I have nothing intellectual to say. However I found this to be really interesting. It's like putting all the water you have for a hike in one bottle, and then half way through the hike you find that the bottle has a hole in the bottom. (from a liberal standpoint)
Those evil Prius owners, driving their conspicuously, um, small cars--terrible! They ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Hummer owners are just your average Joe Sixpack, trying to get from point A to point B. They're not looking for attention. But they really *need* a Hummer because, you know, pot holes and such.
I was hoping your link would provide information that would counter what I linked to. It did not.
How do you think a Prius would have fared in those "tests"? My guess is it wouldn't have passed--and still would be more polluting than the Hummer! (if what was in my link was true)
...It seems to me that the kind of people who buy/drive a hybrid are interested in saving the environment, making a statement, and doing little else... is a part of this post . I like it, but I may be biased :)
Hey, you can't forget that if one bought the car, they would be contributing to hurting the environment... and that may lead to global warming!!!! we can't have that happen. :)
I'm suspicious of this analysis. The implication would be that the lifetime costs of a Prius (100K miles) come to $325,000. Who is paying for it? All of those elements--energy, materials, etc--are sold in market transactions under a price system. Toyota subsidizes the Prius to some extent, but certainly not to *that* extent...
You can tell from what I wrote that I, too, am somewhat suspicious. I've seen those numbers before, but I don't see any evidence or citations in the link.
When the Prius first came out, there was a drumbeat underneath all the accolades that the machine would only last for eight years, tops. The replacement cost for the battery cell would cost $5000, at which point it would be a negative investment so people would dump them on the market to get rid of the financial liability. Then the dealers wouldn't know what to charge for the cars as used due to the possibility of needing new batteries before it's lifespan was over. Batteries removed would pose huge toxic hazards since they are big, unwieldy and loaded with chemicals. Add to that the problems that firefighters have dealing with accidents and the possibility of chemical burns in addition to conventional gas fires and injuries and you have a recipe for another liberally inspired Big Old Mess.
10 comments:
I have nothing intellectual to say. However I found this to be really interesting. It's like putting all the water you have for a hike in one bottle, and then half way through the hike you find that the bottle has a hole in the bottom. (from a liberal standpoint)
Or worse, there's no hole in the bottle--but someone pee-peed in it.
Oh, my!
That being said...
...I think I'll get the Hummer. Like the commercial says, I gotta get my girl on.:) The Prius just isn't diva.
Those evil Prius owners, driving their conspicuously, um, small cars--terrible! They ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Hummer owners are just your average Joe Sixpack, trying to get from point A to point B. They're not looking for attention. But they really *need* a Hummer because, you know, pot holes and such.
Anyway,
Hummers vs. The Real World.
Check into reality.
You call that reality?
I was hoping your link would provide information that would counter what I linked to. It did not.
How do you think a Prius would have fared in those "tests"? My guess is it wouldn't have passed--and still would be more polluting than the Hummer! (if what was in my link was true)
...It seems to me that the kind of people who buy/drive a hybrid are interested in saving the environment, making a statement, and doing little else... is a part of this post . I like it, but I may be biased :)
e
Hey, you can't forget that if one bought the car, they would be contributing to hurting the environment... and that may lead to global warming!!!! we can't have that happen. :)
I'm suspicious of this analysis. The implication would be that the lifetime costs of a Prius (100K miles) come to $325,000. Who is paying for it? All of those elements--energy, materials, etc--are sold in market transactions under a price system. Toyota subsidizes the Prius to some extent, but certainly not to *that* extent...
You can tell from what I wrote that I, too, am somewhat suspicious. I've seen those numbers before, but I don't see any evidence or citations in the link.
When the Prius first came out, there was a drumbeat underneath all the accolades that the machine would only last for eight years, tops. The replacement cost for the battery cell would cost $5000, at which point it would be a negative investment so people would dump them on the market to get rid of the financial liability. Then the dealers wouldn't know what to charge for the cars as used due to the possibility of needing new batteries before it's lifespan was over. Batteries removed would pose huge toxic hazards since they are big, unwieldy and loaded with chemicals. Add to that the problems that firefighters have dealing with accidents and the possibility of chemical burns in addition to conventional gas fires and injuries and you have a recipe for another liberally inspired Big Old Mess.
Post a Comment