The Prius Bad for the Environment?
87
This may or may not come as some shock to you, but many scientists are saying that Toyota's best-selling hybrid, the Prius, is actually bad for the environment. Some are even asserting that it has a worse impact on our world than the widely-hated Hummer.
With such universal concern (whether genuine or a desire to be "hip") to live a "greener" lifestyle, it's no surprise that this argument has become quite heated, though surprisingly quiet.
After all, if Toyota says that it's created a car that gets excellent gas mileage and is therefore better for the environment than other cars are, the consumer wants to believe this. So what are these new, conflicting reports?
Is the Prius or is it not good for the environment?
|
Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that will Recharge America
Price: $9.00
List Price: $16.95 |
|
Electric and Hybrid Cars: A History
Price: $40.00
List Price: $55.00 |
|
Hybrid Cars (Our Environment)
Price: $20.61
List Price: $26.20 |
|
COMMON SENSE NOT REQUIRED: Idiots Designing Cars + Hybrid Vehicles: My Career with Chrysler
Price: $8.93
List Price: $14.50 |
The Beginning
The first I heard of any of this was in March 2007. My conservative Republican father snidely directed me to an article in Central Connecticut State University's school newspaper, The Recorder, that claimed that the Prius "outdoes" the Hummer in damage to the environment (link at the bottom of the page).
What??
This is based on a CNW Marketing Research report called "Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles From Concept to Disposal." But I thought the Prius was supposed to be great for the environment. It can get up to 60 miles per gallon of gas (though Toyota officials admit that most users will get more like 45 mpg on the highway).
As it turns out, burning gas is not the only (or even the major) factor in a car's impact on the environment. News to me!
The Other Factors
Apparently, when considering how "good" (or bad) a car is for the environment, gas mileage is one of the last factors to weigh. It's actually the production of the car that matters. The raw materials' sources, the manufacturing effort, and the shipping costs all have an impact on the environment. And apparently, those of the Toyota Prius are not having a positive impact.
|
H4 6000K Xenon HID Replacement Bulbs Fit Yaris Prius xA
Current Bid: $19.99
|
|
Screen Protector Toyota Prius Highlander Land Cruiser
Current Bid: $11.49
|
|
H13 6000K Xenon HID Replacement Bulbs Fit Yaris Prius
Current Bid: $19.99
|
|
H13 8000K Xenon HID Replacement Bulbs Fit Yaris Prius
Current Bid: $19.99
|
The Numbers
The Prius' battery contains nickel, which is mined in Ontario Canada. The plant that smelts this nickel is apparently nicknamed "the Superstack" because of the amount of pollution it puts out; the area for miles around it is a wasteland because of acid rain and air pollution.
But the main problem that the "Dust to Dust" study has with the Prius' impact on the environment comes next.
That smelted nickel then has to travel (via container ship) to Europe to be refined, then to China to be made into "nickel foam," then to Japan for assembly, and finally to the United States. All this shipment for each tiny step in the production process costs a great deal, both in dollars and in pollution.
The study then concludes that -- all the production costs in mind -- the Prius costs about $3.25 per mile and is expected to last about 100,000 miles. The Hummer, on the other hand, with all the same factors counted, costs about $1.95 per mile and is expected to last about 300,000 miles.
Join HubPages!
You can write a "hub" like this and make money from the advertisements! Just join the HubPages community (it only takes a few seconds), and start writing about whatever moves you. It's that simple!
The Other Side
The Pacific Institute points out the holes in the argument of "Dust to Dust" quite eloquently, and to be quite honest, I'm not sure who to believe. They've written an entire article debunking the study.
They argue that the study bases its conclusions on "faulty methods of analysis, untenable assumptions, selective use and presentation of data, and a complete lack of peer review." As I'm not a scientist, I can't particularly argue against any of these things; I can only report both sides.
Let the Market Decide
Ultimately, new technologies will always come under all types of scrutinies. Hybrid automobile technology is no different, and surely scientists and marketing executives will continue to argue about this for years.
The moral of the story, to me, seems to be to do your research instead of listening to media hype. Don't believe at face-value the hype a company gives you when selling its product. Don't read just one article and let it change your decision to buy a car.
The market will decide whether or not the Prius and other hybrid vehicles help us feel better about our impact on the environment until we can unlock Hydrogen-powered vehicles (or a similarly efficient fuel).
- Forbes: Feel Green, Feel Good
Not sure how credible this sarcastic article is (it says Ben & Jerry's is bad for the environment because they don't use bovine growth hormones), but it's worth a link. - Pacific Institue: Hummer versus Prius
This nonpartisan think-tank argues that the reports against the Prius are intentionally omitting important information.
Share it! — Rate it: up down [flag this hub]
Comments
Great hub. Most people will never look into the total cost to the environment of producing a car. Electric hybrids have a great cost to the environment in both production and disposal of batteries. Get a corolla instead of a hummer or a hybrid.
Eye opening! I suppose most that can purchase a prius will do so because of their immediate need of saving money. But for those who really care about the environmental impacts, this information is cause for pause.
I don't know how forthcoming auto makers would be when it comes to divulging all the costs involved in producing cars and getting them to market. But, it's something I'll consider the next time I need to purchase a vehicle.
Thanks for posting this!
Unfortunately, the people who purchase a Prius do so knowing that they will save money by buying less gas in the long-run. Priuses are extremely expensive, but people who buy them think that they are doing so to be environmentally conscious and to save some cash down the road. The latter might be true, but the former is not!
Again, it's a case of advertising versus education. Hopefully education will eventually win out!
The latter might be false, too :)
There are numerous reports and calculations on the net, showing that savings on gas cost (on the current price level) do not offset the difference in car prices completely...
That's true, too, Misha. Especially considering that the engines don't last nearly as long as they do in many other cars.
I don't believe that hybrids are all they're cracked up to be because of the complexity (maintenance) and cost of the hybrid drive train, but I also wouldn't be willing to place a dime on the quality of the CNW report -- they look like an extremely secretive company (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNW_Marketing_Researc and http://www.cnwmr.com/frequentquestions/) -- industry analysts who are bought and sold for the price of a "research report" are a dime a dozen. The funding for their study (like everything else about their company and the report) was not disclosed -- the Pacific Institute's analysis pretty legitimately rips them to shreds.
I also believe that most people who buy Priuses do so for status and image of being eco-conscious, rather than reality (if they really cared that much, they would ride a motorcycle or the bus). I drive a Corolla right now, but my next car will probably be a VW CleanTDI that can run on biodiesel (which is convenient enough here in Seattle, but not many other places right now).
You're not wrong, MC7. CNW is suspect, though I find Pacific Institute suspect, as well. The point of all of this is just to call the Prius and its lofty claims into question.
And you're totally right about the status thing; if they cared that much, they'd ride their bike! ;)
I think you bring up a very good perspective - question the validity of what we are being sold.
That said, I think most people, me included, tend to make the best decision we can with way too little information and way too much emotion. Really, what do you think the average voter knows about any bill or politician they vote for?
The good of this is that at least people are getting emotionally behind the green movement and beginning to care about the world we live in. Who knows we may even be in time to keep from destroying the planet - or maybe not...
You're so right, Jason, that people make decisions with a small amount of information and a large amount of emotion, when in reality it should probably be the other way around.
I love that companies are promoting the "green" thing now; I just hope that they'll do it responsibly.
Helen,
This is a great article that covers both sides of this issue. Moreover, you point out that we can't trust others and need to research on our own to make a good decision. I will be quite disappointed if the hybrid isn't all they say it is.
Your writing is great!
Jonathan
Thanks, Jonathan! The whole do-your-own-research is something I've gotten used to having a dog; the canine food, toy, and medicine industries are all completely skewed and backwards. It's been a great life lesson; don't believe what big companies tell you!
I KNOW!!!! I'm getting more skeptical with age. I used to trust doctors and know I don't.
Unfortunately, we defer to "professionals" far too easily. And, depending on the situation, we willingly put our mental health, our child's well-being, or our LIFE in their hands after asking very few questions. There are plenty of trustworthy doctors out there, for example... but there are also plenty that aren't (as I'm sure you've noticed).
Excellent Hub....Nice thoughts..Keep it up.
Thanks, Stephen! The educated consumer is the most powerful weapon against most of the capitalist world's evils. :)
I've always wondered about anything that has a large battery content, because batteries in general have some pretty noxious chemical floating around in them, and are the devil to manufacture and dispose of properly.
Of course, no matter what you do, someone can find fault in it. It's like the envirnmentalists opposing wind generators because of the potential impact on birds. It seems like no one is happy unless we regress to the lifestyle of the colonists, but even that has a major carbon footprint (wood burning stoves, large acreage clear cut due to low yields from 200 year old farming techniques, etc.)
Just do the best you can and move on.
"Do the best you can," that's great advice, john. There will always be someone opposed to everything so we just have to do our own research and decide for ourselves.
Thank you very much for posting this article.
Just a couple of month's ago, my parents were planning on purchasing a car, and they were leaning towards the Prius because of the fuel savings. I disuaded them by telling them the extra cost of the vehicle is probably more than what they'll save in gas (they're both retired, and won't be driving much because of my father's health). Furthermore, no one has told us yet how long the batteries will really last, and how much it will cost to replace them. Being in a southern state, where regular car batteries don't hold up very long, this gave me pause. And to think about replacing said batteries, and the impact on the environment (and their wallet) it may create, made me shudder.
Now that gas is almost $4/gallon, I was rethinking my decision in disuading them. However, your article helped comfort me in my original argument. (Mother didn't like the way the Prius looked anyways.) <grin>
I'm impressed you had the foresight to think as you did, Jim! Most people can't see past the But Think Of All The Money You'll Save On Gas argument. The truth is, you'll probably save a lot more by just buying a fuel-efficient (non-hybrid) car. Thanks for your story, and I'm glad my article was able to support your original argument. (My father is always complaining about how ugly Priuses are, too!)
The writer of this article should have followed his own advice, and after doing the necessary research, wrote an accurate and balanced account of the CNW report and its critics. I won't waste space detailing all the problems with the CNW Report. It has been thoroughly "debunked" not just by the Pacific Institute and Argonne National Laboratory but also by numerous ordinary individuals using common sense. If you want to see what I mean just do an internet search on "CNW Report".
To make a long story short, the headline and most of the article gives an air of credibility to CNW that it lost well over a year ago. There undoubtedly is a need to weigh the costs and benefits of owning a Prius or any other car. Unfortunately, the CNW Report and this article serves at best to confuse, or at worst to mislead rather than provide useful information to such consumers.
So what do you use that has to go to China and shipped here??? Get real. Using less gas and creating less polution is a real start. Unless you have something better just stop your protestations.
Plenty of stuff, chicken, but I try to buy most of my food locally, and I use public transportation. I have great alternatives to the Prius: fuel-efficient vehicles, bicycles, carpooling, mass transportation, organic food, plenty.
You think it's okay for the fat to get fatter because they've lied to the rest of us about the positive effects of their products? I guess that's why I'm the writer with my name on my work, and you're the chicken.
The Hummer lasts 300,000 miles! Now that's a laugh. I am no environmentalist and enjoy a car with a decent engine.. but I am not sure American cars outlast their Japanese counterparts. How did they arrive at that conclusion?
I think that's part of the problem people have with that report; some what it says is just obviously nonsense. I don't know much about cars in general, though, so I have no idea how long a Hummer can last. But just because the report stretches some facts doesn't mean there's no grain of truth to it... That's why I wanted to bring further attention to it. Thanks for reading, Dubai Entrepeneur!
I can't comment about anything regarding the vehicles but would like to say that I live in the nickel city "Sudbury Ontario" you called a wasted land. That may have been the case 40 years ago but today Sudbury is a beautiful forested city. It has gone through a greening upgrade and I am proud to have lived here for the past 53 years. I think before you a call a place a waste land you better check your facts. To me it leaves me questioning your facts about the prius over the hummer.
Allan
I'm very happy you stopped by, Allan.. Obviously I'm thrilled to hear that Sudbury is no longer a wasteland; the thought of that was terribly depressing. It must have been amazing to see the place you love so much go through such a remarkable change for the better.
I want to remind you, though, that I am not a scientist and haven't done ANY research into the Prius other than to read the original "Dust to Dust" article and then the Pacific Institute's article debunking it. This hub is not meant to be a presentation of findings, merely a presentation of the argument that's going on in the scientific world. I'm sorry to leave you questioning the facts, but the very problem is that they're questionable in the first place!
I hope you don't question my credibility as an author overall, though... That's the one thing I can control and try to remain as credible as possible. Thanks again for your valuable personal experience.
I think the CNW's original report did some harm by saying "hummer is better for the environment than a prius". Perhaps the subject should have been little different as "Prius .. environmentally friendly? .. NOT". Instead the comparison could be in between a prius and a diesel jetta. Jetta or any other diesel cars have much better driving experience and even the gas milage is better than a hybrid, in very recent news, toyota avgo hit 90 mpg on a testing track in UK and car is expected to hit upper 40s in average. And guess what ... no nickel is needed .. there is cost of transportation, running two engines, battery replacement etc. etc. etc. and it can drive as long, if not more than a prius. So .. I ask you why do we compare Prius with a "hummer".
I'm frankly very disturbed by Toyota's hybrid push in the US market where an easy solution such as diesel is looking right into our eyes for over 20 years. Step by step we can move to electricity, hydrogen or others but now the diesel solution is there and it works perfectly fine.
Someone, I agree COMPLETELY that the report shouldn't've gone "so far" because the facts that they DID use spoke for themselves. By comparing the Prius to the Hummer and "stretching" the facts, they just lost all credibility. Not intelligent.
But there are downsides to diesel, too. Gas milage is certainly better, but it's not a cure-all... it's still fossil fuel! I agree that it might be a good solution for the interim while we're working on better technology. Thanks for your opinions and explanation!
Helen, my point is that as consumers, our market is being played that somehow we need some new technology and "as of now" no solution is available that we need to wait for hydrogen, electrcity or some other source. This is the very matter along with companies like Toyota putting fuel in to fire by pushing hybrid in to market instead of selling diesel cars.
Checkout VW Polo Diesel with 70+ MPG. BMW on the other hand pushes their environmetally friendly 335 bluetech diesel's in to market next year with lower 30s milage. To me, anything below 40 mpg is technology belongs to bible and jesus. Coming to diesel pollution, it is very important for readers as well you to read up on
Sorry my replied got submitted accidentally/prematurely J To continue: it is very important for everyone of us to read and understand ULSD, ultra low sulfur diesel. There are many newer technologies, mostly from Europe, to reduce emissions, particles etc. to a much lower degree “dramatically” beating gasoline engine not only by mpg but also by pollution per mile. With such regulations, engines supporting it, cheap production, available technology, energy providers available (gas stations) and many more ... we can use this stuff NOW .. there is no need to wait for big bang and Einsteinian idea to save the planet by creating energy from clipped toe nails. Another question for everyone ... why, all of a sudden, we have the Diesel prices increasing at a higher rate than normal fuel? I hear that it is higher demand .. well Diesel fuel is No. 2 distillate meaning that making Diesel is easier and cheaper than Gasoline so ... why ? This is no different than paying more money for light beer (beer with more water). Again, I fully support all investment, hard work etc. to invent newer and better energy sources such as electric, wind, volcanic on and on .. However, I sincerely refuse the thought that we have to wait for these technologies to appear so we can take an action.. we have a solution NOW and it can be used that will drop our pollution by half given that we all compromise from travelling in a gigantic SUV to pick up two bags of groceries.
Someone, all of the points you make are excellent. I'm proud to have them displayed under my hub. :) Chime in any time!
Great Hub you have here :) please read my new hub about getting free online car quotes...
working
Misha says:
9 months ago
Great hub, Helena!
While results of the study are probably skued, any car's damage to environment is definitely not limited to direct pollution from gas burning. It's all not that easy as it seems at the first glance, and people do need to think for themselves - this is a geat conclusion :)