Rossputin
06/16/07
06/16/07
The Prius is far from environmentally friendly
This blog piece originally referred to the article linked below. However, several commenters, including the Freak (who is far from an enviro-wacko) have convinced me that the original article (not by me) was poorly researched and misleading. Therefore, I am deleting the text of the article from my site. You can still read the article at the link below if you like, but with the caveat that it is likely not a good piece of journalism.
It's too bad because I really don't like the holier-than-though attitude of many Prius buyers who act as if they're superior to others because they're buying a little hybrid...
http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/editorial_item.asp?NewsID=188
Trackback address for this post
Trackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location)
5 comments
have you actually read the report? The Hummer was given a lifetime of 240,000 miles while the Prius was allocated only 100,000 lifetime miles, spreading the costs of a Hummer over a period twice a long. There are many more errors in the report. For a real "dust to dust" analysis, try
http://www.cleanairnet.org/transport/1754/articles-69297_resource_1.pdf
http://www.cleanairnet.org/transport/1754/articles-69297_resource_1.pdf
# JerryW 
on 06/16/07 at 09:12
on 06/16/07 at 09:12
Your attitude does you no credit - sneering sarcasm is seldom attractive.
Unfortunately, your research skills turn out to be of a similar order. The sources you quote are as accurate and reliable as the mad hatter. Virtually everything you have quoted is arrant rubbish.
Unfortunately, your research skills turn out to be of a similar order. The sources you quote are as accurate and reliable as the mad hatter. Virtually everything you have quoted is arrant rubbish.
No, I did not read the original report. If it gives the hummer 240,000 miles versus the 300,000 miles that the author wrote, the basic analysis is only slightly less unfavorable to the Prius. Actually I don't care enough about the issue to read the whole report. Only enviro-wackos whose primary aim is to "save the earth" at the expense of human civilization really care about trying to prove that the Prius is somehow saving the earth.
With both of your comments, I don't see any refutation of the issue surrounding the nickel for the batteries.
In any case, as for my attitude and sneering sarcasm about those who believe they are morally superior for driving their little hybrids, all I can say is that you have accurately discerned how I feel about them. Sneering sarcasm is what most of them deserve, except for the few who actually bought the car for no reason more than they wanted better gas mileage.
Enviro-wackos are going to do great damage to human civilization before people and politicians wake up to the hoax of the global warming panic.
With both of your comments, I don't see any refutation of the issue surrounding the nickel for the batteries.
In any case, as for my attitude and sneering sarcasm about those who believe they are morally superior for driving their little hybrids, all I can say is that you have accurately discerned how I feel about them. Sneering sarcasm is what most of them deserve, except for the few who actually bought the car for no reason more than they wanted better gas mileage.
Enviro-wackos are going to do great damage to human civilization before people and politicians wake up to the hoax of the global warming panic.
# The Freak on 06/18/07 at 03:05
The Nickel story in the article is silly. The mine at Sudbury has been providing Nickel to the world for a long time. Toyota buys less than 1% of the yearly output at Sudbury for the Nickel; so the Prius would represent no real impact on the environment, even if the mine were a bad mine.
As it turns out, however, there is no environmental impact from the Sudbury mine of note. The environmental damage cited by your article was done way in the past and over the last 20 years the Sudbury mine has turned into a model environmental mine, with trees planted all around it and nearby water quality restored to good levels. The turn around in held-out and rightly recognized as an example of land restoration following environmental damage, as well as how nickel (and copper) mining can be done with minimal impact.
The Prius can easily go 200K-300K miles. The batteries need to be replaced every 100K or so. Toyota has a very aggressive recycling program and they pay a bounty for old batteris of something like $300. When you put it together, the Prius is a much more efficient machine, if you care about such things.
The information in the article you quoted was generally wrong and, when correct, very misleading.
I bring all this up not because I care one iota whether you (or anybody else) buys a Prius. I drive an SUV and like it a lot.
The reason I bring it up is that the only way we can be credible against the enviro-wacko lobby is if we point out their stupidity with valid and well researched facts. Intellectual honesty and factual rigor make one unassailable. Given the threat to humanity you correctly identify with the green lobby, it's important to maintain the scientific high ground.
By the way, my next car will be a hybrid (although not a Prius). When I return to Virginia I will buy a hybrid approved by the Commonwealth to drive in the HOV lanes. That will save me 20 minutes each way commuting to DC, or 40 minutes a day. At my hourly rate, the payback is about 2 months (not to mention the reduced aggravation by avoiding bumper to bumper traffic).
This, in my opinion, is the best reason to buy a hybrid.
As it turns out, however, there is no environmental impact from the Sudbury mine of note. The environmental damage cited by your article was done way in the past and over the last 20 years the Sudbury mine has turned into a model environmental mine, with trees planted all around it and nearby water quality restored to good levels. The turn around in held-out and rightly recognized as an example of land restoration following environmental damage, as well as how nickel (and copper) mining can be done with minimal impact.
The Prius can easily go 200K-300K miles. The batteries need to be replaced every 100K or so. Toyota has a very aggressive recycling program and they pay a bounty for old batteris of something like $300. When you put it together, the Prius is a much more efficient machine, if you care about such things.
The information in the article you quoted was generally wrong and, when correct, very misleading.
I bring all this up not because I care one iota whether you (or anybody else) buys a Prius. I drive an SUV and like it a lot.
The reason I bring it up is that the only way we can be credible against the enviro-wacko lobby is if we point out their stupidity with valid and well researched facts. Intellectual honesty and factual rigor make one unassailable. Given the threat to humanity you correctly identify with the green lobby, it's important to maintain the scientific high ground.
By the way, my next car will be a hybrid (although not a Prius). When I return to Virginia I will buy a hybrid approved by the Commonwealth to drive in the HOV lanes. That will save me 20 minutes each way commuting to DC, or 40 minutes a day. At my hourly rate, the payback is about 2 months (not to mention the reduced aggravation by avoiding bumper to bumper traffic).
This, in my opinion, is the best reason to buy a hybrid.
I wish I had the time to further research every article I quote. It just goes to show how truly bad a lot of primary research is out there, when a newspaper article (on either side of an issue) which is not presented as an editorial could be as misleading as my commenters say.
I don't care enough about the issue to research it further, so I will just deal with the posting.
I don't care enough about the issue to research it further, so I will just deal with the posting.
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
