Dust in the Wind: Hybrids' Total Energy Cost
Published September 28, 2006
The Hummer H3 is more energy-efficient than the Toyota Prius, according to CNW Marketing.
Hybrids and Hummers
If you thought the hybrid bashers had exhausted their list of criticisms of gas-electric vehicles—they're small, underpowered, ugly, driven only by enviro-weenies and not worth the extra cost in any case—then you probably underestimated the creativity and persistence of the anti-hybrid crowd. The latest reason, we are told, that hybrids are not the answer is that they are less energy-efficient than conventional vehicles if you look not just at the period when the hybrid is driven, but at their entire dust-to-dust lifecycle. In fact, according to a new study by CNW Marketing Research in Bandon, Ore., the Hummer H3, in terms of dust-to-dust energy costs, equates to $1.95 per mile—while the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid are almost $3.30 per mile.
To produce these surprising claims, CNW went further than the traditional lifecycle study. The firm spent two years collecting more than 4,000 data points for all vehicles on the road—not just hybrids—studying energy costs for every single aspect of the vehicle's creation, from research and development to final disposal. They even evaluated the relative energy cost of transporting workers from their homes to the auto plants in Japan, where workers are more likely to take public transportation, with the commuting costs for auto workers in the Midwest, who are likely to drive solo for 20-plus miles in inefficient vehicles. It's not clear if CNW considered the relative diets of those workers (rice and vegetables versus Big Macs, and associated energy costs for growing, transporting, and processing those meals).
When You Assume...
Determining the 4,000 data points, obtaining the relevant data, and processing the data to produce a final dollar per mile cost for the vehicles, required—obviously—some assumptions. Perhaps the most critical one was the anticipated number of miles to be driven by each car. For example, CNW set the number of expected lifetime miles for a Prius at 100,000 miles, which, according to CNW President Art Spinella, was based on public statements from Toyota. In an interview with the podcast "The Watt," Spinella admitted that, "If you can drive the Prius 200,000 miles, and do the same levels of costs and repairs, the cost per mile obviously comes down dramatically."
As you might expect, the media and blogosphere had a field day with the study. CNW's press releases were picked up from New York to Hong Kong. The impression left by the media coverage was to cast doubts on the real benefits of hybrids. In all fairness, it was not Spinella's fault that journalists were not nearly as thorough in representing the report as CNW was in their research.
If reporters had dug a little deeper, they would have clearly seen what the podcast interview exposed: the Hummer H3 looks a whole lot better than the hybrids because it uses "crude old technology that has long ago been paid for," according to Spinella. On the other hand, the hybrids are new and complex, and the cost of the R&D energy required to make the necessary transformation of our cars from oversized, high-emissions gas guzzlers to something new and better has not yet been amortized over any significant period of time.
Priustoric
Podcaster Ben Kenney asked if the results from the study would be different if conducted again in 10 years. Spinella responded:
"It would be totally different in three years. The hybrids will look significantly better. The new hybrids they are developing now—the new ones that I've seen, Prius III and Prius IV—are so much more simplified. They'll do what the current versions do, but with far less complexity, lighter motors, more recyclable parts, and longer lasting components. The current Prius, for all intents and purposes, will be the Model T."
Email
Print
Digg
del.icio.usMost Popular Pages
Free Email Newsletter Sign-up
All the latest news in a free and engaging bundle. Totally free!
The big point here is that the R&D cost for a Hummer is hidden in vehicles that have been built over the past 50 years, where the hybrids have only been developed in the last 5-8 years.
Also, $ cost does not equal energy used to produce it. Think about the materials costs... material costs are not only energy to make and transport, but also the raw material "value" such as exotic metals (like nickel or lithium for batteries), carbon fiber, etc. If you build a car with carbon fiber frame and body, it'll cost a million dollars, but use similar or less energy to make than steel. Batteries are expensive because material costs are high, not because they take as much energy to make as the car uses during its life (not even close).
I should have stated that the original report based lifecycle energy on the $ cost which was what I was talking about above.
What it does point out is that a Hummer is cheaper to build than a Prius, but the retail cost is 2x as much, so those Hummer buyers are really getting ripped off! :)
The lack of critical thinking skills among the masses will be the end of us all.
Anybody with intelligence knows that statistics can be and are frequently manipulated.
Statistics can say anything you want.
Wow! My energy, enviromental saving Prius is of less global benefit than a Hummer!
This took you two years to put together? This is your contribution to earth and human health? You all probably have closets full of firearms because it's your right! A new low has been created and it's creater is CNW Marketing Research. What a JOKE!
Never underestimate the power of Morons in large numbers.
But wait!!! lets factor in the earnings of the company that made the Pruis vs the company that made the hummer- oh that company doesn make mooney--
Hmmm where is my depreciating asset column. We will have to factor lost pensions, wages homes, goodwill
The report is absurd
ASIAN MAKE BETTER CARS THAN WE DO. JUST FACE IT
Everything i read talks about the 'energy cost' per mile driven. cost doesn't mean anything with how green it is. green is (or should by) an overall measure of impact to the environment. being green is more indeed more expensive. i'd like to find some research on the total 'environmental' impact per lifetime mile, not 'energy cost' per lifetime mile. haven't done all research yet, but i do know one thing. energy cost DOES NOT equal environmental cost/impact. we're all being brainwashed and misled.
and this whole fuel cell thing. fuel cells use hydrogen. manufacturing hydrogen takes a massive amount of energy. they're just offsetting the tail-piple emissions with energy plant emissions which lots of them use coal and turbine engines which uses.........oil products. go figure.
also, don't go slamming gun rights folks. this is not the forum for that subject. but i cherish my right to protect myself in a society in which the criminals will always have a means to harm innocent people.
Thank you for the most balanced analysis of hybrid lifecycle energy cost I have seen. Your well-thought-out conclusions can be useful in guiding our future car-buying decisions.
Vehicle lifespan. For some reason, the article points to a projected 100K lifespan for a Prius, while the H3 is lifespan is projected at 3x that. To date, battery performance in the Prius has been extremely sound. Specifically, two Vancouver taxi companies have been running the 2001 Prius and have gotten total mileages of over 332,000 km (206,000 miles) and 410,000 (254,762) with minimal required repairs. http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Toyota_Prius.htm.
Mining Link: The environmental damage related to the Sudbury mine in Canada existed prior to the Prius. Directly linking the vehicle (and batteries) to the pollution is a shaky argument at best. From what I can gather, Toyota purchases ~ 1,000 tons of nickel from the mine annually, which is 1% of the mines annual output of 100,000.
Consider the Source: The original article was written by a student reporter for his college newspaper (Central Connecticut State University). Also worth noting is the fact that CNW does a considerable amount of work for the US auto industry.
Improvements in battery technologies are essential to the growing efficiencies of hybrids and future Plug In Hybrids. AAA expects that work being done with Lithium Ion batteries will further reduce the impact of NiMH battery types.
Sean Comey
Spokesman
AAA of Northern California, Nevada & Utah
I like the ignorant comment on diets, the Japanese wipe out oceanic species daily. People are so easily persuaded By Enviro marketing, it disgusts me. Also if Asians Make better cars, how come most toyotas that are sold in North america, are now being built here. Also sean who is a spokesperson for AAA, That is the most stupid thing I have ever seen. your Trying to justify pollution, Your post is an insult to to every true environmentalist that is trying to help the environment. Alex is right, there is more to how it is built, what it takes to build it then most people see. How many of have every done research on emmissions that are produced by the paint that most cars use. when it comes to environmental damage, The productions of cars is far greater than actually driving them. But of course you knew that , thats why you bought a hyryd. Lol.
Hi. My two cents is that Japanese cars are assembled here to get around the trade limitations. I memory serves me right this occured during the 80s under Reagan, when Japanese bashing was all the rage. Direct imports were capped, while leaving open the loophole to provide American workers with jobs by importing the parts and putting the additional cars together here.
In the end what really matters is what you wish to drive. You can drive a vehilce that has no helpful use to the eviroment,(i.e. hummer) or you can choose to drive something that in the long run will benefit us all. The choice is up to you.
Bloody people whinning about gas prices are the ones driving the least fuel effeicent vehicles out there...sheesh
Statistics can be manipulated and that's a fact.
I own a Prius because I like being able to drive 500+ miles between fill ups. I like saving gas and I like the car's versatility and reliability.
I also own firearms and believe the Second Amendment to be an individual right, just like the rest of the Bill Of Rights. On that note I am appalled at envorinmental extremist's vandalism and violent activity. If someone wants to own a hummer or any other gas guzzler, let 'em. It's their money and they'll eventually get tired of spending it in buckets.
The analysis that CNW is absolutely correct......for today. But as they said, things change as the investment gets amortized. But the total carbon foorprint difference between the cars is not as large as the owners would like to believe.
Hydrogen cars today will actually have larget total carbon foorprints than gasoline powered cars. Studies have shown even solar energy has a major carbon foorprint when looked at as the total prduct life cycle.
Everybody is trying to reduce carbon foorprints or total energy consumed or whatever is your favorite metric, but the sad fact is thermodynamics has a limit and unless we want to go back naked in the woods, there is no magic bullet in any car technology.
But, pray for a "magic" catalyst that can crack water with little energy put into it. The hydrogen could be a solution. Lots of people are searching for it.
This was a study designed to make any new technology look bad.
New tech gets assigned 100% of their R&D costs.
Old tech gets assigned a fraction of their R&D costs.
Therefore all old tech is more efficient than all new tech!!!
Time to tear down the research labs, I guess. It's those nerds in lab coats that cause global warming.
(This would explain Detroit's current strategy.)
What we seem to be overlooking is that material cost can be equated to energy cost. Rare elements are more expensive mostly because it takes a lot more energy to extract them from rock. For example, iron is a very abundant element. Let's say every ton of rock produces 100 pounds of iron. So 20 tons of rock is needed to obtain a ton of iron. It costs serious energy to crush rock into dust and separate out the iron, but when you process huge tonnages it brings the price per unit down. When you have to mine 2000 tons of rock to get 1 pound of some exotic element most of the associated cost is the cost of energy used to extract it. We cannot say that using rarer more expensive materials is better for the environment than using cheaper materials for this reason. Until we use an industrial energy source that is trully clean, every hybrid we buy still costs us more in energy than the alternatives. For now the bulk of our energy still comes from fossil fuels. When it comes from nuclear plants hybrids will become cheaper (impact wise) but ultimately until we have a source of 'free' energy, energy costs will always be around 90% of material costs.
Has anyone done the research to know the real difference in terms of overall impact on the environment. Seems like the real equation should look at the emission level per mile drive, anticipated miles to be driven, and environmental consequence of fabrication and assembly along with trashing/recycling the components. And forget the stupid Hummer, but is a high mileage super low emission regular engine better long term than a hybrid. I wonder but do not know. And what is the long term impact of obtaining the materials and making the batteries which have to be trasked or recycled? Does anybody know of any realtistic studies on the real environmental consequences of hybrids versus the more sensible alternatives?
CNW's report is made for the same douchebags who think:
1. American is about freedom and democracy.
2. The Iraq war was about 9/11 and Saddam Hussein
3. The WTC buildings, 1100 ft buildings both fell neatly and naturally into their own footprint and crumbled into small steel pieces.
4. WMD's actually existed.
5. Bush got elected by democratic vote...
Did I miss anything???
Ah yes...
6. God told Bush to invade Iraq.
The reason why the Japanese automakers make their cars here is because it is CHEAPER than making it in Japan and importing them. But since you asked, you can thank the Japanese engineering teams that design their cars in such a way so that the dumbshit American workers putting them together don't screw things up too much. But sadly since they have been built here, it seems their quality is slipping...go figure.
Lord knows the Japanese have ALOT of vices themselves...their post war culture is a copy of American Quaker and right wing lunacy...read Japan's Zombie Politics to get an idea. But that's not a topic of the thread is it?
Just face it DES...Americans make POS cars...so much so that MOST of the new American cars coming out by Ford, GM, etc....have to be REMAKES of older cars...retro garbage. How sad is that?
Get a life.
for people it takes time to learn.we boost in tachnology then suddenly slow down.
Great to find a site that indicates some people in the USA have heard of countries beyond your border!
What would be more interesting than a Hummer v Prius comparison would be a Prius v similar size car - say a European diesel with a highly efficient engine. Then the 'dust to dust' calculations might be more relevant. I suspect on a dust to dust basis a Prius might not be better than say a VW Golf diesel.
The dust to dust comparison is an important one as we often export the manufacturing pollution to somewhere else in the world. I guess the good thing about the Hummer is that the pollution caused by building and scrapping it is kept at home.
when in fact, YOU are the joke!
I think global warming is a myth.
And there is no such thing.
I aslo do belive in solar powered cars.
I think they are good to help our enviroment.
But i think that you guys over exadorate about littel things.
And you guys make them into big huge deals.
WHEN THERE NOT So SHUT UP AND GET A LIFE
IM,only even looking at this gay page is becuase i have to do a report. otheer than that it pretty much sucks A**
First of all tiffany,
They have proved that global warming is really happening and affecting us. Second, I wouldn't believe someone who spells also aslo and thirdly you may not tell people that they dont have a life reading this when obviously you were reading the exact same site.
Global warming is a large issue in today's society and it is people like you tiffany that pollute our world and dont make it a better place. Please take there words into consideration next time you blabber about something you have no idea what it means
First of all tiffany,
They have proved that global warming is really happening and affecting us. Second, I wouldn't believe someone who spells also aslo and thirdly you may not tell people that they dont have a life reading this when obviously you were reading the exact same site.
Global warming is a large issue in today's society and it is people like you tiffany that pollute our world and dont make it a better place. Please take there words into consideration next time you blabber about something you have no idea what it means
Post a new comment