Full-size SUVs consume less energy over lifetime than hybrids

[boybi]

New study: Full-size SUVs consume less energy over lifetime than hybrids

Posted Apr 1st 2006 11:33AM by Chris Paukert

The results of a new study conducted by CNW Marketing Research Inc. is sure to generate some arched eyebrows. The firm's report stems from their two-year effort to collect and analyze data on the "energy neessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage." CNW then assigned their findings a new comparative metric - "dollars per lifetime mile" - or, said another way, total energy cost per mile driven.

The findings? America's most expensive vehicle in calendar 2005 was the Maybach (presumably a 62), tallying up at a staggering $11.58/mile. The thriftiest? Scion's boxy xB, just $.48 cents/mile.

But here's where it gets interesting: CNW's findings indicate that a hybrid consumes more energy overall than a comparable conventionally powered model. It judged showed that the Honda Accord Hybrid rang up an Energy Costs Per Mile of $3.29, while a gas-powered Accord was significantly cheaper at $2.18/mile. The study concludes that the average of all 2005 U.S. market vehicles was $2.28/mile.

The reasoning goes that hybrids use up more energy to manufacture, as well as consume more resources in terms of the assembly (and eventual disposal) of things like batteries and motors. By CNW's reckoning, the intrinsically lower complexity of, say, a Hummer H3 ($1.949/mile) actually results in lower total energy usage than any hybrid currently on the market, and even a standard Honda Civic ($2.42).

While the study's findings don't take issue with what vehicles are more financially economical to own (read: those with better mileage), it does pose some interesting questions about total energy usage in hybrids.

Obviously, in order to best judge the merit of CNW's findings, a clearer explanation of the study's criteria and processes is in order.

Source: www.Autoblog.com

[nugundam93]

hahahahaha! take that, greenies! :lol:

[garyq]

I would think so coz hybrids are not yet mass produced(compared to conventional vehicles) and the technology has to be refined including the mfg process.

[vicoyski]

This is gonna pi$$-off them Tree-huggers...

[niky]

NOT SURPRISING. I've always been of the opinion that to save energy, you buy the cheapest and simplest car available... with the simplest and smallest engine. Hybrids cost a lot to make, and not just because numbers are small. They're expensive because they have a lot of components (twice as many as a common car), and because batteries that powerful are hideously expensive.

[cardo]

I would think so coz hybrids are not yet mass produced(compared to conventional vehicles) and the technology has to be refined including the mfg process.

you got my vote dude. I totally agree as well

[mazdamazda]

The batteries are the hybrid car's Achilles Heel.

Battery technology hasn't progressed that much. Those high-capacity yet lightweight ones still have to be replaced every x number of years. Disposing of used ones is also no easy task given their composition (nickel, lithium, etc.) since every part needs to be broken down and recycled.

Another thing, hybrids use two motors (one conventional & one electric).

[niky]

Another note on those batteries... guess why hybrids aren't mass produced? It's not because the components are expensive to make... heck, since Americans will pay anything, manufacturers can charge nearly full price for the components... it's because the batteries use exotic materials, and battery companies cannot produce enough to supply hybrids and electric cars in mass quantities.

There is nothing else exotic left on the hybrid. Currently, Toyota is subsidizing every Prius (by a couple of thousand dollars), so that ridiculously expensive price is actually exactly the same price you'd pay if they were mass-produced.

Same problem with hydrogen fuel cells... they use exotic materials and are very hard to manufacture and dispose of.

Like hydrogen, hybrids may be another dead-end niche... an economic group has just announced that hydrogen cars are too expensive to replace gas cars en masse in Europe... unless manufacturers adobt a less expensive battery technology or develop supercapacitors that use less exotic materials.

Hybrid systems are the wrong way to go around making energy efficient cars. You are basically adding complexity and parts to make up for the vehicle's other shortcomings. (i.e.: high weight, inefficient gas engines). Hybrid technologies add more weight to a car, which actually hurts fuel efficiency. By making vehicles lighter and simpler, we can achieve the same thing, while making them less expensive to produce, and easier to recycle.

In other words, instead of driving Hybrid SUVs and Accords... let's all drive Kia Picantos and diesel Getzs... ...either that, or we drive small, fully electric cars... a Kia Picanto uses less gas than most hybrids, and costs less energy to manufacture than any of them.

My bet is still on the flex-fuel system and bio-fuels as viable, cost-effective and environmentall friendly short term solutions... in the long term, who knows what we'll get.

[DacoTyan]

Come on folks, your basic internal combustion engine has had over 100 years of development and refinement in it and it wasn't smooth sailing in the beginning either. With the exception of turbine and wankel engines most engine technologies has already been tried before WWII: compression igniton, spark-assisted ignition, electric and steam.

I too agree with garyq.

But hybrid technology is, in my opinion, just a stop gap until a better battery comes along.

[niky]

It's not that we don't believe electric cars are possible in the future... heck, we actually had electric cars for sale back at the turn of the century!... it's just that people put too much faith in current hybrids.

Simply put, more expensive and complicated cars aren't an answer for our mass transport needs. They're just a placebo for people who can't give up gasoline vehicles... actually, who can't give up faster and bigger cars... to save gas.

Also, they're something of a fashion statement... That's why the Accord Hybrid and Civic Hybrid don't sell as well as the Toyota Prius... because they're practical Hybrids, which don't show off their "hybridness" as well as the Hollywood darling, the Prius.

Want to save the earth? Buy a Getz... or buy a City... both fuel efficient (the City is just as fuel efficient as a Prius ) without being enormously expensive.

Some hybrid tech should trickle down to regular cars, though... like engine-off and cylinder deactivation... plus Honda's integrated starter/assist motor (lighter and more effective than Toyota's big one)... these are technologies that could help us save more gas in the long run, and which don't make vehicles too heavy or expensive.

Who wants a modern steam car? Modern steam turbines are very eco-friendly compared to the old wood burners... ...a steam car broke 400 mph a while back.