Thread: Climate change scepticism - its sources and strategies

Am I the only one who thinks that the Prius was never intended to be the solution to automotive emissions?

I had always believed that it was just a research platform to develop some of the technology like regenerative braking.

Selling Priuses (Prii or whatever the plural is), was just a way of funding research and testing technology.

It was never intended to be anything more than a step towards a solution, It was not intended to be a solution in itself.

If that is the case, then all this criticism of the Prius is really irrelevant.

Originally Posted by vnx205

Am I the only one who thinks that the Prius was never intended to be the solution to automotive emissions?

I had always believed that it was just a research platform to develop some of the technology like regenerative braking.

Selling Priuses (Prii or whatever the plural is), was just a way of funding research and testing technology.

It was never intended to be anything more than a step towards a solution, It was not intended to be a solution in itself.

If that is the case, then all this criticism of the Prius is really irrelevant.

Exactly. It is basically a stopgap until we can develop something better. Already we have seen some technologies being applied to other vehicles - like non-hybrid minis which seamlessly stop and restart the engine at traffic lights to save fuel.

However, the current priuses are extremely economical for city driving (see my previous post).

Originally Posted by ghillie

The usual FUD. No references, unsubstantiated assertions, personal insults towards anyone with a different view. Blah, blah, blah - movin' on.

Yep ghillie, I just made it all up.

Thats like the mob in the USA that do the Dust To Dust analysis of different vehicle.

They examine every aspect of a given vehicle, from it’s inception through the development stage, on through production and then the fuel consumption while in use, then right through to the way the vehicles have to be handled when they are scrapped.

Their findings were that a Hummer has a more environmentally sound life span than the Prius does.

But what the hell, they must have made that up, because you say so.

Get your head out of the sand, the Prius is the end result of a very good PR con job.

Well, the market gives it's verdict.
There is/was one for sale in the Central Coast .
2006-or 7 low ks $17K or about 40% of the new price.
ORIX also had a low K one up here for AFAIR 21.9 down from 23.9 a while ago.

It seems to me that few private people buy them new except for the inner city "early adopters" and there will be lots around as the ex Government ones run out of lease.

They may be a good deal second hand but you would have to be very confident that the batteries are OK.

You should have seen the look I received when I suggested to the DG of DPI that he should use one to be driven around in in the city instead of his V8 Fairlane. You know, leading by example. He was happy for some of the scientists to drive them in the country though, and they were not happy,Jan.
Regard sPhilip A

Originally Posted by drivesafe

Thats like the mob in the USA that do the Dust To Dust analysis of different vehicle.

They examine every aspect of a given vehicle, from it’s inception through the development stage, on through production and then the fuel consumption while in use, then right through to the way the vehicles have to be handled when they are scrapped.

Their findings were that a Hummer has a more environmentally sound life span than the Prius does.

But what the hell, they must have made that up,

Yes, actually they did make it up.

I assume you are talking about the work by "CNW Marketing Research"

The study was later repeated by the Rocky Mountain Institute - a nonprofit education and research foundation (among others). All the independant studies have found that the CNW study was a load of BS and PR/marketing spin.

When the Rocky Mountains Institute did a life cycle analysis using the Hummer/Prius figures, they couldn't get the Prius to come out worse than the Hummer no matter how hard they jimmied the figures. Even when they made the energy to manufacture a Prius three times that to make a Hummer, the hybrid still came out ahead.

CSIRO's Chief Advisor Automotive Technology & Strategy, David Lamb, is a leader in hybrid technology, and his gripe with the CNW report is simple - "there's no explanation for their silly assertions". Their assumption that Hummers have much longer lifetimes and higher mileages than high-tech hybrids means CNW's results will always be skewed against the Prius.

In reality, says Lamb, "over their lifetimes hybrids are 20-30% more energy efficient than standard vehicles" - and significantly more efficient than uber-SUVs. They do take more energy to make, but they more than make up for that with energy savings during their low-fuel lifetimes.

So that's it for the energy side of things. And while the nickel mine in Canada they mentioned in the show really is your basic dead zone, that damage was done during the great acid rain era pre-1990s - now it should be as clean as any EPA abiding mine in North America.

Is a Hummer really better than a Prius??? - ABC Green at Work (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)


Maybe it is you who should take the blinkers off??? (With all respect of course Tim )

Originally Posted by PhilipA

Well, the market gives it's verdict.
There is/was one for sale in the Central Coast .
2006-or 7 low ks $17K or about 40% of the new price.
ORIX also had a low K one up here for AFAIR 21.9 down from 23.9 a while ago.

It seems to me that few private people buy them new except for the inner city "early adopters" and there will be lots around as the ex Government ones run out of lease.

They may be a good deal second hand but you would have to be very confident that the batteries are OK.

You should have seen the look I received when I suggested to the DG of DPI that he should use one to be driven around in in the city instead of his V8 Fairlane. You know, leading by example. He was happy for some of the scientists to drive them in the country though, and they were not happy,Jan.
Regard sPhilip A

I believe the battery pack has a 160000 km / 8 year warranty. A new battery pack is ~US$3000. (about the same cost as 1-2 new unit injectors for a newer landie).

Originally Posted by bee utey

Friends of mine bought a Prius in '02, managed to trade it last year just before "warning, transmission fault" became pemanent on the dash. All in all, a mostly useless car, no towbar allowed, cost more to run than their previous Corolla on gas. They were quoted $8K minimum for a fix. They ended up trading on a new Liberty and are tickled with it as it will take a bike beak for the kids. HIS car BTW is a '87 RR 4.2 stroker so he is welcome at my place any time.

My RFS brigade has been told if a Prius is in an accident we are not to rescue any trapped people but to stand 200 meters away and let it burn, because the fumes are so toxic that they will kill fire brigade members if we try to rescue people in it.

Like many rural brigades, our brigade does not carry breathing gear, if we did and had members trained to use it, we could rescue them, but like most rural brigades we cannot.

But similar for many other cars. If they have Dupont Viton products--many fan belts, suspension rubbers, etc. we must not go near them, and must not touch the burnt out wreck. When burnt and mixed with water this Viton turns to Hydrofluoric acid which will burn through glass. Get it on your arm and amputation of the arm is the cure.

So our brigade members must not go near Modern Burning Cars. But with Viton we can get near enough to hose the burning car, as long as we do not breath the fumes or have skin contact.

That is our brigades instruction from the Group Captain.

We need a few coroners inquests as to why we did not attempt to save the people, and then perhaps the use of these environmentally dangerous products will be remedied.

Originally Posted by JohnF

My RFS brigade has been told if a Prius is in an accident we are not to rescue any trapped people but to stand 200 meters away and let it burn, because the fumes are so toxic that they will kill fire brigade members if we try to rescue people in it.

Like many rural brigades, our brigade does not carry breathing gear, if we did and had members trained to use it, we could rescue them, but like most rural brigades we cannot.

But similar for many other cars. If they have Dupont Viton products--many fan belts, suspension rubbers, etc. we must not go near them, and must not touch the burnt out wreck. When burnt and mixed with water this Viton turns to Hydrofluoric acid which will burn through glass. Get it on your arm and amputation is the cure.

So our brigade members must not go near Modern Burning Cars. But with Viton we can get near enough to hose the burning car, as long as we do not breath the fumes or have skin contact.

That is our brigades instruction.

We need a few coroners inquests as to why we did not attempt to save the people, and then perhaps the situation will be remedied.

More BS and misinformation... (not on your behalf but the person who wrote the training manual)

If you come in contact with HF (hydrofluoric acid), the treatment is calcium gluconate gel. By the tyme you could ampurtate the affected body part, the person would probably be well on the way to kidney failure (as happened in a famous case in SA, but the person spilled 70% HF on themselves, and did not have CG gel handy. Nothing was amputated.)

Viton seals may produce HF at temperatures above 315oC, however viton seals are usually only used in things like injector pumps, automatic transmissions and arb lockers. We are talking tiny quantities in sealed components. the chance of getting close enough to a burning car to inhale HF would be infinitesimally small.

John - you know you could put some of the time you put into researching conspiracy theories to better use...