Hummer beats a Prius in environmentally friendly tests

[Rob Williams]

I'll just quote my news posting:

"The Toyota Prius has become the flagship car for those in our society so environmentally conscious that they are willing to spend a premium to show the world how much they care. Unfortunately for them, their ultimate ‘green car’ is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America; it takes more combined energy per Prius to produce than a Hummer."
​

I think the results found here will shock most people. It's mentioned that it was once claimed that the Prius could go 60MPG, but recent tests have shaved that down to 45MPG. That puts the Prius just within spitting distance of the Chevrolet Aveo, as the article states.

It doesn't end there. The Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer. This is a big hit to those who "thought" that they were doing favors to the environment by driving a hybrid car (this is not exclusive to Prius).

I can't say it's very surprising, but at the same time... it is.

http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/print_item.asp?NewsID=188

 

[madmat]

The Prius doesn't cause more environmental damage than a Hummer. That's a misnomer, the manufacture of a Prius causes more environmental damage than the Hummer does during the lifetime of the Hummer's operation but notice that no mention is made of any of the damage to the environment caused by the manufacture of the Hummer.

At best it's a very slanted article that really has a minimal amount of merit based on the overlooking of the manufacture of the Hummer....hell it looks like some kind of propaganda concocted by a GM employee rather than a true look into any sort of impact that the two cars make on the environment.

 

[madstork91]

I still wouldnt buy either.

 

[Greg King]

I still wouldnt buy either.

I am with you on that one.

 

[NicePants42]

The Prius doesn't cause more environmental damage than a Hummer. That's a misnomer, the manufacture of a Prius causes more environmental damage than the Hummer does during the lifetime of the Hummer's operation but notice that no mention is made of any of the damage to the environment caused by the manufacture of the Hummer.

Sure, the author didn't mention that the Hummer's battery probably comes from the same 'disastrous' nickel plant, but the total combined energy per mile comparison looks legitimate.

At best it's a very slanted article that really has a minimal amount of merit based on the overlooking of the manufacture of the Hummer....hell it looks like some kind of propaganda concocted by a GM employee rather than a true look into any sort of impact that the two cars make on the environment.

If the article were suggesting that people go out and buy a HUMMER, I'd agree that it's propaganda. However, you can't really argue with the dramatic decrease in the Prius' EPA estimated mpg, and if you're under the impression that this article is only meant to be a direct comparison in environmental damage caused by the Prius and the HUMMER, let me correct you. He is simply encouraging environmentalists to look at what is actually important when considering the environmental impact of a car - not just the 'Hybrid' label.

It looks to me like the guy did his homework and is making a perfectly reasoned (if a little overstated) argument that just having a battery in your car doesn't mean you're helping the environment. He's not trying to say that environmentalists should buy HUMMERS - he's just using the HUMMER in this article because it will be the most shocking (and attention-getting) among environmentalists - his target audience. Dismissing his core argument (which is backed up with facts) just because a small piece of trivial information is overlooked would be a mistake. If the xB is the least costly vehicle to put on the road, it stands to reason that it takes much less energy to produce and operate - and so should be the first choice for those truly looking to minimize their negative environmental impact.

 

[madmat]

The Chevrolet Aveo that the author recommends as the most fuel efficient alternative to the Prius (based on dollars per mile) is made by who? GM.

As to the damage caused by the manufacture of the Hummer...you're overlooking the steel going into it (enough to build 3 or 4 Prius') along with the plastics, leather, rubber, aluminum, etc. Those items all come from the earth and require refining, mining, drilling, death to animals...same thing that goes into any car only way more of it. Also stop to think about the fuel burnt by the Hummer...it's being drilled, refined and consumed at a rate of 13 MPG or so by the hummer...that's an awful lot of soot being dumped into our atmosphere along with all the toxins of the refining process and that goes on for the "advertised life" of the vehicle of 300,000 miles? OK, divide 300,000 by 13, that's 23077 gallons of diesel used in it's lifetime. I'm being generous here, I've read reports of 8 MPG in Hummers so I'm giving it nearly an 80% advantage over worst case scenario.

The Prius at 45 MPG uses 2222 gallons of fuel in the 100K miles allotted to it. After it dies those batteries can (and will) be recycled so that's giving back to the environment (wow, the author missed that too didn't he?) but that Hummer can't give back any of the diesel it burned can it? Nope, that's just gone.

 

[NicePants42]

The Chevrolet Aveo that the author recommends as the most fuel efficient alternative to the Prius (based on dollars per mile) is made by who? GM.

This means nothing. Even if this guy is a GM employee, the core message of this article still has validity.

As to the damage caused by the manufacture of the Hummer...you're overlooking the steel going into it (enough to build 3 or 4 Prius') along with the plastics, leather, rubber, aluminum, etc. Those items all come from the earth and require refining, mining, drilling, death to animals...same thing that goes into any car only way more of it. Also stop to think about the fuel burnt by the Hummer...it's being drilled, refined and consumed at a rate of 13 MPG or so by the hummer...that's an awful lot of soot being dumped into our atmosphere along with all the toxins of the refining process and that goes on for the "advertised life" of the vehicle of 300,000 miles?

Actually, all of those things you mention are specifically included in the total combined cost per mile as determined in the study the author referenced. I'd suggest skimming over that study before accusing the author of overlooking things or spreading propaganda.

The Prius at 45 MPG uses 2222 gallons of fuel in the 100K miles allotted to it. After it dies those batteries can (and will) be recycled so that's giving back to the environment (wow, the author missed that too didn't he?) but that Hummer can't give back any of the diesel it burned can it? Nope, that's just gone.

The author didn't mention recycling because he doesn't need to - the total combined energy cost per mile INCLUDES not only the energy used to make the materials and the car, not only the cost of getting fuel from the ground to the gas tank, but also includes the reclamation and recycling of materials (among many other things). Here's a small tidbit from the report about recycling:

"Current hybrids have components that are capable of being recycled in a higher proportion of their total social energy costs than non-hybrid models. Light-weight metals (rather than the sound-deadening metals now common in conventional vehicles) and plastics currently have higher desirability so more of the hybrid’s non-electronic components can be bought and sold more readily in the scrappage and recycling industry.

With that comes a price, though. It is more energy intense to recycle high-tech electronics, battery(ies), related components, motors, controller(s) and small items such as special gauges and regenerative braking parts.

In all, while the industry as a whole the cost of recycling is about $119,000 per vehicle, hybrids cost more than $140,000 per vehicle to recycle. Again, the owners of the vehicles do not pay this amount. Recyclers pay and resell at a typical 11 percent profit margin over and above their total expenses."

The report goes on to include maintenance parts that are recycled over the lifespan of the vehicle as well.

So, as far as the core point of this article goes, the author wrapped up your arguments before you even made them; there's really no need to be so dismissive. The real point of the article isn't about the Prius and the HUMMER, it's about a study that tries to look at the total cost of everything that goes into (and comes out of) a vehicle, and what the results of the study actually mean in terms of energy consumption and environmental friendliness.

If you want to buy a car based on mpg alone, I'm fine with that. But it annoys me to see you attack this author when the data he's trying to show people is 1) Not his own; and 2) valid.

 

[madmat]

Dust to dust cost per mile showing trend and adjustment.

$3.027.........psuv....H1.......$4.012.........14.48%
$3.184.........psuv....H2.......$3.585.........18.46%
$3.249.........hy.......Prius....$2.865........-11.80%

Now tell me how the Hummer is beating anything when the Prius is clearly lower at a cost per mile dust to dust?

Those figures are from the study that you're throwing in my face and all it serves you is to show that the author is full of...well, you know.

As I said, it looks strongly like propaganda to me. If that irks you I'm sorry but the facts in the study support me rather than the author of that work of fiction.

 

[NicePants42]

Now tell me how the Hummer is beating anything when the Prius is clearly lower at a cost per mile dust to dust?

Those figures are from the study that you're throwing in my face and all it serves you is to show that the author is full of...well, you know.

As I said, it looks strongly like propaganda to me. If that irks you I'm sorry but the facts in the study support me rather than the author of that work of fiction.

You continue to argue over the HUMMER vs. Prius issue. I notice you didn't show the data for the H3, which adjusted from $1.95 to $2.07. If you look, you can see exactly what the author was quoting, the unadjusted D2D value for the H3 and the Prius: $1.95 vs. $3.25. H3 wins. Those are actual numbers from the actual study, and even looking at the adjusted numbers you're left with the H3 at $2.07 vs. the Prius at $2.87. H3 wins. I fail to see the fiction here.

That pretty much wraps up the issue of the author being full of whatever vs. you making uninformed comments. The article holds up. Care to continue?

 

[madmat]

Nowhere in there did I find the H3. Hell it took me 20 minutes to locate the H1 and H2 and the author never differentiates between any of the Hummer lines, he just says "Hummer" but he gives the figures for the miniature version with a diminutive (compared to it's predecessors) 3.5l gas engine. He needs to be specific when he's making his comparisons. What he's doing is akin to saying something like "The Ford Bronco is a more economical vehicle than the Cadillac CTS" and then going on to use figures from the Ford Bronco II. Yes, I concede that the H3 might be more economical dust to dust than a Prius but it's just a part of the Hummers on the road and the first two versions are nowhere near being as cheap to operate as the H3, which to hardcore Hummer enthusiasts isn't a Hummer at all.

Also note that the Prius decreases in cost dust to dust while the cost of the Hummer lines increase across the board. It will be interesting to see how radically the costs on the H3 changes (in either direction) as it matures. since it's a fairly immature offering so the real costs are yet to be known. The costs of operation have increased 6.15% in just the one short year it's been on the market while the Prius has decreased -11.80% since it's introduction (at least I'm assuming that's the period that they're going by) which is a smaller amount year by year but if the H3 keeps up it's rather alarming rate of 6.15% per annum increase it will be up to nearly 19% above the initial figure by the time the H4 is set to debut in 2009.

 

[NicePants42]

Nowhere in there did I find the H3. Hell it took me 20 minutes to locate the H1 and H2 and the author never differentiates between any of the Hummer lines, he just says "Hummer" but he gives the figures for the miniature version with a diminutive (compared to it's predecessors) 3.5l gas engine. He needs to be specific when he's making his comparisons. What he's doing is akin to saying something like "The Ford Bronco is a more economical vehicle than the Cadillac CTS" and then going on to use figures from the Ford Bronco II. Yes, I concede that the H3 might be more economical dust to dust than a Prius but it's just a part of the Hummers on the road and the first two versions are nowhere near being as cheap to operate as the H3, which to hardcore Hummer enthusiasts isn't a Hummer at all.

Data for the H3 is on line 381. It's actually leading the Upper Mid Range SUV segment, ahead of things like the B9 Tribeca, Mountaineer, Aviator, etc.

And no, the author does not need to be more specific. You still seem to be tangled up in his presentation rather than the actual substance.

Imagine that you're writing an Editorial and Commentary article designed to earn publicity for the Dust to Dust Study - a study that shows that mpg is not the be-all and end-all of environmental friendliness. How would you go about writing this article in order to generate the most interest? (Hint: Present the data in a shocking way, but don't lie.)

The author did what he set out to do, without lying or fabricating anything. Did he omit certain things in order to get people's attention? Obviously. Should we dismiss the D2D study and what it's implications are because of it? You seem to think so. I do not.

In case you haven't picked up on it, I don't care about the HUMMER/Prius comparison. You have every right to voice complaints about the author's lack of specificity, but it's a waste of time considering the bigger picture, which is what the author (and I) have been suggesting.

Edit:

Also note that the Prius decreases in cost dust to dust while the cost of the Hummer lines increase across the board. It will be interesting to see how radically the costs on the H3 changes (in either direction) as it matures. since it's a fairly immature offering so the real costs are yet to be known. The costs of operation have increased 6.15% in just the one short year it's been on the market while the Prius has decreased -11.80% since it's introduction (at least I'm assuming that's the period that they're going by) which is a smaller amount year by year but if the H3 keeps up it's rather alarming rate of 6.15% per annum increase it will be up to nearly 19% above the initial figure by the time the H4 is set to debut in 2009.

See, you really are capable of drawing useful conclusions from this study. Keep doing it.

 

[madmat]

Keep denigrating me and you'll go back to being a guest in these forums. You seem to forget that I'm a mod here and I have the option of making you go away.

 

[NicePants42]

Keep denigrating me and you'll go back to being a guest in these forums. You seem to forget that I'm a mod here and I have the option of making you go away.

You read a lot of hostility that isn't there, Matt. I've been civil.

My last comment in my previous post simply illustrates how you went from completely dismissing the article to actually examining the data presented and making a reasonable and useful speculation based upon it. That's all I've been trying to get you to do all day!

Do you think I was wrong to try to point out that the D2D study contained useful information?

Do you think after reading our conversation that people on this site would respect you for threatening me?

 

[madmat]

See, you really are capable of drawing useful conclusions from this study. Keep doing it.

I see that as denigrating, there's no need for it, you could've used different wording. If you want an example of how to deal with someone that's mistaken look to the Tt cooler reviews that I posted in last week.

And no, I don't think the author handled his article well, half truths are the same as no truths.

 

[NicePants42]

Let me rephrase:

See, people really can draw useful conclusions from this study.

Would you consider rephrasing this:

At best it's a very slanted article that really has a minimal amount of merit based on the overlooking of the manufacture of the Hummer....hell it looks like some kind of propaganda concocted by a GM employee rather than a true look into any sort of impact that the two cars make on the environment.

To something more along the lines of:

"I don't like the way this author wrote the article, but people may be able to draw useful conclusions from the study he cites."

?

 

[madmat]

No but if I were to contact the author of the article personally to disabuse him of the half truths he uses to propagate his point I'd be more diplomatic with him than you were with me.

 

[NicePants42]

No but if I were to contact the author of the article personally to disabuse him of the half truths he uses to propagate his point I'd be more diplomatic with him than you were with me.

Well, then I guess you are a more diplomatic person than I am.

In my defense, my first reply to you was very diplomatic, and encompassed my entire argument pretty succinctly. I only started getting sarcastic when you kept arguing the H/Prius issue despite the fact that I was arguing the validity of the D2D study.

Incidentally, why would you not be willing to revise your original statement? Are you telling me you'd still dismiss the entire study based on some random author's presentation?

 

[madmat]

No, I dismiss the author's article because it's slanted and inaccurate, wildly so.

I never said I found fault with the study, I said the article smacks of propaganda and it does. He's twisting the findings of the study to suit his needs is he not? He claims the Prius is less green than the Hummer. to me that means the Hummer as a whole and if you average the Hummer family over the units sold (and thereby on the road) the H2 makes up the lion's share at well over 60K on the road as we speak and a mere 30K+ H3's on the road as we speak...average the cost of operation of both units and you come up with a cost much higher than the Prius.

That's even ignoring the 2K H'1's that snuck onto the road and the military Hummers running around guzzling fuel and costing 10 times what the civilian counterpart does.

I find the study interesting and I wish they could expand it to encompass older vehicles as well but it is what it is and besides, when shopping for a used car in 2017 it'll be a nice reference for what to look for and what to avoid.

 

[NicePants42]

I realize you never specifically dismissed the study, but you also didn't look at it until after your second response. Dismissive, one could argue.

Regardless, I'm glad you find it interesting. I'll see you around.

 

[madmat]

No, I never read it because I knew that there was no way in hell that a Hummer would cost less to own and operate than a Prius. I've never read up on the H3 aside from reading things about it by people that have looked at them and said how weak they were...gutless, way too much car for the motor, etc. I always assumed it was a case of them making the thing even bigger and more grandiose, I never had a clue that the H3 was a high end version of the HHR.

After reading it though then following up with a bit of down and dirty researching I've found that yes, the H3 is cheaper than the Prius but the Hummer as a whole, H1, H2 and H3 combined still costs more.