The Hummer greener than the Prius?

[Christophe]

Edit Capt_Maloche 12/05/2009: detail of standardized consumption in 2 lines HERE:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post125914.html#125914

This post will make some people jump (me the 1st but especially one who loves the forest ) but it is not me who says it:

CNW Marketing Research Inc's 2006 report DUST TO DUST recently published on www.CNWMR.com is widely commented on by the American media. The authors of this voluminous study (458 pages) analyzed 320 models of vehicles sold in the United States to determine their overall energy consumption. (...)

This study is the result of a long collection of data, mostly public, and the application of a formula, the details of which are not given, but the complexity of which must be commensurate with the diversity of the parameters considered. “We have identified energy consumption to develop, build, sell, drive and eliminate each of the models considered. This includes transport at all levels, from the distance traveled by employees to get to the factory, to the distance traveled by the finished product to the point of sale. ”

All of this information was put together to obtain an immediately understandable final note: the average cost in dollars per mile traveled. The authors specify that they considered a cost at the pump of 3 dollars per gallon (80 euro cents per liter).

Champion all categories:
• The Toyota Scion xB, not marketed in Switzerland, credited with a cost per mile of 0,492 dollars.
• The donkey cap, the Maybach, which costs $ 15,837 per mile - five more than Rolls-Royce.

Thus Toyota US strongly contested the method used by discovering that its Prius hybrid ranked lower than the Hummer H3 and CNW said it loud and clear ...

(...)

“SUVs consume at least twice as much, but their simpler construction and their longer lifespan ultimately weigh favorably on the total energy need from their birth until their disappearance (…) far from us the idea of to say that a hybrid vehicle is not a good choice in terms of consumption and pollution. We just want to draw attention to the fact that what is won on one side can be spent on the other. ”

We should still see who is behind this American study remember ... because if it is the same kind as the study on the dangerousness of mobile phones?

[Capt_Maloche]

PFFF, the energy cost must not integrate the value of the vehicle

money has nothing to do with it

Energy consumption matters, from source to user

[Woodcutter]

Seen, seen, it is a subject "in fashion" for a few days ...

No time to really look into it, but in my opinion there is a wolf somewhere ...

[nialabert]

Seen, seen, it is a subject "in fashion" for a few days ...

No time to really look into it, but in my opinion there is a wolf somewhere ...

It's a bit like certain who say that the prius is more polluting since more expensive so you have to go to work more.

[Christophe]

It's a bit like certain who say that the prius is more polluting since more expensive so you have to go to work more.

WHERE? WHERE? WHERE?

Do not prevent it is not false! hihihihihi

[Christophe]

PFFF, the energy cost must not integrate the value of the vehicle

Really?
So we must not take into account the "item" energy consumption (gray) when taking into account the cost of the vehicle?

I'm not following you at all ...

money has nothing to do with it

Energy consumption matters, from source to user

I don't really understand what you mean ...

[Capt_Maloche]

I'm sure you do it on purpose

To know the total energy cost of a vehicle, we take into account:

- the energy cost for its manufacture
- the energy cost for operation

But when I say that the money has nothing to do with it, it is that it is only the pollutants released that actually count

[Christophe]

The famous study in question for those interested in seeing the methods: https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... wwzFvu.pdf

Found here: https://www.econologie.com/forums/vehicules- ... t7582.html

I quote the conclusion:

CHAPTER 15 - Conclusion

To be quite up front, there is no actual conclusion to this study (it begins well!). It is, hopefully, only a beginning of a discussion about the social cost of energy. Just as an example of some of the issues future reports from other sources and investigators must consider include those already pointed out in this report but should increasingly note the small items in the calculations. Just a few:

- The type of material used other than major panels or understructures have important impact (albeit seemingly small overall) such as chrome. It is one of the most difficult and expensive to make and dispose of. The pollution and clean-up
cost for such material far outweigh its seemingly insignificant contribution to a vehicle's appearance or cost.

- “Manufacturing” must include suppliers and the design, development and manufacture of support machinery, not just the use of those machines. Human labor is far less energy intense than a robotic milling machine, even though there are clear cost advantages when replacing human labor with robotics.

- Dies, molds and related equipment are more complex for more technologically advanced vehicles. This can be the difference between a Maybach and a Sonata or between the Scion xB vs. the Scion xA. More bending, more components, more cost.

- Some portion of the worker transportation to and from work at all levels of the auto design / develop to disposal can be a critical component in the overall energy expense. This relates in part to where those manufacturing plants are located be it
in China or Tennessee and what the infrastructure are demands to support that manufacturing plant. (Note: CNW used a 22 to 46 percent range of employee transportation costs related to the individual models based on actual surveys of what portion of total driving is specifically for work and adjusted for the fact that worker would obviously be employed somewhere else if not at the car plant.)

- Autos are fully a quarter-plus of all items disposed of in the US as a share of energy expended to recycle, re-use and / or dispose of non-recyclable components and material.

- To sell 17 million vehicles the auto industry needs roughly 45 million shoppers or stewards. No evaluation except this one has included that calculation in the overall energy cost of a single automobile.

While we could expand on this for pages, the real conclusion is that there are many other factors involved than the simple “fuel economy” cost that most consumers believe is the true measure of
a vehicle's efficiency.

For environmentalists and those concerned about CO2, for example, the adage that this emission knows no (national) borders is not only true but important to the discussion about pollution, global warming or related subjects. And that leads back to the ability of an automaker to produce simplified vehicles, the ability of the recycle / disposal industries to increasingly more efficient means of using those vehicles at the end of their lives.

For government agencies, a serious consideration of the global impact has to be addressed when deciding on a local regulation regardless of the final decision.

For automakers, it is important to consider all aspects of energy consumption and how this important social product impacts society in general.

For other researchers into this subject, we would recommend adding as many factors as conceivable to their evaluations to better understand the overall impact.

For CNW, it means continued refinement of the data whether it results in significant alternations in methodology or how the data is reported. We welcome comments, criticisms, suggestions and recommendations for a better way of reporting the findings. We expect to continue on this path for some time into the future.

[Michel Kieffer]

Are they kidding us?

Here is a study that must be strongly biased or even outright untrue!

How to claim that a vehicle of 2500 kg (?) Consumes less energy, both in operation than during its manufacture, than a vehicle of 1400 kg?

The editor of this study would do well to go back to school or even ...!

Michel

[Michel Kieffer]

Prius, false good solution?

If the Prius is one of the least bad cars of today, it is not for all that good! Explanation: its consumption remains far too high compared to what it is possible to do. It owes its relative performance as much, if not more, to aerodynamics than to its hybridization.

The Prius is far, because of excess mass, from the real economic vehicle that we should have. This ideal vehicle should be close to the recent LOREMO, a car which itself has venerable ancestors just as good or even better. For example, the CITROEN ECO 2000 or the RENAULT VESTA from the early 80s.

On the other hand, the Prius is a very profitable marketing operation. Besides, every Prius buyer signs the check thinking: " I act for the planet! ". Given the above paragraphs, the question is: " who benefits from the crime? »

All of this was widely developed and constructed in the forum « The car of the future ». https://www.econologie.com/forums/la-voiture ... t6803.html

Michel