Used Cars vs. Hybrids: What's greener?

This is to once again generate discussion among the Hybrid haters on this board. I know there is already a thread that was long ago derailed... http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/hybridelectric-vs-gas-discussion/43496/page1/

Anyway: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1072003_a-little-math-lesson-are-used-cars-greener-than-hybrids

According to M.A. Weiss et al., in their 2000 report from the MIT Energy Laboratory, On the Road in 2020: A Lifecycle Analysis of New Automotive Technologies, fully 75 percent of a vehicle’s lifetime carbon emissions come from the fuel it burns over its lifetime, with another 19 percent coming from the production of that fuel. Beyond that, the energy used to extract raw materials for the vehicle adds 4 percent more. A relatively tiny 2 percent of the vehicle's lifetime carbon footprint is due to manufacturing and assembly.

I would like to say that it's not ALL about CO2. Virtually all hybrids I'm aware of, outside of the Volt, are also PZEV in emissions. So there's also a debate on "other" gas emissions when considering the merits/demerits of hybrids.

(I don't know what is put out for hybrids vs. conventional, but I would say that the additional battery is the primary difference in pollution- engine, body, paint, all generally the same. Maybe some more for the larger electric motor, but I don't know)

CO2 is nice to talk about, but with out control over emissions that are harmful to people on a much shorter time frame, CO2 is kind of academic.

That's terrible math.

They only counted the gasoline burned. The 2012 Prius is a plug-in. 63% of the test drive was completed in electric mode.

48.7% of the nation's electricity in the grid is generated by COAL. In other words, 30.7% of the energy they consumed was generated by coal, not gasoline.

Over 90% of the nation's electricity generated is from coal, nuclear, and natural gas.

There are life cycle emissions that are generated at the electric generating plants that they are "overlooking".

Do you have any idea how many pollutants are in a battery for those hybrids? Bet it would be hard to find out.

How's this for green. Paid 1000 for a 30 mpg car. Thats green in my pocket. Thats the green that counts on GRM.

N Sperlo wrote: Do you have any idea how many pollutants are in a battery for those hybrids? Bet it would be hard to find out.

the cynic in me tells me that since the data is THAT hard to find, then it's probably very bad news.

But there's no real data in that opinion.

I'm not a hybrid proponent, or hater. But I think we all know how stron lobbyists are and that they are not concerned with truth and what's best for us all, just them. The gubment is pushing this stuff, that alone makes me give it the stink-eye.
One day I'll own a hybrid, when I do it'll be a huge back-step in dollars-per-mile for me.

SVreX wrote: That's terrible math. They only counted the gasoline burned. The 2012 Prius is a plug-in. 63% of the test drive was completed in electric mode. 48.7% of the nation's electricity in the grid is generated by COAL. In other words, 30.7% of the energy they consumed was generated by coal, not gasoline. Over 90% of the nation's electricity generated is from coal, nuclear, and natural gas. There are life cycle emissions that are generated at the electric generating plants that they are "overlooking".

Yes. If only the greenies would acknowlegde this!

N Sperlo wrote: How's this for green. Paid 1000 for a 30 mpg car. Thats green in my pocket. Thats the green that counts on GRM.

Agreed.

saw a great bumper sticker in W. Virginia a few years ago.

"if you don't like coal power plants, turn off your lights"

SVreX wrote: That's terrible math. They only counted the gasoline burned. The 2012 Prius is a plug-in. 63% of the test drive was completed in electric mode. 48.7% of the nation's electricity in the grid is generated by COAL. In other words, 30.7% of the energy they consumed was generated by coal, not gasoline. Over 90% of the nation's electricity generated is from coal, nuclear, and natural gas. There are life cycle emissions that are generated at the electric generating plants that they are "overlooking".

The Prius Plug-in plugs in. The others do not.

Also, the north east gets a lot of hydro electric power.

There's also the fact that hybrid drivers are helping to subsidize the R&D that will eventually pave the way for pure electrics, so that's nice. I really am happy that people are buying them. Not my cuppa, of course...

As for the "lithium batteries make them worse than gas engines" thing, I'm pretty sure I read a very solid debunking of that myth. The original anti-hybrid study was done by some vaguely oil-money-funded researcher who turned out to have been predictably biased...

DaveEstey wrote:

SVreX wrote: That's terrible math. They only counted the gasoline burned. The 2012 Prius is a plug-in. 63% of the test drive was completed in electric mode. 48.7% of the nation's electricity in the grid is generated by COAL. In other words, 30.7% of the energy they consumed was generated by coal, not gasoline. Over 90% of the nation's electricity generated is from coal, nuclear, and natural gas. There are life cycle emissions that are generated at the electric generating plants that they are "overlooking".

The Prius Plug-in plugs in. The others do not. Also, the north east gets a lot of hydro electric power.

The link was specifically a review of a 2012 Prius Hybrid.

ppddppdd wrote: There's also the fact that hybrid drivers are helping to subsidize the R&D that will eventually pave the way for pure electrics, so that's nice.

Yep. So we can all have coal fired cars. Now THERE'S a green idea.

It is dishonest to discuss the life cycle energy demands of a vehicle and fail to recognize the fuel sources used indirectly when dealing with electrics.

ppddppdd wrote: As for the "lithium batteries make them worse than gas engines" thing, I'm pretty sure I read a very solid debunking of that myth. The original anti-hybrid study was done by some vaguely oil-money-funded researcher who turned out to have been predictably biased...

I don't doubt that for a second. I also don't doubt that the studies that make hybrids seem like the answer to everything are funded by the coal folks.

I think what bothers me about hybrids is that the materials for most of the batteries used today are mined in countries that are even WORSE, as far as political stability, than the Middle East. China has already threatened to cut off exports of certain heavy or rare earth minerals if the U.S. keeps "bullying" them about the valuation of their currency. AND, this country embraced hybrids without putting in place a means to recycle the batteries. In Japan, they pretty much recycle EVERYTHING...and as a "visitor" on one of their joint defense military bases, I can tell you they are VERY picky about the whole issue of recycling. Example? You don't separate the recycleables by material....they let it sit outside your garbage collection point.

Dead horse vs hybrid threads: which is beaten harder?

You can opt into buying specific types of electricity.

And please don't anyone say "you're just buying coal electrons at wind/solar prices."

In reply to Taiden:

You're just buying coal electrons at wind/solar prices.

Yeah, but it won't change the production rates.

That's sort of like "lottery money goes to education". It may be true, but it won't increase the education spending, just move money around in the general funds.

It may make some people feel good, but it won't change the fact that we generate dirty electricity. At least not unless huge numbers of buyers start doing it (which is pretty unlikely).

Electricity is (for the most part) a giant barrel of electrons that we all have the ability to draw from.

If you pay for coal electricity, you are paying for coal to be added to the barrel.

If you pay for wind electricity, you are paying for wind to be added to the barrel.

But you still draw from the giant cluster berkeley of electricity.

I'm all for backing up the old Tesla idea, and not the roadster. Yes, I truly think its possible.

alfadriver wrote: I would like to say that it's not ALL about CO2.

I would like to say that this whole debate has NOTHING to do with what comes out of a tailpipe.

I get so tired of this debate. We dig up dead carbon from miles under the biosphere, burn it, and then try to control what ends up IN the biosphere with catalysts, EGR valves, and urea injectors. For cripes sake, we have more carbon IN the biosphere than we do in fossil fuels. Why don't we look at it that way?

We keep polluting our biosphere with fossil fuels. Regulating what comes out of the tailpipe is simply a delay. We're still taking carbon from miles below the earth and dumping it into the atmosphere. Why not start using the carbon we already have up here and using THAT instead of digging for it?

SVreX wrote:

ppddppdd wrote: There's also the fact that hybrid drivers are helping to subsidize the R&D that will eventually pave the way for pure electrics, so that's nice.

Yep. So we can all have coal fired cars. Now THERE'S a green idea. It is dishonest to discuss the life cycle energy demands of a vehicle and fail to recognize the fuel sources used indirectly when dealing with electrics.

True, and while we need to account for coal, it would also be dishonest to assume we would get more energy/CO2 efficient if we went from using coal power plants to gasoline engines.

In other words, while coal is polluting for a powerplant, almost any powerplant is more efficient than the millions of small motors you'd need to replace them.

Most of this discussion seems better aimed at pure electrics like the Leaf than hybrids, few of which are plug-in. (Yes, I know that the Volt exists)

curtis73 wrote: We keep polluting our biosphere with fossil fuels. Regulating what comes out of the tailpipe is simply a delay. We're still taking carbon from miles below the earth and dumping it into the atmosphere. Why not start using the carbon we already have up here and using THAT instead of digging for it?

Well put. That is the goal of biofuels - everything from alcohols to biodiesel to SVO - but I don't expect that to scale well with current technology. Research is needed if we're going to change how we do things.

FWIW, right now, what Dr. Boost is doing with his greasecar is probably the best thing for CO2 emissions. (...but not for particulate emissions.) Every gallon of oil he burns puts CO2 into the atmosphere....but it is CO2 that was taken out of the atmosphere a few months ago by plants. He's just putting it back there.

Unfortunately, there's not enough waste veggie oil to power everything. I expect that there will be a bifurcation/fragmentation of the market over the next few decades. When people started driving cars, gas, steam, diesel, and electric were all viable fuel sources. I think we'll run through a similar period for a while before settling on a new fuel source that everyone wants to use. There will be some crazy ideas for a while

mguar:

very "interesting" answers(?) to my reasons for not liking hybrids.

"Most batteries will last 20 years because they are warrantied for 10 and your car typically last twice as long as it's warrantied for."

Most cars have a 50K-60K warranty, some don't. That is no "guarantee" they will last 100k. A lot has to do with how it is built and how it is maintained. My experience with batteries in general? Some BRANDS of batteries last longer than others and that includes re-chargeable batteries.

"They aren't like lead-acid batteries that are DONE in 5 years."

No they aren't...there is a system for re-cycling lead-acid batteries, is there one for the batteries in a hybrid?

By the way, I don't know whether you have ever noticed, as a battery "ages" it loses it's ability to hold a charge. Sure, the battery may last for 10 years, but will it performe the same in your car on day ! as it will on day 3,650?

How many zillion of cell phone batteries are out there already? Not sure what that is supposed to rebut. I don't dispute that hybrids are viable, just that there are better ideas for power.

Don't worry there are methods to deal with dead batteries. There is money to be made dealing with them. When is the last time you tried to "dispose/re-cycle a bunch of used up flashlight batteries? I bet up tossed them in the trash...because no one that I know of accepts them like they do...oh, say, an empty soda bottle or a bag of aluminum cans.

Finally, an online news source (AutoWeek.com) reports that Chevy dealers are being coerced by GM to take more Chevy Volts. Problem? No one is buying them and it costs a dealer a large amount of money to keep them (or any unsaleable vehicles) in stock. No one wants them. They cost too much. Folks want to buy a cheap hybrid so they can feel good without much pain.