I posted my article on the Toyota Prius' genuine or otherwise eco-friendliness, on Moneyweb as well. One of the readers has posted a response, which is:
| Name: | Jim Summers |
| Subject: | Read the Study |
| Body: | If
you actually read the study (by a marketing firm!), you find that one
of the primary determinants of the environmental cost is the lifetime
of the vehicle. The study assumes that a Prius will only last 1/3 as
long as a Range Rover, so you have to buy three to equal it. This is a
somewhat dubious assumption. If you instead assume a Prius will last as
long as any other car, you come to a completely different conclusion.
Most other studies find that manufacturing and disposing a vehicle amounts to 15% of the gas it will burn. This is a significant amount, but not enough to make a Range Rover a better choice than a Prius. |
| Time: | 21:21 Fri 12 Jan 2007 |
In this morning's edition (Saturday 13th January) of 'The Weekender' - my favourite weekend read - is the article below. I've left just the headline and subhead. The sub-head is the killer.
Is this how the myth gets perpetuated? Or is there in fact no myth? I just find it fascinating that a publication of the calibre of Car Magazine would 'get it wrong'. Or is Jim Summers' conclusion wrong? The specific comment in CAR was this: : “Research conducted by US-based CNW Marketing confirms that taking into account the ‘dust-to-dust’ environmental impact, the Prius rates 25% poorer than a Range Rover Sport. It even scores worse than its little sibling, the Toyota Yaris. The Prius’ relatively low replacement cycle (roughly one third of that of major 4x4s) along with the disposal of batteries and special materials, weighed heavily against it.” Maybe the whole topic of green cars needs to be better explored. It could be rather like the butter/margarine debate. Margarine might be better in immediate cholesterol terms, but the trans-fatty acids it contains are long-term even worse for your health. So what's the truth with the Toyota Prius?
reason why it's only a third of a RR is because of battery life.
Posted by: senor neek | Friday, 16 February 2007 at 16:02
The battery life comment is correct. After about 7-10 years (or less), I believe, the batteries will no longer take a charge and become more costly to repair than the car is worth.
Posted by: test | Monday, 24 August 2009 at 14:08