Clean diesel vs Hybrid research paper complete with sources of info

If YOU want to be taken seriously, you should look into things before call somebody out (isn;t that what you have been screaming this whole time)

 

Nah, I find it more fun to go with my gut and call you out first and see where the cards fall.

Now do you have something useful to contribute to this forum or are you going to sit here and :cheer2: for your buddies?

 

They do love to thank each other and stroke one another a lot, do't they???

 

I did post it originally yesterday but did not post this one.

I am not much for stroking others.

 

The most obvious problem with the report is the use of outdated Prius information. The tax credit is long gone and the new model is clearly more efficient. Some of us never had any of those mentioned privledges either.

Refering to "green" as meeting the 50-state criteria is disingenous. That's the dirtiest a vehicle is allowed to be. Much cleaner are the SULEV and PZEV ratings, which the traditional diesel vehicles don't deliver. In fact, biodiesel actually increases NOx emissions.

As for comparing the base price of Jetta TDI to the Touring model of Prius along with focusing on highway MPG rather than combined, that was just plain wrong.

I can't wait for winter to set in. It's very exciting collecting real-world data firsthand, seeing the efficiency improvements the 2010 Prius provides. Of course, the 47.7 MPG lifetime average from my Iconic Prius was hardly anything to complain about here in Minnesota... nor something the non-hybrid diesels could compete with.
.

 

Not true. Those of us who were here last night know you are lying and you are stroking all your buddies.

 

This report is out of date by 16 months:

• The 2009 Jetta TDI compared to 2010 Prius
• 40.4 (16 users,) 40.3 MPG (26 users) < 51.0 MPG (57 users)
• $1,235, $1,273 annual fuel costs > $801 Prius fuel costs

• compact car, Jetta TDI sedan < middle size car, the Prius
• 107 ft.{3}, Jetta TDI sedan < 116 ft.{3}, the Prius (thanks Chris Hogan)

So with the Prius compared to the Jetta TDI, we get 8% more car and pay ~35% less for fuel, about one car payment per year ... every year. I don't have to pay income tax on the money not spent for fuel, ~28% additional income tax penalty.

I do sometimes recommend the Jetta TDI:

To my competition.
​

Bob Wilson

 

Guess he's gonna have to rewrite his paper if he's trying to recommend a greener car...oh wait- that's not what he's trying to do!

 

Since we are comparing emissions and costs on the Prius and VW......

I added in a 2000 Jetta TDi because someone said buying a used $3,000 TDi would be greener. Well depends on how much you plan on driving the dirty beast....

http://www.driveclean.ca.gov/search...00&make3=Volkswagen&model3=JETTA+TDI&x=57&y=9

 

Ryan, if you are truly interested in accuracty of the data you used in part to form your opinion you may do better to simply ignore the insulting posts.
By simply responding to the posts that have shown information you used as resources to be incorrect we can get a much more productive discussion going?

For example, this response:

This basically brings into question why the prius's use of 30 pounds of nickle for the battery would be a bad thing compared to most other vehicles.

Jay's responses have been very well laid out and detailed. I would encourage you to consider his points. But if you only want to focus on one at a time, Cwerdna's above is a good one to start with.

Did you consider how much nickle is used in the Jetta TDI, or other vehicles and where that nickle comes from and is processed?

 

Welcome to the conversation Shawn. Two post up I say I posted it last night.:boink:

 

The main problem I have with what is a fairly balanced view is that you decided upon your conclusion first...then chose facts and anecdotes to justify that position.

Even bringing up the Nickel issue puts all of the other positions in question. Again nearly all the raw materials for both vehicles, Jetta and Prius, are imported to the respective countries from somewhere else. Why isn't this noted also? Why is only the Nickel referenced?

The Edmunds comparo that you reference was outdated 45 days after Edmunds published it. Since then they have done another comparo with the new Prius and new Jetta. The Jetta gets trounced all around. You didn't reference this. Why not?

Bob Wilson showed you from the EPA website that neither fuel economy nor emissions favor the Jetta. Why did you not reference this data?

When you publish something like this on the web you will have to accept that unless you've done extensive and exhaustive research on both sides of an article ( you did not ) then what you've created is a one-sided opinion piece.

Also when you publish something like this it's no longer yours. It now belongs to the various communities that are viewing it and analyzing it. Some of the things that are being pointed out are simply oversights on your part that you didn't consider. Scientists publish studies in reviews in order to pull out differing views, to gather more data and to test the strength of their hypotheses and their research.

Your paper has some good points but you should have looked at both sides more carefully, gathered data that supports both sides, then let the chips fall where they will.

 

Well, I have 48.8 MPG lifetime in my non-hybrid diesel in Manitoba. Just thought I'd throw that out there for you to chew on. But of course, most diesels won't do as well as or be as clean as the Prius. Now back to the regularly scheduled thrashing of the report...

 

Seftonm, the Prius has done as well as 120 mpg. Just thought I'd throw that out there. In the same ring as your number, without any context to judge what if anything it means to anybody else.

Once you give up on spin, you try to provide driving environment, mods from stock, speed, and trip distances to give meaning to the number.

 

ay, is this really what passes for references in college now? wikipedia? when i was a TA, i would have blasted any of my students way the hell out of the water for using wikipedia or an internet blog or opinion news articles cited as fact.

two words: PRIMARY SOURCES!

 

If Mike was spinning it, he would have claimed 66.566 mpg, over 1920.6 miles, with a fully loaded car of other CleanMPG reviewers. And I think it was mostly at highway speed. While lots of Priui can peg 99.9, they can't do it at those speeds.

I'm sure the context has been linked here in the past, by me if not by someone else.

His 48.8 mpg lifetime figure seriously sandbags his recent results, because it includes a lot of older lower-mpg tanks.

 

Galaxee!!!! We've missed you.


Maybe he is a liberal arts major. They get away will all kinds of stuff the bio majors can't.

 

Intriguing how comments like that almost never include any detail.

Vehicle? Year? Transmission? Miles?
.

 

A bunch of folks here blasted him as a troll when he gave details in the past. So see my post, #56.

Mike is a very valued contributor over at CleanMPG.com, where there is little loyalty to particular car models, and where I started my modern quest for fuel efficiency. If push comes to shove, my loyalties to CMPG are stronger than to PC, despite my ownership of a Prius.

 

There is a difference between getting an "A" in a class and writing a peer review article. It is much harder writing a peer review journal article. Even if you are right (and I am not saying you are or that I agree with you) you should be prepared to respond to criticism. If you don't respond with a fact by fact argument, don't expect to be published. The editorial board, along with the peer reviewers, will knock it down.

What you are getting is hardly unusual. Don't complain about bias reviews. In any article - green, global warming, gun control, republicans, democrats, defense, welfare, there is going to be plenty of criticism.

You can respond, or you can re-write to take the criticism into account (e.g., delete the offending sentence, or rewrite the sentence).

If you can't stand the heat and want the criticism to stop, you can retract your paper.

Welcome to the real world.