Somehow I don't think you could be convinced no matter what was said. The info is out there unless you just don't want to believe it.

 

If you have that info, please provide a link. Appreciated!

 

http://www.evworld.com/library/pacinst_hummerVprius.pdf

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/hand...pdf?sequence=1

 

great post, thx for sharing!

 

Thanks Jim for the links!

However, both articles only pointed out shortcomings of another paper which happens to share my point of view (btw I did not read "dust to dust" before and I might not agree with everything in that paper). Unfortunately, neither paper you cited did their own analysis on product full life cycle. It is easy to find flaws in other people's work, but it is much harder to do his/her own research and show solid data on their own to proof the point. It will be greatly appreciated if you can direct me to some trustworthy writeup on this subject that author did their own homework.

By the way, the MIT thesis (2008) for BS degree (Bachelor of Science in Engineering) looks awfully similar to the paper written by Dr. Peter H. Gleick from Pacific Institute in 2007. I wonder how MIT will evaluate Mr. Azu's thesis and his degree (if he got one) when that thesis was read side by side with Dr. Gleick's paper...

 

actually there was an actual article released by toyota saying that the pollution created from the making the batteries is worse than average cars.

http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...EM01/310189979

 

A few general pubs. on the comparisons of different technologies, and life cycle impacts.


http://web.mit.edu/sloan-auto-lab/re...uly%202008.pdf

http://ecopolproject.blogspot.com/20...uation-vs.html

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1021/es903729a

 

I've read some valid reasons here why the hybrid might be worth the extra money.......the least of which is as some have put it "exclusivity " if I want to feel special a Lexus RX isn't going to cut it I'm going to need a 1964 Aston Martin DB5 lol.

 

This is one of those situations that if you buy the strategy and thinking behind the hybrid concept (being green, saving fuel, greenhouse gases, etc) than there isn't anything anyone could say or prove that would change your mind, and the reverse is true as well. But that is why we have all the different kinds of vehicles on the road. Hybrid technology is not the future as it is too complex, demonstrabably not that much more efficient than a gas engine overall, and it is too Rube Goldberg-y to be the final solution. The next breakthrough in energy hasn't been discovered or invented yet, but in, say, 20-30 years I seriously doubt hybrids will be ruling the road. We'll be using just as much dino oil in far more efficient engines or another superior technology will have been perfected by then. The fact of the matter is liquid fossil fuels are superior to any form of power since it is cheap, energy dense, easily stored and transported, and has a vast distribution system already in place. Plus the world is awash in fossil fuels.....coal, natural gas, petroleum that can power the world for hundreds of years. (Forget the global warming schtick, that will blow over). So if the concept behind a hybrid appeals to you have fun with one and enjoy it. It's a novel way to power a vehicle for sure, just like the curly fry light bulb is novel. But no way to prove it is 'better'.

 

^^ very true. I dont think anybody on this earth agrees that hybrids are the solution to the fossil fuel/global warming problem. Even toyota agrees that it is a middle step -- a step in the right direction.

Lets step back for a minute and look at what hybrids have done. Its not just the fuel savings, but it has ingrained in our minds that being green is the new way to be cool. Hybrids are the message we leave future generations that things arent finite in this world and that we need to be as environmentally friendly as possible.

I recently read an article in the WSJ about Mercedes. If you notice their lineup, they have invested a lot of money in electric, hybrid, diesel, and hydrogen. They believe that not one technology can be universal to fit everyones' needs. Diesel engines are good for towing, hybrids are good for the city, etc etc. They dont know what will be the solution, but they are betting that one of those will be. In the process however, they have a nice lineup of more fuel efficient vehicles to cater to everyones' needs.

 

Thanks again Jim! You are really a resourceful man!

I find the conclusion about hybrid by MIT's Laboratory for Energy and the Environment very interesting:

"Over a time horizon of 20–30 years, the gasoline hybrid-electric vehicle (HEV) offers a
promising path to cost-effective reduction in fuel use. Relative to conventional spark-ignition and diesel engines, gasoline hybrids are projected to offer increasing efficiency gains and a narrowing price premium."

From what I understand, basically, current hybrid technology is nothing more than a grand social and technology experimentation. In US, we (tax payers) and hybrid owners are paying for this experiment, and no one really knows how it will end up with.

One question, does anyone know if Toyota makes money on the sales of current hybrid cars and SUVs?

 

Supposedy they make about $3,000 profit per Prius.

There is a lot of potential in the old internal cumbustion engine (ICE). Many strides have been made in the last twenty years or so but most of that efficiency has been put towards power rather than mileage. That will change and more surprises are coming in better injection systems, oils, rolling resistance of tires, and lighter, stronger materials. That technology is no where dead yet.

 

Let's put this in perspective. I don't think anyone buying a LEXUS hybrid is going to pour over some MIT analysis about how it's production is affecting the eviroment. It's an expensive luxury SUV that happens to have hybrid power. Lexus is using the purchasing power of their luxury brand to fuel hybrid tech accross the board. It helps bring down costs for the Toyota brand.

We bought because:
1) Torque that I like
2) The hybrid does excell where my wife drives it the most. Rush hour traffic.

Would the fuel savings offset the extra cost? I don't know. Used, we didn't pay that much more for the hybrid version. Maybe a few grand for the RX400h?

 

OK, let's look beyond environmental issue and get back to the original topic about the cost of hybrid. Seriously, I do not understand why hybrid will have higher resale value than its equivalent version that has ICE powered by gas only.

If I were buying a 10 year old car with 120K miles, I would not want to take a chance with a hybrid, since I do not know when the battery pack needs to be replaced, and that will cost the new owner a couple thousand dollars alone. For a well maintained 10-year old Toyota or Lexus with ICE, it should serve the new owner a couple years without major trouble. So the choice is quite clear to me, I won't pay a premium for a 10 year used hybrid, in fact I would expect 10-year old hybrid to cost less to compensate potential buyers for the big battery expense down the road.

 

You won't know when the tranny or engine will have to be replaced either.