JEEP is GREENEST

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(azguy @ Dec 4 2006, 11:11 AM) [snapback]357353[/snapback]</div>

Kurt,

We've already killed the Daily Mail arid landscape story -- see the thread under that title (the gist: the mine is owned by Falconbridge, not Toyota. Falconbridge produces 109,000 tons of nickel a year. Toyoto buys 1000 tons of nickel a year.)

And the CNW marketing survey has been much discussed too, namely the Prius getting a low rating because it was assigned a 100000 mile life while most SUVs were assigned a 200000 mile life.

But I'm sure both these articles will get cited all over the place for the next 10 years or so, as is usually the case. And I sure would hate to take my Prius off-road. Just hearing its bottom scrape on our recent Chicago snow was alarming enough for me. :blink:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(azguy @ Dec 4 2006, 10:11 AM) [snapback]357353[/snapback]</div>

Unfortunate to see that same nonsense reprinted. The CNW study has been discussed in numerous threads here. Their numbers make absolutely no sense in the absolute (ie., multiplying their "energy cost per mile" times US annual passenger vehicle miles yields something like 60% of the US GDP. Not even remotely plausible.) And their numbers make no sense in light of other, reputable studies showing that about 10% of the total life-cycle energy cost of a typical passenger car is in the manufacture and scrapping, and 90% is in the gas to fuel it. (So, Toyota's 20/80 estimate for the Prius is in line with all other reputable studies, given the high fuel efficiency of the Prius).


Here's a link to more than you ever wanted to know about life-cycle energy use of cars, courtesy of Google answers:

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=433981

So, the CNW story is still baloney, and at this point, it's stale baloney.

 

More CNW Marketing crap.