How environmentally friendly is a Prius
07-05-2011, 07:32 AM
#22
UK Moderator
07-05-2011, 07:55 AM
#23
I suspect that the Toyota chart does not include the CO2 emissions caused by manufacturing the raw materials in the first place.
Why spoil a good bar chart with the truth?
07-05-2011, 08:08 AM
#24
UK Moderator
Originally Posted by lovegroova' timestamp='1309859777' post='20746839
That's not a comparison really worth doing, though. If someone's going to buy a new car, then the only fair way to make the comparison is with a new car.
I suspect that the Toyota chart does not include the CO2 emissions caused by manufacturing the raw materials in the first place.
Why spoil a good bar chart with the truth?
The Toyota chart does apparently contain the raw materials elements. See post #12
07-05-2011, 09:07 AM
#25
carbon footprint of going to all 4 corners of the earth to make it cant look good. also dont the batteries need to get replaced frequently? The disposal has got to be worse for the environment than a egular car.
07-05-2011, 09:53 AM
#26
They DO mention mining, and as stated, the brochure is far more factual than the graph.
It's merely that it's an incredibly complex measure and the AGW 'fact' has ensured that one must be very cautious about such stuff being based upon assumptions that later turn out to be hogwash.
As posted earlier, since Toyota are no doubt comparing it to their own 2.0 car, such irregularities are evened out.
The replacement battery thing can also be overstated - imagine the energy required to make a replacement HP Diesel pump & turbo, or to decoke a fouled DI gas engine regularly, for example.
It's merely that it's an incredibly complex measure and the AGW 'fact' has ensured that one must be very cautious about such stuff being based upon assumptions that later turn out to be hogwash.
As posted earlier, since Toyota are no doubt comparing it to their own 2.0 car, such irregularities are evened out.
The replacement battery thing can also be overstated - imagine the energy required to make a replacement HP Diesel pump & turbo, or to decoke a fouled DI gas engine regularly, for example.
07-05-2011, 10:20 AM
#27
Banned
They DO mention mining, and as stated, the brochure is far more factual than the graph.
It's merely that it's an incredibly complex measure and the AGW 'fact' has ensured that one must be very cautious about such stuff being based upon assumptions that later turn out to be hogwash.
As posted earlier, since Toyota are no doubt comparing it to their own 2.0 car, such irregularities are evened out.
The replacement battery thing can also be overstated - imagine the energy required to make a replacement HP Diesel pump & turbo, or to decoke a fouled DI gas engine regularly, for example.
It's merely that it's an incredibly complex measure and the AGW 'fact' has ensured that one must be very cautious about such stuff being based upon assumptions that later turn out to be hogwash.
As posted earlier, since Toyota are no doubt comparing it to their own 2.0 car, such irregularities are evened out.
The replacement battery thing can also be overstated - imagine the energy required to make a replacement HP Diesel pump & turbo, or to decoke a fouled DI gas engine regularly, for example.
I tear these bloody things to pieces most weeks - they are usually presented by some twenty something twat via Powerpoint
07-05-2011, 12:02 PM
#28
Originally Posted by Nick Graves' timestamp='1309888434' post='20748058
They DO mention mining, and as stated, the brochure is far more factual than the graph.
It's merely that it's an incredibly complex measure and the AGW 'fact' has ensured that one must be very cautious about such stuff being based upon assumptions that later turn out to be hogwash.
As posted earlier, since Toyota are no doubt comparing it to their own 2.0 car, such irregularities are evened out.
The replacement battery thing can also be overstated - imagine the energy required to make a replacement HP Diesel pump & turbo, or to decoke a fouled DI gas engine regularly, for example.
It's merely that it's an incredibly complex measure and the AGW 'fact' has ensured that one must be very cautious about such stuff being based upon assumptions that later turn out to be hogwash.
As posted earlier, since Toyota are no doubt comparing it to their own 2.0 car, such irregularities are evened out.
The replacement battery thing can also be overstated - imagine the energy required to make a replacement HP Diesel pump & turbo, or to decoke a fouled DI gas engine regularly, for example.
I tear these bloody things to pieces most weeks - they are usually presented by some twenty something twat via Powerpoint
Isn't that the truth! Probably why I boiled up over the use of CO[sub]2[/sub] s as if it were a legitimate SI unit.
I realise I'm a bit unusual in enjoying reading dry technical papers from SAE or whatever, but all this simpleton stuff with cliche flowers or babies or smiley minorities all over it just makes me all Tourette's.
Honestly; it'd be like if I had a website & used my avatar as statistical proof of why that makes my practice better than all the other beancountancy firms. I'd be swamped with business, probably and no-one would see the parody.
07-06-2011, 05:22 AM
#29
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: County Wicklow
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whenever I see this argument, rarely do people mention the environmental benefit within towns or cities. Even if there is no difference in total CO2 over the manufacturing and ownership period, then surely not having to breathe noxious diesel (and I include modern diesels in this statement) fumes and petrol fumes from older cars with no catalytic converters is something worth striving for.
As a regular pedestrian as well as car owner, I would be much happier for all the CO2 and other toxic stuff to be produced at the factory rather than pumped out of the tail of cars into my lungs as I walk down the street.
Anyone agree?
As a regular pedestrian as well as car owner, I would be much happier for all the CO2 and other toxic stuff to be produced at the factory rather than pumped out of the tail of cars into my lungs as I walk down the street.
Anyone agree?
07-06-2011, 05:47 AM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: sideways with an OWL!
Posts: 13,579
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
No, because co2 us pretty irrelevant to pedestrians. It's all the other stuff you need to care about.
Most electronics create some pretty nasty pollutants during manufacturing. I'd be interested to see those figures. Joules is a reasonable measure, but a better one would be the differential volumes of all the pollutants. Co2 is the least of our worries.
Most electronics create some pretty nasty pollutants during manufacturing. I'd be interested to see those figures. Joules is a reasonable measure, but a better one would be the differential volumes of all the pollutants. Co2 is the least of our worries.