Is it true that the engineering of hybrid cars is more harmful to the environment than....?

Question

driving a regular gas powered car?

people are saying that making one hybrid car is equivalent to driving 3 SUVs around the world.

is this true?

and where can i find more info on this? (what website)

thanks!

Answer 1

No, that's completely false.  As illustrated on pages 4-5 in the link below, only 5-10% of a car's lifetime energy use comes during the construction phase, vs. 80-90% during the operations phase.  That means hybrids, which are much more efficient during their operational phase (driving around) will overall be more efficient than a car which consumes more gas.

http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_...

Plus hybrids require a minimal amount more energy to build than non-hybrids.

The Sudbury thing mentioned by emiller is also a myth.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/ar...

Answer 2

No it may be over engineered but many things are legislated.

Answer 3

That is completely false! For one thing, the Nickel being mined at the Sudbury plant has been around decades longer than the Prius. Most of the Nickel is used for products other than Prius batteries. That is a denier false claim. From birth to death, the Prius is one of the cleanest vehicles on the planet.

Answer 4

NO, it is NOT true.

Making a hybrid is no more harmful than a regular car with the only major difference of the battery.  Most of the links provided by others are pointing to the heavy metal mining of lead and Cadmium.  Neither are used in Hybrid cars of today.  Even Nickel mining is NOT more toxic than most of other mining.  For example, people use cyanide to mine Gold.  Isn't it far worse?  

Today's new hybrid will slowly migrate to Li-ion batteries which is "cleaner" to produce than either the Lead acid or Ni Metal Hydride batteries.

Another user mentioned the cost of battery replacement cost of $3k.  That is only 750 gallon of gas at today's gas cost.  Hybrid is capable of saving that much gas in the lifetime of the battery (That is 12.5 gallon per month for 5 years).    So, the cost will even out.  Beside that, there are NO additional maintenance needed for hybrid as it compares with typical gasoline cars.  Not to mention the tax rebates from both Federal and State government.

Answer 5

Could be.  Hybrids have more lead in them

Answer 6

Just google Sudbury ON.  That's where most of the hybrid batteries are made.  The area around the plant and mine is supposedly free of any type of life for miles.

The problem with the other argument is the lifetime of a vehicle.  The Pruis will not last as long as typical gas engine car.  The battery will be worn out well before the car wears out and a new battery will cost well over $3k and worth more than the car at that point.  Its not practical to spend more money making the car usable again than its worth so its life is considered over.

Answer 7

Its a flawed study...perhards a little biased. H1 compared to a Prius...knife to a gun fight.

The main factor hurting the prius was not the Nickle Plant, but the assumption that a Hybrid will last 100,000 miles while the SUV will last 300,000 miles or better.  They use the Hummer H1, which is the diesel civilian version of the HMMWV (that had better last 300,000 if not 500,000 miles!) not the Tahoe-based H2 (you'd be lucky to see over 200,000 miles)

Use any other car without that kind of service life, and the cost per mile come pretty close to evening out.

Answer 8

all the engineering involved to keep fossil fuels at the top of energy supply? I have to finish your question with what we all know. In the realm of the industrial revolution-we had a moment to ponder our conscience. We chose a direction that was easiest to respond to the world events with what we had at hand. If Tesla was able to work uninhibited and fully free of condemnation, we would now be traveling between the galaxies. Man's greed has fully stifled any and all respect of the human culture.Aliens laugh at us with all the sincere attributes of a new-born menace of comical revelance.

Answer 9

It's pretty much a wash.  Hybrid vehicles use *slightly* less fuel than conventional vehicles with the same capabilities but they do take more resources to produce.

As for Sudbury, I've lived there and I can tell you that the region was pretty barren long before they started mining for nickel and copper.  Bare precambrian granite isn't the best spot to grow a tree.

Answer 10

I don't know about the engineering being harmful to the environment, but I have read reports about the electric field of the hybrid car's electrical system making drivers sick.  I only know one person who has a hybrid car and he and his wife are healthy.  But they have short commutes.