I've heard that hybrid cars are worse for the environment because the batteries are so corrosive, Any Truth?

Question

I've heard that hybrid cars are worse for the environment because the batteries are so corrosive, Any Truth?

Answer 1

Un-true

the paper that published such stories, along with pictures of opencast nickle mines has removed them from their website because they "might be misleading"!!

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live...

The prius uses NiMH, no lead acid.

modern batteries do not leak, explode or catch fire in accidents  

and for real world evidence (not petrol head prejudice) see http://www.killacycle.com/2007/09/13/im-...

and batteries can be recycled unlike burnt fossil fuel, exaust systems, coolants, oils ....

Answer 2

<sigh> Not true.  I suggest reading:

Battery Toxicity:  http://www.hybridcars.com/battery-toxici...

Hummer versus Prius: “Dust to Dust” Report Misleads the Media and Public with Bad Science: http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_...

Prius Versus HUMMER: Exploding the Myth: http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_New...

Giving Directions: http://www.betterworldclub.com/articles/...

Usually the mythic "article" from The Mail on the nickel in the hybrid cars' NiMH batteries is quoted from a now retracted article. The retraction that clears up this bit of misinformation is at: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live...

Hybrid battery replacements aren't all that common, and on some models very rare. (The hybrid battery is designed to last the life of the car.) In the US, the hybrid battery packs are usually warrantied for 8 years/80,000 miles or longer (depending on manufacturer and if an AT-PZEV model in a CA emission state (10 years/150,000 miles). Full warranty, NOT pro-rated.

Meanwhile, here's the 2004 Toyota Prius Green Report (life cycle assessment):

http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/k_forum/tenji...

(you'll need to download the Japanese fonts for your PDF reader inorder to read it, but the entire document is written in English. note that this was published well before the Inco-Sudbury "article" and CNW "report.")

Over the lifespan of the Prius, when compared to a comparable mid-sized gasoline vehicle, the Prius comes out ahead in the lifecycle assessment (LCA) for airborne emissions for CO2, NOx, SOx, HC, but actually does worse for PM (thanks to the material and vehicle production stages). Lifespan is given as 10 years use/100,000km. The CO2 break-even point for the 2004 Prius compared to this unnamed gasoline vehicle is given at 20,000km. (more CO2 is emitted during Prius production, but the Prius makes up for it over it's driven lifetime.)

Another neat thing is that the Prius is one of the first uses of

Toyota's Eco-Plastic (plastic made from plants, as opposed to

petroleum products). The battery is recycleable (NiMH), as is much of

the car (steel and aluminum body, for example).

To quote Toyota's press release:

http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_librar...

<quote>

How long does the Prius battery last and what is the replacement cost?

The Prius battery (and the battery-power management system) has been designed to maximize battery life. In part this is done by keeping the battery at an optimum charge level - never fully draining it and never fully recharging it. As a result, the Prius battery leads a pretty easy life. We have lab data showing the equivalent of 180,000 miles with no deterioration and expect it to last the life of the vehicle.

We also expect battery technology to continue to improve: the second-generation model battery is 15% smaller, 25% lighter, and has 35% more specific power than the first. This is true of price as well. Between the 2003 and 2004 models, service battery costs came down 36% and we expect them to continue to drop so that by the time replacements may be needed it won't be a much of an issue. Since the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for wear and tear.

Is there a recycling plan in place for nickel-metal hydride batteries?

Toyota has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel-metal hydride batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in 1998. Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic, plates, steel case and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries come back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for recycling information and dealers are paid a $200 "bounty" for each battery.

</quote>

As for the batteries themselves:

The lead-acid (Pb-A) 12v accessory batteries in hybrids tend to be smaller than those found in every traditional gasoline vehicle. Recycling programs are in place for traditional lead-acid batteries.

All the hybrids on the market use NiMH (Nickel-Metal Hydride) batteries, which contain no heavy metals (so they're not hazardous waste, like the Pb-A batteries), and are easily recycled. Often they'll have labels on the packs themselves listing who to contact to recycle them, and often there's a nice cash bounty as well.  (Toyota offers a $200 recycling bounty.)

There are no commercially-available plug-in hybrids on the market so far.  (You cannot plug-in any commercially available hybrid to your home electric source.  They are all fueled by the same gasoline as a regular car.  The gasoline engine can act as a generator to power the hybrid battery, and some otherwise lost kinetic energy is reclaimed through regenerative braking.)

Some hobbiests and aftermarket companies have been altering a few hybrids (Prius, Ford Escape Hybrid/Mercury Mariner Hybrid) to make them plug-in capable, though. Typically this requires adding additional hybrid batteries, besides the ability to charge off the mains.

For more information, check out

http://www.calcars.org/vehicles.html

For cost reasons, unless you are a fleet owner or other high-mileage driver it probably will not be worth the cost of the PHEV conversion for you. (Conversion pricing is high due to startup costs and low volumes, besides the pricing of the needed additional battery packs.)

To note, converting to a PHEV (plug-in hybrid electric vehicle) does not reduce the vehicle's range. It gives the owner the option to recharge the (newly added larger) hybrid battery pack at night (cheap electricity and off-peak electric load which would otherwise be lost). The vehicle would run for a certain distance (longer than stock) on the stored electric power alone, and when the battery pack is depleted to a certain point the vehicle reverts back to its original hybrid self and runs on a combination of the gasoline engine (which will also recharge the battery) and the electric motor. A PHEV would add a greater all-electric range to the existing hybrid, besides the ability (but not the requirement!) to plug it into an electric source.

Depending on the source for electricity in your area, a BEV (battery electric vehicle) may or may not put out more greenhouse gas emissions than a 55MPG HEV (hybrid electric vehicle). Mainly, if the primary source for electricity in your area is coal, your HEV is cleaner than a BEV running on coal-powered electricity. However, if your electricity source is natural gas, the BEV is usually cleaner than the HEV (depending on the method used for natural gas->electricity conversion), and it gets even better for the BEV if you are using a hydroelectric or other renewable electric source. In comparisons with a generic 17MPG SUV, an average 26MPG vehicle, and a high-efficiency 38MPG vehicle, the 38MPG vehicle still will beat the coal-powered BEV, but isn't as clean as the HEV (and gas and renewables powered BEVs are much better than the 38MPG vehicle).

see: "Battery-Powered Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicle Projects to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Resource Guide for Project Development," July 2002

http://www.netl.doe.gov/products/ccps/pu...

http://www.eere.energy.gov/cleancities/i...

mainly section 4.3

(and that's besides the arguements that it's easier to manage emissions from a handful of electric plants, as opposed to millions of independently-owned cars... typically, electric charging rates (especially the off-peak charging times which would use otherwise lost power and level the loads) are still cheaper than petroleum rates, too. Of course, there are still emissions to worry about other than just greenhouse gas emissions, too.)

more info on US electric power generation (for the often followup BEV questions) can be found here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/fuelelectric.html

oh, and no, you do not need to call HAZMAT in a hybrid vehicle accident.  nor will there be an electrocuted emergency responder...  more info at:

http://extrication.com/erg.htm

Answer 3

There is no truth to that statement whatsoever.  The big oil companies have spread all kinds of lies and myths about hybrids and ethanol because they feel threatened by them.  Make the switch to a hybrid or flex fuel car and let's put the corrupt big oil fat cats out of business once and for all.  And we'll clean up our air and reduce our trade deficit while doing so.

Answer 4

Maybe not worse but certainly not much better either. Producing a prius or any other hybrid uses as much resources (plastics, metals etc.) and creates as much by-product and pollution as a conventional vehicle. Although hybrids use less gasoline they still require it for operation. Even if everyone were to switch to hybrids the earth will still be in trouble. Human overpopulation is the real problem.

Answer 5

Hybrid cars are definitely not the answer. Electric energy is the dirtiest energy around, made mostly from coal fired power plants with technology from the 1930's. This plants spew sulfur, carbon monoxide and other deadly toxins by the million of tons every year in the air. The right thing to do, would be lighter cars, with modern, clean air Diesel engines, going 100mpg (is already possible), until a better way to transport goods and people is invented.

Answer 6

I hardly know. Thought  just occured to me that if one o these electric cars got involved in an accident and cracked batteries or worse caught fire you might have an eco road hazard then. May have to call Hazmat or somethin.

Who knows? Only The Shadow knows.

Answer 7

Nope, no truth whatsoever.

This myth stems from the Inco nickel plant in Sudbury, Canada.  Supposedly the area around the plant is so barren that NASA uses it to simulate moon excursions, or something like that.  I don't know if there's any truth to that part of the myth.

The rest is completely bogus.

"In fact any damage occurred more than thirty years ago, long before the Prius was made. Since then, Inco has reduced sulphur dioxide emissions by more than 90 per cent and has helped to plant more than 11 million trees.

The company has won praise from the Ontario Ministry of Environment and environmental groups. Sudbury has won several conservation awards and is a centre for eco-tourism."

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live...

In reality, the Prius is the most environmentally friendly car on the planet.

http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNe...

Answer 8

You've got to make the batteries which will likely use lead and acid, and you've got to charge them. If the charging happens when the car is cruising along and not using much gas then it might be a good idea also if the batteries help with acceleration, which is when you use a lot of gas that might help fuel efficiency too. Kinda hard to say...

Answer 9

I think the effect of reduction in fuel consumption far outweighs the need to recycle these batteries. and they are definitely recycle-able.