Is a Hummer greener than a Prius?

Is a Hummer greener than a Prius?
Spinella's finding that a Hummer on the whole consumes less energy than a hybrid than even some smaller hybrids and non-hybrids has infuriated environmentalists. And on its face it does seem implausible that a gas-guzzling monster like a Hummer that employs several times more raw material than a little Prius' could be so much less energy-intensive. But by and large the dust-to-dust energy costs in Spinella's study correlate with the fanciness of the car – not its size or fuel economy -- with the Rolls Royces and Bentleys consuming gobs of energy and Mazda 3s, Saturns and Taurus consuming relatively minuscule amounts.


Read Article

PlanoA4PlanoA4 - 7/21/2006 10:19:49 AM
+1 Boost
This 450 page report, signifies how short sighted Hybrids can be. The American consumer is so easily duped by marketing effort. Only when you look below the hype do you see the truth.

Some Key Points in the report:

1. For instance, the dust-to-dust energy cost of the bunny-sized Honda Civic hybrid is $3.238 per mile. This is quite a bit more than the $1.949 per mile that the elephantine Hummer costs. The energy cots of SUVs such as the Tahoe, Escalade, and Navigator are similarly far less than the Civic hybrid.
2. The energy costs of disposing a Hummer are 60 percent less than an average hybrid's and its design and development costs are 80 percent less.
3. One of the most perverse things about U.S. consumers buying hybrids is that while this might reduce air pollution in their own cities, they increase pollution – and energy consumption -- in Japan and other Asian countries where these cars are predominantly manufactured. "In effect, they are exporting pollution and energy consumption,"



1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 7/21/2006 4:08:55 PM
+1 Boost
This is the most disgusting piece of propaganda trash I have ever seen linked to Autospies. You should be ashamed. Let me tear apart Shikha Dahlmia’s argument, bit by bit.

“Never mind that at the time Ford was losing $2,000 to $3,000 for every hybrid it sold because consumers won't pay the entire $6,000 extra that it costs to produce a hybrid over its gas-powered counterpart.”

Linking your own original article of lies and half-truths doesnt lend credibility to your present article. The original article said “The best estimates suggest that the company loses $2,000 to $3,000 on every hybrid it sells.” ESTIMATES SUGGEST, great journalism there. Also it stated “The big difference is that for Toyota hybrid production is about PR” Toyota fully intends to make a profit on hybrids. Any new technology has to have R&D costs factored in. Go back to Econ 101.

“hybrids don't deliver anywhere close to the gas mileage that the agency attributes to them”

Bold-faced lie and propaganda. Many drivers in the real world have reported getting mileage which approaches EPA estimates (and sometimes get higher). And almost all cars, as any car owner will tell you, do not get the actual EPA estimates. (Gee, there’s that word “estimates” again. It’s hard to make an argument about estimates, but you’re sure trying.)

“hybrids have received such a thrashing in the market lately”

Another lie. Some sales are up, others are down, as with all cars. Net hybrid sales show a consistent upward trend almost every month.

“Even sales of the Toyota Prius – the darling of the greens – have dropped significantly”

The facts- Prius was up last month, but has had a few down months recently due to not enough supply, because Toyota is selling so many other hybrids using the same components. Prius days on lot are still near the tops in the industry, 3-5 days.

“consumers are defying all expectations and turning their backs on hybrids at a time when gas prices are soaring”

Just because you keep repeating the lie doesn’t make it true. Just ask Bill O’Reilly.


So the foundations and suppositions upon which this article is based are completely flawed. How then should I even begin to believe that the arbitrary values assigned to each car’s dust to dust cost.

One assumption, “As for Hummers, Spinella explains, the life of these cars averaged across various models is over 300,000 miles. By contrast, Prius' life – according to Toyota's own numbers – is 100,000 miles.”

WHAT???? The batteries are warranted for 100,000 miles, but NONE have yet expired. And this certainly does not mean the car will only live 100,000 miles. STOP THE INSANITY (AND LIES)

Second, “But the biggest reason why a Hummer's energy use is so low is that it shares many components with other vehicles and therefore its design and development energy costs are spread across many cars.”

I’ve just explained that many Toyotas are using the same hybrid technology, 5 at last c


1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 7/21/2006 4:11:32 PM
+1 Boost
looks like my comment may have been too long, and the end was cut off. To finsh.....

I’ve just explained that many Toyotas are using the same hybrid technology, 5 at last count. And it’s being used in Camrys, Highlanders and RX’s. which are existing vehicles, and all on the same platform to boot. You can’t get much closer to sharing components than that.

“All in all, Spinella insists, the energy costs of disposing a Hummer are 60 percent less than an average hybrid's and its design and development costs are 80 percent less.”

Insist all you want, that doesn’t make it true.

“Toyota has shown no planetary concerns”

Wow, no bias or agenda here.

Sorry for the length of my post. Hate hybrids all you want, but the lies, half-truths, false statements and cooked figures are unacceptable. The “Reason Foundation” needs to come up with better reasons than these.





LexusLexus - 7/22/2006 1:37:45 AM
+1 Boost

Yup....! it hard being a Good Role Model this day, jealousy, Envy of your success. Please don't Toyota/Lexus because they are trying to make the best, most realiable vechicle out there. At least they are providing what their customers want. What cheap bunch bias propaganda article I have ever read.

Yup! it hard being a good role model this day..Little punk looking to you and stuff..Ah..ha..ha..ha.. Toyota/Lexus Rule

Lexus for Life




knobsturnerknobsturner - 7/31/2006 9:46:30 AM
+1 Boost
The basic math in this story is so awful it almost deserves framing.

Each year residential cars and light trucks travel over 2.5 trillion Miles in the US alone. Using the CNW 'industry average' number of $2.25 energy cost per mile, that works out to 5.6 trillion dollars. The US GDP is 12 trillion. Over 1/3 of the economy goes into the energy costs of owning our cars? What about housing, schools, air travel, electricity, all other industries?

In fact, the total amount of energy expenditure in the us for 2002 was a 0.6 trillion dollars. (source: Energy Information Administration ) This covered gasoline, natural gas, coal,hydro, etc, etc. Only some fraction of this expenditure was for building, maintaining and disposing of cars (cars are the most successful recycling story in the world).

In fact the energy used to build operate and dispose of US cars is, according to this silly report, GREATER THAN ALL ENERGY USED ON PLANET EARTH!. This includes energy to run all cars, heat and cool everything, industry, etc, etc...

I think that the persons who wrote this report may think that they did an honest job, but the simple fact is that the report is total complete garbage.

If you download the report, they even have a few people in the report who point out these absurdities, and their answers to them are laughable.

Anything to get on CNN.

Tom Andersen


Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC