I'm curious to know if there are ANY hybrid articles published in peer reviewed journals? If you know of any I'd be interested.

Thanks

My impression from reading the news article is that they may have been considering R&D costs. However, I would argue that those costs are more properly considered an investment which will result in lower costs (energy usage) in the future.

I (like most on this thread) am quite skeptical that an SUV really costs less energy than a hybrid.

But I do think it's fair to consider total cost in dollars as an approximation of total energy usage. Dollars are just abstractions of resources. Give or take a fudge factor, "spending" == "resource depletion". That's why it's so vitally important that we develop technology to use truly renewable resources -- or accept a decline in our material standard of living.

It also means that, in the short term, I probably would have contributed more to the environment by buying an old used car with a lower TCO, as opposed to my shiny new hybrid. But I'm taking the longer view and hoping that my actions will encourage the development of sustainable energy technologies. That, and I just think hybrids are cool.

-Brian

Something occured to me.

Is the article really weighing development costs? I don't mean that in some superfiiscal sense, I mean that quite literally. Would it not stand to reason, that if you're going to do a vehicle fleet cost in terms of development, testing, construction, maintenance, and end time (recycling and whatnot) energy uses that every succeeding model year be drastically cheaper than the preceding one for every vehicular make? For example, the first year of the Ford Escape required much more effort in every resource. A new design, new tools, extensive testing, marketing, etc, all that the following years didn't need? Just some slight updating or changes? Then, you'd think, logically then, there would be no way the FEH could cost more than say the H3 to develop. (Yes, I'm chosing 2 brands that vastly illustrate my example.) The 2006 didn't require much that the 2005 production didn't already include. And even that year was based on an older conventional Escape, so in theory, 2006 really only required the new options, and actual factory production costs. Everything else had already been "paid" for in development by the preceding FEHs and the preceding Escapes. On the other hand, the H3 required essentially starting from scratch, as a new vehicle, from design to tooling, to construction, every element had to be put into order anew. So, it would be logically improbable to say the the FEH (Or any other "modified" hybrid [That is, one that has a non-hybrid version preceding it]) cost more than the H3, or any other new SUV. (Seems completely redesigned is a bad thing in this arguement.) In which case, all a vehicle needs for low energy usage for a vehicle model is to be enduring!

Or, are we lumping all the makes and models together? Which creates more sticky wickets, so to say. For the FEH, for example, do we use all the FEH model years together in one "lump sum"? Or do we lump all the Ford Escape costs together? If so, then we can't compare any similar vehicles, as they're the same. FEH to Ford Escape, HCH to Honda Civic, etc., since they all have the same originating design! Then, if we say just the extra hybrid development, you run into the contrast between original and mated designs. For example, the Prius, and say the FEH. The Prius was developed from scratch, while the FEH used all the development that the Escape had done already, making it rather logical to conclude that the FEH required less overall than the Prius did to develop.

Any way you look at it, it does make the articles conclusion a bit hard to swallow, and the true "total energy usage" rather difficult to find.

First 4WD Hypermiler

Have you read the FEH FAQ?

Live in Michigan? Let it be known in Michigan Roll Call

Read My Automotive Blog at Rich Rambles

This is pretty obvious. Cell phone batteries weigh a few ounces. Hybrid vehicle batteries weigh in the order of hundreds of pounds. Additionally, the reason this is brought up in the context of hybrids is that hybrid owners aim to help save the environment, which is the oppostive what the are doing *with respect to product life cycle* With cell phones, there is no such counterpoint.

To go off on a bit of a tangent, I question whether or not hybrid technolgy can be applied to a large portion of the world's vehicle fleet. Are there enough reserves of precious metals to make batteries for hundreds of millions of vehicles? I don't know enough to make an informed decision yes or no, but it's something to consider. I feel you have to look at the entire life cycle -cradle to grave- of the product. The only effects you will perceive will be during ownership of the vehicle, you will not witness the energy being expended during mining, casting, forging, assembly, dismantling, recycling, disposal, etc. Personally, my tentative decision is to buy a small, efficient car that is not a hybrid. For example, when considering a Honda Fit vs. a HCH, the fuel savings during the life of the HCH may not outweigh the decresed energy use during the life of the car. I'm not choosing between an H2 and an Insight.

Here is where I need to cry foul. Yes cell phone packs are much smaller and lighter, but in terms of quantity, there is absolutely no comparison. So a 100 lb pack is 1600 ounces - at 2 oz per phone, that's 800 cell phones per hybrid. So how many cell phones are there compared to hybrids? Even at an 800-1 ratio it's no comparison. So where are the cell-phone studies that show the damage that will do? Why do hybrid owners have to shoulder the bad rap alone on this?

*** Retired after 65,000 outstanding miles ***

One might argue that complexity in autos uses more resources. That might suggest we build cars the way we did in the 1960's. Something else to ponder...

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

Thanks to tim and bwilson4web and others for welcoming me. I did my homework and now know more about what "SMUG" means. And I did go listen to the South Park episode about hybrids which was funny and horrifying at the same time (the self-recognition was the horrifying part).

Several people have touched on this: One aspect of lifecycle cost of a vehicle (whether expressed in energy units or dollars) is the size of the vehicle. Even though I know many smaller cars have lower lifecycle costs than my mid-size car, I need a mid-size car to do the things I need to do in my life. So cost comparisons seem most useful within a size class of cars. Then there is a separate issue of driving a vehicle larger than you really need. Some reasons may justify this (safety, comfort) and some reasons are weaker (status symbol).

This has been been a very interesting discussion.

We like you!

We have a number of forums filled with experienced hybrid owners and drivers. For technical questions about a particular vehicle, real world experience, these are the places to post a question or 'listen to the pulse.'

Our family also has a mixed vehicle requirement: (1) daily, 10 mile commute, and (2) weekend Holly, my wife, trips. I'd looked hard at a Ford Escape because the tow capabilities would allow us to bring a small trailer along on trips. Instead, we saved $10k buying a Prius which lacks a towing capability. But I'm thinking about making my own tow kit for a utility trailer . . . an introduction about my Prius hobby:

http://hiwaay.net/~bzwilson/prius/
http://hiwaay.net/~bzwilson/prius/pri_T_cold.html
http://hiwaay.net/~bzwilson/prius/priups.html

You've come to the right place to get fact based answers along with some 'noise.' Still, the fact and experience based postings out weight the 'noise.'

As you 'kick the tires,' enjoy and if you decide to buy, consider using the vehicle database (click the "Compare" tab) to get an idea of what folks are getting. Some of the folks on the high side of the mileage can give excellent advice on how to get simular performance.

If you decide to go diesel or other technology, you might check some of the Yahoo groups out. There are no guarantees but the Prius Technical group has been very helpful.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

This article does not suprise me. Some people seem to live their lives trying to find reasons against hybrid vehicles.
The media is flooded with such print.
If I were a conspiracist my mind could go wild.
I've never read anywhere (Other than actual hybrid owners) what some of these cars are capable of regarding MPG (Conserving energy if you will)

Efficient drivers do it better.
1003 miles a tank personal record. 74MPG calculated. HCH1 CVT

Hi folks,

I sent this email (English errors and all) to the author of the study and invited him to reply here. We'll see:

Hi Art Spinella,

Some of us in the "GreenHybrid.com" discussion group have been chatting about your report. We had noticed the report "cost per mile" doesn't seem to come close to either our individual or the Dept. of Energy 'Freedom Car' reports on cost per mile. As I read more about your service, I got the impression the intended target was not indiviiduals but other clients. So I thought I'd send a note and ask a few questions. By all means, feel free to go to "www.green.hybrid.com" and answer directly in the "Hybrid Topicis > General Forum" thread titled "hybrid total energy usage greater than SUVs??".

We noticed you used units of "dollars/mile" rather than BTUs. Unfortunately, the ordinary methods of calculating the per mile cost of a hybrid also uses "dollars/mile." Needless to say, this is confusing to us. Is there some way to seperate the expense a buyer sees from expenses that preceed the purchase and follow the sale?

For example, I bought my 03 Prius used for $17,300. Based upon the NADA Blue book value change and fuel expenses, it is running about $0.15/mile. I have not include insurance but did include maintenance (so far, just oil changes.) But this is at least an order of magnitude different from your numbers. If the expenses outside of the boundry an ordinary owner driver where identifieid, it would make the report more understandable.

The spreadsheet example for the Honda Civic list just relative percentages instead of "dollar" amounts. Granted, we could pickup your "dollar/mile" and do the math but why change to percentages in the example rather than show the "dollar/mile" values?

I drive a Prius NHW11, the closest vehicle is a Toyota Echo but I've noticed _Consumer Reports_ used the Corolla. Which car did or would you compare the Prius to? BTW, we have a 2001 Echo and a 2003 Prius and the engine, cabin and vehicle characteristics are very close.

If I understand your business model, the full report is available for a fee. It isn't clear what that would be but I get the impression it is in the $1,000 range. What value would an individual gain by paying $1,000 for your report? Is it really designed for an individual car buyer?

Recently _Consumer Reports_ April 2006 published a report "Hybrid Hype?" and cited ". . . according to our analysis of data from Vincentric, a company that complies ownership costs for some 1,800 vehicle configurations per model year." (pp. 21). Yet Vincentric had recommended hybrids in January as the most cost effective vehicle for fleet owners. Are your analysis complementary to Vincentric or so far apart that no comparison of the results are possible? Was Vincentric wrong to recommend hybrids?

BTW, _Consumer Reports_ issued a retraction after noting some minor math errors had resulted in errors for the Prius and Honda Civic hybrids. It happens and no one thinks the worse.

Like I said, we've been discussing the report in "GreenHybrid.com." Some folks are dismissing it out of hand and others, like me, remain curious. Feel free to scan the discussion and post there or anyway you wish. One of the things I like about "GreenHybrid.com" is the mileage database folks maintain (See the "Compare" tab.) After six months, I'm getting 49.4 MPG and we're headed into warm weather when mileage typically improves.

Thanks,
Bob Wilson

I figured the e-mail was free and the questions, hopefully clear enough. As for whether Art will reply, we'll see.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.