumption. And, there is the matter of the $10,000 battery which is loaded with bad stuff and takes a similiar amount of resources to manufacture than a Prius saves in its lifetime. So you have the energy consumption of manufacturing the battery and then what to do about the hundreds of thousands or millions of these batteries when they or worn out or more likely when they become technologically obsolete.
The available battery technology does not support a hybrid car as economically advatageous. The Volt is just a Prius to the power of 10.
There will come a time when a small inexpensive battery will be available at a price that works and electric cars will be viable. I am sure of that. the only problem is that we are not there yet.
"The prius is evil incarnate" is a complete and utter fabrication.
Every one, and I mean every one of your "assertions" has been debunked a hundred times over (regular car batteries are worse, battery technology is growing by leaps and bounds, hybrids in stop and go urban traffic get exponentially better mileage, etc). links have been provided in a dozen forums, you just don't get it, or are willfully trying to obfuscate reality.
[LEFT]The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests. In a study released this spring, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute named Koch Industries one of the top ten air polluters in the United States. And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a “kingpin of climate science denial.” The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus.
and on specifics regarding pollution:
...Koch Industries has been lobbying to prevent the E.P.A. from classifying formaldehyde, which the company produces in great quantities, as a “known carcinogen” in humans. [LEFT]Scientists have long known that formaldehyde causes cancer in rats, and several major scientific studies have concluded that formaldehyde causes cancer in human beings—including one published last year by the National Cancer Institute, on whose advisory board Koch sits. The study tracked twenty-five thousand patients for an average of forty years; subjects exposed to higher amounts of formaldehyde had significantly higher rates of leukemia. These results helped lead an expert panel within the National Institutes of Health to conclude that formaldehyde should be categorized as a known carcinogen, and be strictly controlled by the government. Corporations have resisted regulations on formaldehyde for decades, however, and Koch Industries has been a large funder of members of Congress who have stymied the E.P.A., requiring it to defer new regulations until more studies are completed.
The Prius is the definition of environmental hypocrisy. It is a badge of an intention to be environmentally responsible but is not actually so. I doubt that buyers intend that when they make their purchase, but that is the result. I am not angry with Prius buyers, I am sympathetic.
As you know, a Prius barely beats its non hybrid competition in gasoline consumption. And, there is the matter of the $10,000 battery which is loaded with bad stuff and takes a similiar amount of resources to manufacture than a Prius saves in its lifetime. So you have the energy consumption of manufacturing the battery and then what to do about the hundreds of thousands or millions of these batteries when they or worn out or more likely when they become technologically obsolete.
The available battery technology does not support a hybrid car as economically advatageous. The Volt is just a Prius to the power of 10.
There will come a time when a small inexpensive battery will be available at a price that works and electric cars will be viable. I am sure of that. the only problem is that we are not there yet.
It would do you some good to cite facts, not fiction, concerning the Prius.
First of all the Prius trounces every currently made car in fuel economy. Whether via EPA ratings, independent magazine tests, or ordinary consumers the Prius uses less fuel per mile than any other vehicle that uses gasoline or diesel. That includes the Smart and Jetta TDI.
The Prius battery cost is now about $3000, not $10,000. And they last about 180,000 miles.
I don't own a Prius because it doesn't suit me. But it is an interesting car and I continue to follow it's development.
Well firstly in Europe the Prius is classed as the #6 most fuel efficient vehicle after the Smart, Ford Fiesta, Seat Ibiza, VW Polo, and Mini One (all diesel) this is reproduced from the Independent.
European Auto Express ran a independent fuel efficiency test of the Prius against other similar vehicles and it came in 10th behind the winner the Citroen C4 Coupe 1.6 HDi, where the fuel consumptions were 41.5mpg and 49.6mpg respectively, the C4 is a conventional diesel.
Now one other concern for me is that the UK Government runs a fleet of 130 Prius, and they've asked Toyota to provide their figures for lifetime energy used, to confirm the 43% lower emission statement by Toyota, they have not supplied this information. If the information was that conclusive, I'd expect that Toyota would be printing it on everything from the front page of the NYT to toilet paper.
I think the problem with the Prius is that Toyota weren't up front (and since they haven't given the data to the British Government still are not being up front) about the whole "environmental costs" failing to mention the costs of the batteries, and recycling of these batteries in their marketing. Which has led people to challenge them on its environmental credentials (justified of not) like the CNW Marketing report that placed it as more energy consumptive over it's lifetime than a Hummer (although this was later retracted), and they still haven't really published any lifetime energy figures that I can find (not that anyone else has either).
By doing this they didn't just mess things up for the Prius, but most Hybrids and EV's, where people are constantly challenging their environmental credentials.
Well firstly in Europe the Prius is classed as the #6 most fuel efficient vehicle after the Smart, Ford Fiesta, Seat Ibiza, VW Polo, and Mini One (all diesel) this is reproduced from the Independent.
Hybrid cars are designed to be efficient in stop-and-go situations. I have lots of friends who have them, and yes, they can get mileage in the city of upper 40s/lower 50s when "efficient" cars are getting half the city mpg that manufacturers claim - you do have to know how to drive them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
the whole "environmental costs" failing to mention the costs of the batteries, and recycling of these batteries in their marketing. Which has led people to challenge them on its environmental credentials (justified of not) like the CNW Marketing report that placed it as more energy consumptive over it's lifetime than a Hummer (although this was later retracted), and they still haven't really published any lifetime energy figures that I can find (not that anyone else has either).
The cars have only been in the marketplace for what, 7 or 8 years? How can they know what the lifetime impact will be now? My Honda is 15 years old and will run for another 15 if I take care of it.
But I'm so glad you brought up that completely fabricated CNW Marketing Report - I've been debunking that one for a decade.
It illustrates everything wrong with the skeptic movement in general - false assumptions that are buried in the study (that a Hummer would get 250K miles while a Prius would get 100K - hilarious), no actual controlled study & test results you can study/replicate, etc.
That's why the concept of peer-reviewed is so important.
I really don't waste my time with any "studies" that haven't been scrutinized, as it's pretty crystal-clear that if the studies were valid the authors would be beating down the doors of respected scientific and consumer advocacy publications to spread the word, not engaging in shadow guerrilla PR campaigns.
And on the batteries, do we have to continue beating this dead horse? I guess so.
Firstly, regular car batteries are toxic as hell, and quite often not recycled. So as an earlier poster stated, either don't drive (or use any products moved by a vehicle with a battery), or don't be hypocritical and pretend hybrid batteries are poison while regular batteries are healthy.
The hybrid batteries are boku expensive (my one complaint with hybrids is they're fairly elitist and out of reach for most of us), and due to that will absolutely be recycled, just the same way valuable metals and other materials are recycled from e-waste.
I don't have a hybrid but would love one if/when we could swing it. I bike when I can, take public trans when I can. I'm not in the "cars are evil" club by *any* stretch, and I completely understand in more rural areas people often use larger vehicles for transport purposes.
but I do see no reason in the City for people to drive status symbol SUVs and the like, it's just wasteful.
and on fuel economy, my dad lives in a more rural part of Wisconsin, and believe me many people are very worried about how rising gas costs will impact their livelihood up there - why wouldn't we want to encourage auto makers to help people who need pickups, trucks, by making them more financially viable?
The figures quoted are for combined cycle, so there's city driving and more high speed, which is meant to duplicate most peoples commutes.
The Prius went on sale in Japan in 1997. So there's 13 years of data.
Yes all vehicles have batteries, however a standard Lead-Acid 12V with 750 CCA has pollutants (lead and sulphuric acid), however that's one battery normally weighing 20-30lbs and they're normally recycled. The Prius has between 240 and 168 1kg modules, or between 530lbs and 375lbs of batteries, and a standard lead acid battery. From this we can say that those batteries are certainly over and above a standard vehicle, so do add to the total "impact" the vehicle has on the environment. They contain Nickle, Potassium hydroxide, and a rare earth (Lanthanide series) metal compound (Manganese, Aluminum, Cobalt) rare earths have mild to moderate toxicity.
All I can honestly say on the whole hybrid mess is that it has not been proven to me in any conclusive manner that the energy savings of increased mileage are not consumed by the installation and production of the battery packs. There's lots of claims and as yet no real concrete data to confirm that the energy consumed in production and running a Hybrid over 10 years is less than energy consumed in production and running for a standard high efficiency vehicle.
I do however agree with your SUV perspective, to begin with how many people really need the additional weight of 4 wheel drive? Or really use the size of the vehicles? Not many, most are road only pampered pets, nothing like my truck (which is a 4x4 8L V10) where it's off road most of the time, and has hauled lumber, firewood, gravel, 6 months of groceries, and many other things at least once in the past year. Gas prices are a problem, however is it better to pay incrementally at the pump, or up front on the vehicle? It varies from person to person, and its' not my place to comment on which is preferable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
