That being said Gorn’s numbers assume that these cars always existed. I don’t pretend to understand how CNW’s formula works. Gorn’s simply does this (he used some different numbers and fudged up the Hummer2 number)…

Prius 100 000m / 45mpg = 2222.2 * 3.00 = 6666.66 + 21,000 = 27,666.66

Humme 100 000m / 12mpg = 8333.3 * 3.00 = 24999.90 + 54,110 = 79,109.90

No financing costs, taxes, tariffs, wasted shipping, waste management costs, or anything else has been accounted for with Gorn’s method. The basic point is that CNW has created a formula that accounts for all of the waste. A big point is that Gorn’s method is not the “total cost of operation” it only accounts for gas and the sticker price.

How much to insure a Prius for 100,000 miles. How much can you deduct off of your federal tax returns if you own an SUV? How realistic is it to suggest that an $8,000.00 battery has ZERO downside? What does mark-up have to do with this? We buy Japanese but if you buy American the reason a Hummer costs $50K is that it is all “mark-up”. What about depreciation and the rate of depretiation?

I realize all study results of any study can be fudged, fictitious or based on problematic formulas. The point is that hybrids are the same BS that Hummers are and that is the same BS that all cars are. The study did not suggest that anyone should purchase a hummer. It pointed to less expensive options and in that list were other Toyotas. To comment about this and suggest that CNW supports hummers is as ridiculous as the Greens thinking that they can drive the nation clean. Gorn does the same thing that he accuses CNW of and Gorn has invested in the Prius. I don’t own any SU(X)Vs or Toyotas, the main reason I chose Honda to roll in is that the total cost of ownership is LOW.

Thanks lot :)

My apologies, I left out one important variable in my disclosure: my assumptions about fuel economy for each vehicle.

My calculations used 45 MPG for the Prius, 9 MPG for the Hummer, and 28 MPG for the Corolla. I opted to used figures typically reported in the real world rather than EPA estimates which would unfairly favor the Prius.

I found the Hummer and Corolla figures via reviews found on the internet. For the Prius, I used my own experience which I think is fairly typical. My commute this morning: 14 miles, mixed freeway/city, 49.8 MPG. Thus, I think 45 as an average is a more than fair figure to use.

Fair enough. I assumed the MSRP of each vehicle as found on the internet, used $3 per gallon for the price of gas, and assumed the same number of miles driven for each vehicle. Unlike freedomrings’ numbers, there’s no magic dust involved here.

It’s pathetic what passes as environmental progress in Bush’s America.

P.S. US automakers can deliver 40MPG today in their European models, the ones they refuse to sell here.

While it is clear that those other results are impossible it is relevant to question where you obtained your information ##s whatever statistics??

Assuming both vehicles are driven 100k miles, the lifetime cost (vehicle plus fuel) at current fuel prices would be:

Prius: $28,166
Hummer H2: $87,333
Corolla: $26,714

If driven 300,000 miles:

Prius: $41,500
Hummer H2: $154,000
Corolla: $48,142

Left unstated is that a Hummer could not possibly last that long without probably being fully rebuilt a couple of times, the volume of crap spewed into the atmosphere, the damage done to roadways, damage done to vehicles and people in accidents, the near-certainty of much higher ordinary maintenance costs, and the relative damage done to national security.

Other than that, it’s just a swell idea to drive a Hummer to work every day.

Bottom line: really weak reasoning. To come up with this figure, they suggested that “historical data” shows the average Prius owner drives only 6,700 miles per year. They don’t indicate where that historical data comes from. I can’t find it anywhere. The only hits from a Google search either point back to this very web site, or sites talking about this web site.

Even if it were true, it is nonsense to use this figure to compare against a Hummer. It suggests that if I Prius driver instead drives a hummer, suddenly they will drive three times as much. What? Are we to believe that there is something magical about a Prius that makes people suddenly dirve only half the national average just by virtue of owning that car?

Let’s suppose that this hypothetical Prius driver switched to a Hummer and drove the identical number of miles on it. Now, the cost of the Hummer per mile would be about $6 per mile, not the $2 claimed. Of course, ALL of these figures are suspect.

This paper does NOT claim that the expect practical life of a Prius is 100k miles. It states:

Can the Prius be driven more than 100,000 miles? Of course. The vehicle is superbly engineered … Mechanically, there is no logical reason for the Prius not to last 130,000 miles or more.

Sorry freedomrings, this lays your central claim to waste.

Further poor reasoning in the CNW report center around the idea that at an “early adopter” stage, costs per vehicle are higher, but any rational analysis would look at the amortization costs over the lifetime of the technology. It even forces itself to admit this:

As for Hummer, much of the design, development and manufacturing energy costs are spread across more than just this single model. (One of the original and recent Prius disadvantages, quickly being turned around.)

Suggesting that Prius technologies would not be shared among other models and brands is absurd.

Finally, the paper makes a statement that completely agrees with my position against freedomrings:

“The energy cost per mile is unequivocally going to decline for Prius over time as the technology continues to spread across other models and the disposal/scrap industry learns how to deal with its high-tech materials and components.”

Thus, freedomrings, your very position is completely undermined by the source behind your student newspaper article. As flaky as that source is, even they have to back off and admit to the obvious. And, their conclusion is the opposite of your woe-is-me fatalism. Don’t you feel stupid?

These standards do not even attempt to slow down the pace at which we pollute the air and consume natural resources, let alone reverse the damage. Instead, they ensure that we will continue to consume and pollute at ever increasing levels, and only limit the rate of increase minimally. This bill is evidence that the Democrats have neither the intent nor the ability to address the environmental and economic problems they helped create, and are in fact only slightly less beholden to corporate interests than are Republicans.

We need zero emission vehicles. We need a solar grid. We need public transit. Cars that get 35 miles to the gallon are worse than an empty gesture; they are a false comfort in a time of emergency.

I call upon our representatives to reject this meaningless bill and go back to the drawing board, this time listening not to centrists, appeasers, and lobbyists, but instead to technological innovators and real environmental advocates.

As a member of the House of Representatives, I vow to craft legislation that offers real, sustainable solutions to the severe crises we face. I encourage our current Congressional legislators and all Americans to learn about my proposed “New Deal for sustainability,” which provides a model for sustainable energy production and transportation in the 21st century. And I encourage voters in the 37th district to consider which candidate will provide real leadership on issues related to the environment, energy prices, and transportation when they vote this Tuesday”

For years Ford, GM and Chrysler produced cars were designed to explode in three years, and which had poor resale value, embrassessing safety features and pathetic gas mileage . Now, when Americans in droves are purchasing great cars from Japan with superior gas mileage, design, safety, resale value and reliability, and only now, are these failed accountants even trying to build better and more competitive cars.

Even now, with the market walking away from them, are they attempting to stop the development of cars with moderately higher fuel economy. Are they stupid? Is it possible that they just don’t understand? Or are they still just looking at next quarters financial statement?

I would sincerely love to buy American, however, these clowns have told me that I would be foolish to do so.

However, you’re only half right. There are TONS of people with W stickers doing the same thing.

Very true, but when they voted for W, they presumably didn’t like the idea of heavyhanded CAFE regulations.

Sure we should, Marie. But thanks to the extreme low-density nature of most American cities and sprawl-burbs, effective and ubiquitous mass transit would be an incredibly expensive solution.

That’s not to say we shouldn’t do it, however – I personally think we should. All I’m saying is that building the political will to do it will be very difficult, in light of the price tag for doing it right.

Which is also the figure I claimed. You called me a liar, now you’re supporting what I said. You are so amusing.

“The battery as expected looses performance at 40F and lower”

Whatever. I debunk a lie so you try to come up with some other angle. Can you come back to your original premise that a Prius is more damaging to the environment than a Hummer?

“Canada has a poor mining track record!”

Whatever. Your original claim was that the Prius was responsible for the acid rain destruction around Sudbury. I’ve proven your premise false, but again you try to change the argument. Won’t work, bucko.

“If that is true then why did you get a Prius?”

I thought I was pretty clear on that. I’m not the fatalist, you are. I got it because (1) it’s good for national security, (2) it’s low emission, (3) it saves me money, (4) it’s a cool car with cool features, (5) I like it, (6) I get to drive the HOV lanes and bypass all the SUVs, etc. Sorry I’m not sitting in a fetal position whining about the hopelessness of it all, like you.

” No this is wrong. All energy sources become depleted. The Sun will not last forever and is depleting.”

Holy crap, batman, you are unbelievably dense. I already kicked you ten ways to Tuesday on this subject before. The Sun will not last forever. It will only be there for a few billion years. Oh, woe are we.

“You were commenting about your tree hugger Prius and boasting about how it gets less than sticker mileage”

Well, I guess if stating real, verifiable facts is ‘boasting’, then I’m guilty as charged. Wow, do you ever have an inferiority complex. I guess that comes from having your a$$ handed to you over and over and over again.

“my as$ is small and tight.”

Must make it damned hard to breathe.

“I’m not going to STFU simply because you say so looser!”

Please don’t call me loose. That hurts my feelings.

“I will have to put an egg in my shoe and beat it.”

Translation: “Okay, Gorn, I’m going to do as you say and STFU.”

Thanks, freedomrings, I’ve enjoyed this a$$-kicking today. Come back and play again after the welts heal.

CR confirmed that the car gets 45mpg like the article. The battery as expected looses performance at 40F and lower… So you are full of BS so far but there is much more…

Right. You want to go back and read about Sudbury? Let’s see how honest you can be. (Rhetorical point – the answer is known.)

Mining may provide the elements, minerals and crystals we want but at an excessive cost. You referenced Wiki and according to them operations have become cleaner in Sudbury. According to the link I provided Inco Mining has devastated massive amounts of land with pollution. Canada has a poor mining track record!

Wrong again. Rationing is merely a delay of the inevitable. As a fatalist, you should understand that.
If that is true then why did you get a Prius? More than that why waste time defending a car that is doomed by the inevitability of oil depletion? You strike me as a Lexus person. Regardless, rationing is preferable to demand destruction. Rationing allows us to limit population growth and reduce the same over time while still being able to grow food. I don’t think I’m a fatalist? I do think that not moving to strict conservation methods now will cost more lives to be lost.

The best form of rationing is using energy sources that cannot be depleted, and finding more efficient ways to renew depletable(SIC) resources.

No this is wrong. All energy sources become depleted. The Sun will not last forever and is depleting. Harnessing alternatives at the cost of existing oil supplies is something a bone head like you would offer as a solution. Then you went onto say, “And finding more efficient ways to renew depletable resources.” That is a joke right? You want people to get better at renewing non-renewables? “Shut the DOOR!”

Hypocritical blowhard. Your Honda is, at best, as negatively impactful of anything you are whining about. Walk, ride a bike, or STFU.

Hondas CBR600 and a Civic. You were commenting about your tree hugger Prius and boasting about how it gets less than sticker mileage and is all that and then some. That Prius cost all of us some energy. I pointed out that my mileage on the bike blows your giant cell phone battery away. My old Civic gets 35 in town and better on the highway but I don’t drive it that much. I have a bicycle too, etc. One thing about you is that you like to command the store but I’m not going to STFU simply because you say so looser!

And yes, I can stay here all night checking this thread from time to time and continuing to hand you your a$$, as long as you want to do it.

And when is this as$ handing going to happen? Heck, first your wiping the floor, then your handing it and next you will have your head in my poor ‘ol as$ You have a big head and my as$ is small and tight. I can suggest that you stick your head up your own as$ and see if it fits but odds are that you can lose yourself up there and then whose colloquialisms and pontifications will I have to listen to then?

Son, I don’t claim to having intelligence of any special merit.

But me debating with you is like Stephen Hawking debating with a drosophila melanogaster. You’re a persistent little bug, I’ll give you that.

“blah blah…when you’re hugging trees”

In fact, my first interest with the Prius is a positive action in favor of national security. This is followed by low emissions, gas savings, and the smug satisfaction of cruising by a-holes like yourself.

I’m taking money from Osama. What are you doing, scum?

“Your mileage claims are a lie.”

Which ones are those? Do you need a snapshot of my mileage computer? I average 45 city, 50 highway (at 75-80 mph). Sorry if you can’t deal with that. If I accelerate slowly enough, I can hit or exceed 60 city, but I don’t have the patience to do that on a normal basis.

So, pray tell, where am I lying, you useless sack of manure?

“Your car is after all a car and so can’t be “green” ever.”

Right. Just the greenest one available.

“You can’t drive your way out of the energy and pollution nightmare.”

Don’t remember claiming it. I can’t save the world from starvation or war, either, but I can do what little contribution I can, and if we all did it the world would be a better place.

Or, I can sit around whining and moaning and obfuscating like you.

“There are NO “green” mines in or on the earth.”

Didn’t make the claim. Glad to hear your Honda arose direct from the mind of god, with no environmental impact of any kind.

“The biggest point to make is that your Prius is another BS device that you bought”

Wow, your argument is so powerful. So impressive. You have zero chance arguing actual facts, so just make nonsense statements.

“The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles – the expected lifespan of the Hybrid….”

… and repeat stupid, already disproven lies as well. You can’t even remember that your original argument was about environmental impact, so you switch to talking about “style” or “cost efficiency”.

It’s hard to tell if you are genuinely stupid, insane, delusional, morally bankrupt, or just a very poor troll. All of the above?

“but… but… but… it’s sourced!!!”

LOL