PBS falls for the CNW report!

Where do you get this? I find them pretty conservative.

Since when does public funding equal lefty liberalism?

Are you saying Elmo is a Socialist?

 

Conservative, liberal, right, left...all are relative to the viewer. And these labels are not fixed firmly in the individual. I consider myself a conservative politically. But 40-50 years ago I would have been considered a liberal over racial matters, as an example; today, my position is mainstream. You may consider PBS shows conservative if you are a socialist -- I don't know know what your position is, just making the point. PBS tends to the more progressive, liberal viewpoints, but they are not deterrminedly liberal. Viewers will disagree or agree on that depending on their own philosophy.

Public funding has nothing to do wth political viewpoint.

Elmo is a puppet.

 

Seems like this show is in an online test phase, before the stations decide if they're going to pick it up for the fall. Sounds like a good time to vote no Below are the comments I sent to both the sponsoring network and the show creator.

 

LOL, thats a pretty good way to demonstrate that it makes no sense. Nice work.

Rob

 

Very well said indeed! I hope they take your comments to heart.

 

Actually, I don't think it's accurate to say nobody does he math. I'd say, it's the majority of people who see the stupid story (that won't die) who take it at face value and don't bother to do the math. About the only ones who do bother are the ones who question it.

Yes, the numbers are just absolutely insane, way off the mark and nonsensical. I went thru the numbers and went thru CNW's crap spreadsheet with all sorts of bogus numbers pulled out of the air.

It's a shame that the vast majority of journalists who "report" on this crap don't bother doing the math either. The same seems to hold true for bloggers.

 

Thanks. This is what really drives me over the edge on this issue. You get people discussing the details of the CNW report, e.g., shouldn't a Prius last more than 100,000 miles. Detailed analysis of whatever you can glean about CNWs methods. Which means that CNW has already won half the battle, because it makes it seem like there's something to what they do, plus or minus a few moderate changes in assumptions.

When in fact, their numbers are off by at least a factor of 10 to begin with.

Maybe my viewpoint is colored by the fact that I do data analysis for a living. But when I get a result like that, I don't go tweaking the parameters of the analysis. I toss in the garbage where it belongs. Right alongside the CNW analysis.

As a second real-world point of reference, the IRS allows just over 50 cents per mile now for the total cost of driving a car for business use.

IRS Announces 2008 Standard Mileage Rates; Rate for Business Miles Set at 50.5 Cents per Mile

That's the total cost -- gas, maintenance, depreciation, insurance. Presumably, in the long run, the total cost of driving has to cover all the energy costs (energy in manufacture and the energy in the gasoline).

So, maybe some hotshot reporter can ask this one the next time: how can the average "energy cost" per mile be more than 4 times higher than the IRS's estimate of the average total cost per mile?

 

Hmmmm. Maybe for the same reason my cost of living seems to be 4 times higher than the government's CPI.:juggle:

 

Yeah. You can see it in the Lehrer News Hour--the PBS nightly news show. Probably why McNeil left the show years back.

Shocking to hear Judy Woodruff last night trying to put Obama's guy on the defensive about off-shore drilling. She said "the polls show the public is in favor of it." Judy knows that the oil companies have plenty of off-shore drilling rights they aren't using--see the current "use it or lose it" legislation underway in Congress. She also knows oil use must be decreased, not increased--because of Global Warming. Phoney efforts to "balance" the discussion--which just muddles the issues for the public.

The media is behaving irresponsibly, keeping the public uninformed on issues which should not be politicial. They are unwilling to acknowledge the Emperor wears no clothes. When you are making 6 or 7 figure salaries in the media, you blow with the wind.

 

I happen to agree with both the CNW report AND PBS.

 

sigh

Why would you believe CNW? I went thru the spreadsheet CNW had in great detail and concluded it was TOTAL BS. See Thomas Friedman's foolish attacks on GM - Page 2 - MY350Z.COM Forums.

It's already been thoroughly debunked numerous times. See http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-hybrid-news/30974-prius-vs-hummer-exploding-myth-5.html#post541556.

 

Sticking strictly to the facts, since I have not read the complete report, or even seen the 2008 one, and probably am not qualified to evaluate it if I did:

1. The dude stated the the Prius should be in the slow lanes where it is driving "mainly on batteries." The interviewer swallowed this whole, indicating that neither one of them knows how a Prius really works. Using batteries uses MORE energy, since it ultimately comes from the gas engine, and there are losses all along the motion > electricity > chemistry > storage > electricity > motion pathway.

2. He stated that research and development costs were included in the calculation. Yeah. The R&D costs of adapting an existing military design to an existing SUV chassis I suspect were less than the marketing research done to show that people would buy these monstrosities. Comparing these to those that went into developing the Prius, where new technologies were developed and implemented for the first time (and which like all such research will have valuable spinoffs for years to come outside of Prius sales), is ridiculous.

The facts speak for themselves.

 

they sure do... if a normal (gas powered) vehicle emits less when travelling at speed vs idle, and a hybrid excels at low/no emissions at low speed/idle but does poorly at high speed (these are facts) then it stands to reason that hybrids should be limited to slow speeds and remain in the right line, while single occupancy gas powered vehicles should be allowed in the HOV lanes etc.

I've always maintained this glaring hypocrisy flouted by hybrid owners

 

He claims that the Prius is going to become obsolete rather quickly. Although with rising gas prices it would seem that, compared to most other cars sold today, the opposite must be true. Sure, the next generation Prius will have slightly better FE, but the difference will be small compared to the lead that the current generation has on its competition.

Look at the the CNW report, another thing strikes me: It gives it results with no less than 3 significant digits, but doesn't even discuss what the uncertainty is on the figures. I would think that a proper report would have given 2 digits and mentioned a 50% uncertainty, minimum.