Sorry, but you've been fooled:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kenny
. . . according to CNW Marketing Research Inc.
The Bandon, Oregon, auto research firm says in a news release that it spent two years collecting data on the energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage. . . .
|
That dog don't hunt. We've already been through the report and as Toyota UK pointed out, every 'peer reviewed total energy paper states that 80% of the energy use occurs during operations, not manufacturing.' If you need the detailed problems, use the search function for "CNW" under the Journalism forum. But some of the obvious problems:
- every hybrid was given an arbitrary shorter life than their gas only equivalent although hybrids have less mechanical stress than the gas versions
- CNW claims if someone had the same model, hybrid and non-hybrid, the owner would choose to drive the more expensive to operate, lower mileage non-hybrid than the fuel efficient hybrid.
- every SUV was given an arbitrarily longer life than other gas models, in one case, nearly twice that of the other gas models (see Land Cruiser above.)
There are many more problems that others have identified and you can read them using the search function. In the meanwhile, I'm getting great mileage with complete confidence that CNW's false claims won't show up at the pump . . . or anywhere else.
Bob Wilson