It appears that the Toyota Prius isn't all that it is cracked up to be.
"Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius."
"When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis."
For the full article click here.
As a concerned citizen for the environment (notice extreme sarcasm) I demand that we boycott Toyota, stone and key all Prius on the road, and demand that more people drive Hummers!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
The article repeats lies that have spread over the last couple months. One of those lies from the article is that under the new EPA standards the Toyota Prius and Chevy Aveo are within spitting distance of each other. That is true if you make the comparison using the new EPA for the Prius and the old EPA for the Aveo. But if you use the new EPA for both (or the old EPA for both) then it would require a gold medal spitter to bridge the gap - 45 mpg for the Prius and I believe 27 mpg for the Aveo. That was clear deceit by the initial author and lack of research by the author of this piece.
Next the author says that a Prius causes more combined pollution than a Hummer which goes three times as far. That is taking a lousy study and bastardizing it completely to make the Prius look worse. The initial study which I have read says that a Hummer which goes 379,000 miles will cause less pollution per mile than a Prius which goes 100,000 miles. The idea of having the Hummer go go 3.8 times as far is that it makes the manufacturing costs of the Prius more prevalent. To help out the study uses nickel emissions pollution from Sudbury from the 70's, before the standards were greatly improved. Next how did the study come up with the life times for the two vehicles? In the case of the Hummer it estimated that the hummer has the ability to last 379,000 miles (that's over 600,000 kilometers). In the case of the Prius it used a different method, instead of estimating how long the car would last (which they admit that it is an amazing well put together car that could last several times as long as they giving it) it figured that environmentally conscious purchasers would want to upgrade to newer technology in a couple years (for instance a plug-in hybrid) and I guess they forgot that the car will be purchased as a used car and driven for many more years. I have been in a Prius taxi in Winnipeg which is closing in on 300,000 km without ever having a problem. That already doubles the study's Prius life. There have been other studies comparing the life cycle environmental impact of vehicles. Everyone of those studies gives a completely different result from this study.
ENOUGH OF THIS BACKDOOR COMMUNISM. RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT, THE REAL CONSERVATIVE! http://deanberryministries.net.
AND I'LL BET YOU THIS BLOG IS FUNDED BY THE JEWS (EDOMITES: THEY'RE THE SONS OF ESAU, NOT JACOB.)
The Conservative Mind, Right All the Time. Hmm. Are you are aware that the author of the article you cite published a follow up in the same publication admitting that the statistics he used to compare the Prius and Hummer are bogus? Then, being conservative I suppose, he went on to cite more fantastically incorrect facts in his retraction (like that you can buy a Tesla Roadster for 30k! Wow!) and bravely declared he would stand by his original opinion, facts or no facts. Yes, the conservative mind, I think you have an excellent example of it at work here. Carry on.
Anonymous...
I am aware that often the fixes for the environment do more harm than good such as the Prius and fluorescent light bulbs. If people were really concerned about saving the planet they would not switch to alternatives that cost more and do more harm. But it isn't really about saving the planet is it? It is all about being able to feel good about yourself and sleep at night. So if buying a Prius makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside then go right ahead and buy one. Just don't think for two minutes that by doing so you are impacting the planet in a positive way.
We've put a few of those energy-saver bulbs in. They simply don't last nearly as long as they claim, in fact I would say they die in a shorter time than the standard incandescent light-bulb. I would be interested to see if the heavier pricetag pays off with the energy bill?
Alex...
The other major issue with the new bulbs is that they contain mercury and must be recycled! This is rarely mentioned. I wonder how many people throw them out and they end up contaminating our landfills with mercury?
Christianity at it's heart is socialism. Why do you call yourself a christian and in the same breath say that your for a free market?
Anonymous said...
Christianity at it's heart is socialism. Why do you call yourself a christian and in the same breath say that your for a free market?
Judging by your statement you clearly have no understanding of Christianity or free market capitalism. The two are completely aligned. I am sort of interested to hear why you say they are incompatible.
interested to see why you think they are aligned... i dont necessarily think they're unalligned, but i certainly dont think they're alligned in any way... lotta tards on here by the way
Post a Comment