Article

2006-07-20 Home Front: Culture Wars

It's official: Hummer More Energy Efficient than Hybrid Honda Civic

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by phil_b 2006-07-20 01:54|| || Front Page|| [11141 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 LOL. This is going to make some heads explode.

Posted by Omusing Angong1547 2006-07-20 02:40|| 2006-07-20 02:40|| Front Page Top

#2 Has anyone hipped Sullivan to this?

I've always been deeply suspicious of the whole hybrid technology "revolution." If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.

A similar thing happened when turbochargers were first introduced into passenger vehicles in the U.S. during the late '50s -early '60's (one of the models was called the "Starfire", IIRC). The idea of turbochargers is a good one, but the technonolgy was rushed into production before it was ready. Those early turbocharged vehicles were unreliable and didn't work out, andit was many years before decent and reliable turbochargers became widely available.

Another example of emotion trumping reason and science. It feeeeeeels good to own a hybrid if you are a leftist, and you can wear your ownership as a badge of pride, proving to everyone else that you're so much more caring and gaia-friendly than all those nasty other people.

Like so much of what those types believe, it's all a self-serving, preening lie.

Posted by no mo uro 2006-07-20 06:16|| 2006-07-20 06:16|| Front Page Top

#3 One of the most perverse things about U.S. consumers buying hybrids is that while this might reduce air pollution in their own cities, they increase pollution and energy consumption -- in Japan and other Asian countries where these cars are predominantly manufactured. "In effect, they are exporting pollution and energy consumption," Spinella says.

Who says that perverse? Irnonic, maybe. Intentional? Possibly.

The faster/farther you drive a hybrid, the more it's fuel economy goes down. It soars in bumper-to-bumper, stop-and-go traffic because the gas engine shuts off (as long as the battery is charged).

So there still isn't a silver bullet.

Lighter , smaller cars cost less to make, and less to drive. Physics.

Posted by Bobby 2006-07-20 06:28|| 2006-07-20 06:28|| Front Page Top

#4 Correction - not Starfire, Jetfire.

Posted by no mo uro 2006-07-20 06:49|| 2006-07-20 06:49|| Front Page Top

#5 While I find this amusing, it's a bunch of hooey. Dust to dust cost? Come one. Of course new technology is more expensive at first.

He makes some good points through out the article that can't be argued with, but by comparing it to the Hummer, he took it over the top and his point is buried in hype.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-20 07:12|| 2006-07-20 07:12|| Front Page Top

#6 The more I think about this article, the more absurd it becomes.

What is his point exactly? That the hybrid is less cost effective for the consumer than a hybrid. Um no, that's not it.

That the *snort* "dust to dust" cost for a hybrid is worse than that inexpensive chevy? Um, no that's not it either.

Now this does makes sense:

This means that when gas prices go up, these people don't rush out to buy more hybrids. "They buy a Chevy Aveo," says Spinella. "It delivers the same fuel economy as a Prius, but at half the price."

Can't argue with that. That's why the consumers aren't buying the hybrids. But what about his point that it is more cost effective overall to not buy a hybrid? Apparently that's not his point. Otherwise he would have stuck with the analogy of the Chevy types when making the *snort* "dust to dust" comparison. But instead he brings in the gas guzzling Hummer at this point in time, which has the very unusual (and very expensive) lifespan of 300,000 miles, something our analyst couldn't get with any other car; certainly not the inexpensive Chevy. I'm guessing the fact that he brought the Hummer into the argument here is because the "dust to dust" comparison of the hybrid v/s to the chevy didn't work out the way he wanted.

And the fact that taxi drivers, who do lots of start and stop driving, are willing to buy says to me that they are more fuel efficient for that type of driving.

What I'm getting out of this article is that this guy was paid by the auto industry. They are being forced to retool their production lines and they don't make as much money on a hybrid as they do on the chevy. It's a valid point - but far from the one that a Hummer is more energy efficient than a hybrid.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-20 07:53|| 2006-07-20 07:53|| Front Page Top

#7 That is the sound of a head exploding. :)

Posted by Omusing Angong1547 2006-07-20 08:03|| 2006-07-20 08:03|| Front Page Top

#8 I think that the article makes some really good points. Despite all of the whining about recycling household waste, we are already incredibly efficient at recycling stuff that makes economic sense like cars, ships, steel frame and reinforced concrete buildings. I had the opportunity to participate in the demolition of a steel frame and reinforced concrete structure once and I estimate that by volume, 99% of it was recycled -- we're talking biological scales of efficiency. As the writer points out, when you start throwing composite materials into the mix, you trash the recycling efficiencies and overall costs skyrocket. In fact, when we were taking down that building, the only thing that we couldn't recycle/reuse was the "composite" roofing materials.

The other thing that is going to bite you is all the damn lead acid batteries. The customer cost is about $3000 to replace them. Link. As I pointed out a few days ago in a comment about electric cars, those costs can easily double or triple for those vehicles, which is why you see them disappearing off the streets as they hit the 3-5 year mark.

2b you are right about costs going down as experiential effects, scale economies and network effects kick in. I do think that the battery and the break in the recycling chain are going to continue to be major cost issues.

Posted by 11A5S 2006-07-20 08:08|| 2006-07-20 08:08|| Front Page Top

#9 2b - The reason for bringing the Hummer in is precisely to make the point dramatically. Its a form of jiu-jitsu, using your opponent's weight against them in a fight. The hybrid-lovers loudly, rudely, and publicly scorn people who drive Hummers and SUVs. Spiniella turns their own anti-SUV momentum against them by showing that in the long run simple, long-lasting cars built in large numbers are better for the consumer and the environment. Complex, short-lived cars transported around the world before entering service are bad for the consumer and the environment. In other words, the dimension that matters is not the one the lefties have focused on. Point made empirically and, for public relations purposes, dramatically.

Posted by Patrick">Patrick 2006-07-20 08:15|| 2006-07-20 08:15|| Front Page Top

#10 I will get 300,000 miles out of my Toyota product and I suspect most others can if they maintain their vehicles properly. Figuring out vehicle ownership cost on a cost per mile basis makes it clear that keeping that antique running one more year provides tremendous economic benefit. I'll even get 200,000+ out of a Chrysler mini-van.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-07-20 08:25|| 2006-07-20 08:25|| Front Page Top

#11 The other thing that is going to bite you is all the damn lead acid batteries. The customer cost is about $3000 to replace them.

And a true hazardous waste. So how about a recycling deposit on the little buggers just like soda bottles. Just to drive home [heh] the real cost for the appearance of 'caring'. Classic lefty auto, its about feelings, not about facts.

Posted by Wheatch Unasing5884 2006-07-20 08:38|| 2006-07-20 08:38|| Front Page Top

#12 And the cost of replacing/recycling all those little batteries are almost as much as a third of the car. The fact is, hybrids don't save money in the long run with a life of only 100,000 miles. A decent gas car with regular mantaince can get 300,000 and the secondary, thridary, fourthary markets still can pass on used cars just fine. The hybrid won't even come close to living that long. I guess if you lease one and turn it in quickly before the depriciation goes to hell it might be worth it, but I'll stick to my Civic.

Posted by DarthVader 2006-07-20 09:46|| 2006-07-20 09:46|| Front Page Top

#13 Sorry 2b, but you didn't read the article. It talks about energy costs, life of vehicle energy costs.

It rightly concludes a Hummer consumes less energy over it's life than a hybrid Honda Civic.

The fact that people who don't know shit from shinola claim is immaterial.

The world isn't built on wishful thinking. It's built on cold hard facts.

Posted by phil_b">phil_b 2006-07-20 10:48|| http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]">[http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/] 2006-07-20 10:48|| Front Page Top

#14 I read this article earlier this morning with no comments and was curious to see what people thought of it. I had my suspicions then, and it's pretty interesting to see that they're shared by most of you here.

It seems fair that hybrid technology and production aren't as cost effective as those of regular cars (and yes, those red herring Hummers, too). But all of that should change when automakers invest more into streamlining and localizing hybrid technology and production lines, which the writer claims isn't worth the energy, money and polution. He comes right out and says that it's the auto-industry that's losing money on each hybrid it makes ($6K per vehicle, if I remember correctly) - not the consumer. So you have to wonder who he's arguing this point for - the industry, or the consumer. Seemed fairly obvious to me then, as it does to most of you now. If the auto-industry would shift production away from large SUVs and towards hybrids, they'd eventually streamline the technology to the point where it's much more cost effective, eco-friendly and financially attainable than it is today. But the writer spelled it out for us already - current production methods are too lucrative for the auto-industry, and changing to adapt to a changing auto and energy market would cost the poor companies money. God forbid, right? So they make bogus, dismall claims about how the old way, as inefficient as it seems, is still more efficient than the new way, which by the way, is pretty damned smug (those smug lib-er-als). It's a perverted, self-serving circular argument.

Now, I'm not saying hybrids are the silver bullet to our energy and environmental problems - they're not. I happen to be on the market for a used car now, and I'm not looking at hybrids - their sticker prices are prohibitively high, they're much more intricate and require more service, and in the case of the Insight and Prius, they're pretty fugly, too. So I'll be buying a Civic, or a Corolla. It's certainly the more sensible thing to do vis-a-vis high gas prices.

But to suggest that buying up full-size SUVs, including the Hummer, makes more economic and environmental sense, both in the short and long term, is pretty damned ridiculous. The answer to our problems may not lie in hybrid technology for the average consumer, but it doesn't lie in your local Hummer dealership, either. I smell an auto-lobbyist in disguise.

Posted by Rugger2 2006-07-20 10:53|| 2006-07-20 10:53|| Front Page Top

#15 The battery issue will remain a killer for some time. If they remade the Graduate, the old dad would have to say "Batteries" instead of "Plastics".

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-07-20 11:19|| 2006-07-20 11:19|| Front Page Top

#16 You laid it out perfectly Rugger. Just for the record, I don't own and wouldn't buy a hybrid right now. They aren't there yet. But I know lots of people who have them and they were aware that they were spending the extra money. They bought either because they want to move hybrid technology along, or they bought for a status thing among their liberal buddies - they willing pay the extra to make a statement - like someone pays extra to drive a mercedes or any other statement car.

My heads not "exploding" on the hybrid issue, I think it's a funny article. But I don't like being fed high spun BS by the auto industry or anyone else. And that's what this is as Rugger spelled out so nicely.

Phil - you should go back and read my article before you say I don't know shit from shinola. It may be true for the hummer but my point was that he used the hummer because its one of the very few cars that lasts that long.

Like I said, the guy makes good points in his article. I agree with Patrick that it's good for effect perhaps to get attention - but it's not very meaningful in terms of getting us off foreign oil or ridding the middle east from controlling us with our oil. Heck - maybe the Suadis paid for that study. Might as well have.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-20 11:54|| 2006-07-20 11:54|| Front Page Top

#17 their oil

Posted by 2b 2006-07-20 11:54|| 2006-07-20 11:54|| Front Page Top

#18 Saudis ...sheesh.. I won't even dare proof read the rest of it.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-20 11:56|| 2006-07-20 11:56|| Front Page Top

#19 At some point someone will create a two-seater hybrid built of recycled plastic (like kids toys, I've seen a car built of the stuff). It'll be light and cheap and get good gas mileage. It'll be perfect for cites, bumper-to-bumper and if it has a reasonable suspension it'll be good for the third world. It'll suck for highway driving but there are always trade-offs.

High school and college kids will buy the disposable car because it fits their needs and scratches and such are unimportant on this type of plastic. Then they'll buy up when they graduate and the third world will be awash in the things just as they are with old school busses and Michael Jackson "Thriller" shirts.

It basically will take one of the small car companies, or a foreign one, to build such a beast. Possibly Japan, Korea or China as it will undercut sales of existing lines.

I have seen the future, I have spoken, I will now shut up.

Posted by rjschwarz 2006-07-20 11:59|| 2006-07-20 11:59|| Front Page Top

#20 He's actually a she. Click on her name and it brings up a bio and list of articles. She seems to like writing contrarian articles.

Posted by Cowboy is a compliment 2006-07-20 12:09|| 2006-07-20 12:09|| Front Page Top

#21 rjs, Europe made cars like that 30/40 years ago, one was called the Reliant. Fibre glass body as I recall. You could fix damaged body work yourself, Pics here.

And VW makes a 2 seater mini-car, quite popular in Germany.

Posted by phil_b">phil_b 2006-07-20 19:37|| http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]">[http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/] 2006-07-20 19:37|| Front Page Top

#22 Rugger, you appear to concede the authors main point that hybrids are very energy inneficient by claiming that in time they can be made more (suffiiciently) efficient. That may or may not be true, but it's immaterial to the situation today. And the Hummer comparison is made to point out how ludicrous the 'hybrids save energy' claim is.

Far and away the biggest problem in the whole energy debate is the rampant wishful thinking by those who like to think of themselves as Green.

Posted by phil_b">phil_b 2006-07-20 19:59|| http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]">[http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/] 2006-07-20 19:59|| Front Page Top

#23 at least the hybrids can clog the carpool lane at 45 mph...wait. that's not a plus, is it? I ran over one yesterday with my truck....seemed like it took forever to clear it from my treads

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-07-20 21:05|| 2006-07-20 21:05|| Front Page Top

#24 lol, Frank. Don't shoot, but I actually work for the EPA. You'd be surprised how many people there can't stand/make fun of the extreme greenie groups. Much like the ELF (Earth Lib. Front) who set fire to all those Hummer dealerships out west, not thinking about the irony of releasing TONS more toxins through burning plastics, tires, oils, etc. than what the Hummer itself produces.

Me? I drive a REGULAR Civic. My dad knew someone who bought one of the first Prius's. After 60k miles, the battery started showing signs of a lot of wear, she took it in and was quoted something like $10k to replace it! I thought to myself, just go buy a regular Civic, which can (also) get 300k miles, if you maintain for another $3k, and you won't be buying a new car every 60k miles. Heck, if you get a 5 year loan (and drive the nat'l average of 12k miles/year), you'd never loose paying that rascally car note.

And, by the way, quite the snarky comment on EPA's testing, which was recently exposed by Consumer Reports or something like them. Basically, the testing rules were set up in the 70's and they test under OPTIMAL conditions (like 60 mph, indoors, etc.). Of course, it no where comes close to representing what our current day traffic conditions are like. Someone here quoted the article, and if I'm remembering correctly, they said ACTUAL milage is anywhere betweeen 10 and 35% worse than the EPA estimates. Of course, I don't work in the Air Division at EPA, really have no clue about the rules/regs, but I wouldn't doubt if all that is true.

As an engineer, I've always thought "big picture," and a lot of the points she's making are true. Doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue hybrids/alternatives, just not that they're even close to being there yet.

Posted by BA 2006-07-20 22:01|| 2006-07-20 22:01|| Front Page Top

#25 By "big picture," I mean: You must add up all the energy INPUTS for manufacturing/transporting/selling, as well as the energy INPUTS during driving (and also the energy inputs to discard of the car once done with it), and I wouldn't doubt that the Hummer isn't that far a stretch to being more "efficient" than the hybrids, at least right now.

Posted by BA 2006-07-20 22:04|| 2006-07-20 22:04|| Front Page Top

#26 no offense meant BA. We all have jobs to do - I, for one, never lie, except to beautiful women about the dimensions of ...ahem....certain bodily parts. One reason why I compensate with a 4X4 Ford F150 truck Crewcab...sadly :-)

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-07-20 22:36|| 2006-07-20 22:36|| Front Page Top

23:58 JosephMendiola
23:45 Anonymoose
23:44 Oldspook
23:36 Oldspook
23:30 Bob Marley
23:26 Oldspook
23:05 BA
23:00 Baba Tutu
22:57 twobyfour
22:55 Baba Tutu
22:39 Capsu 78
22:36 Frank G
22:36 MSM enabler
22:34 BA
22:32 Islamist preacher Omar
22:28 WITT
22:25 mjh
22:24 Omar
22:09 WITT
22:04 BA
22:02 WITT
22:01 BA
22:00 Scott R
21:53 tu3031