• Home
• Stories
• Events
• Green Info
• Groups
• People
• Forums
• Live Green

HYBRID VEHICLES HAVE NEVER MADE MORE SENSE

Posted on 08.01.08
By: Edie Lau, for OGC

* A look at 18 hybrids on the market today

If it seems to you that hybrids are merging into the mainstream, you’re right. Americans have bought more than a million vehicles that run on a combination of electrical power and gasoline since their debut in 1999, and nowhere are they more popular than in California.

The reason is a no-brainer. With the price of a  gallon of gasoline above $4,  the much-better fuel efficiency of hybrids saves drivers money.

Even though hybrids cost several thousand dollars more than comparable conventional cars, that difference for most drivers will be made up, and then some, in savings on gas over the life of the car. Researchers at the University of California concluded in a 2003 report that the break-even price was between $1.46 and $2.65 per gallon, depending on the model of vehicle.

By using less gasoline, owners of hybrids produce less air pollution, contributing less to local smog and planet-changing carbon dioxide. That’s why advocates for the environment widely support the trend toward hybrids.

Bigger hybrids, lower mileage

But being hybrid doesn’t automatically make a car a clean way to travel. Many of the new makes and models are SUVs or luxury rides that in absolute terms get less-than-great gas mileage. While the most efficient hybrid, the 2008 Toyota Prius, is rated at 48 miles per gallon in the city and 45 mpg on the highway, the least-efficient, the 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid 4WD, is rated at 20 mpg in city and highway driving. A conventional Toyota Yaris is rated almost double that on the highway.

Unfair comparison? Sure. A subcompact car and an SUV function and feel completely differently. The point is, escalating gas prices are forcing drivers to consider more carefully how much car they really need. Some do need a heavy, large vehicle to haul passengers and stuff on a regular basis; many don’t.

While the price of fossil fuels may be accelerating the sales of hybrids, other factors contribute to their popularity as well. Research published last year by the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies found hybrid buyers motivated in part by politics and image: Some wanted to show their concern for the environment. Some expressed opposition to the Iraq war. Some wanted to be less dependent on oil companies or the governments of oil-producing nations. Some wished to show off the latest technology.

Another report, by the marketing company CNW Research, suggested that hybrids were more shine than substance. The CNW analysis concluded that Hummers were more energy-efficient than Priuses when the energy to conceive, design, manufacture, transport, operate, recycle and dispose of them was added up.

Dust to Dust discredited

The report, titled “Dust to Dust,” got a lot of attention last year. Its findings linger in the public consciousness, although they were widely discredited for many reasons. For example, the authors assumed a Prius was good for only 109,000 miles, while a Hummer H1 would last 379,000. Hybrids also paid a penalty in the company’s calculations for being new technology. “Designing and developing new vehicles and/or updating old ones are among the most energy expensive parts of the new-vehicle production process,” the report stated. “It requires years of intense engineering, design, parts development, evaluation, suitability, life-cycle vs. cost analysis, prototyping and vehicle integration.”

Fatally -- particularly from scientists’ point of view -- CNW’s data was not open for peer review. The company said some of its sources could not be divulged because the company had obtained information by subterfuge, “hiding energy-related questions behind or within other inquiries,” the report states. “While it may be considered a misrepresentation, the approach worked. We were able to gain insights and data that otherwise would have been blocked ...”

The “Dust to Dust” report did raise important questions about vehicles’ lifetime energy demands. Of all the energy consumed in making, transporting, driving and disposing of a vehicle over its lifetime, manufacturing accounts for roughly 10 percent, depending on a vehicle’s make, model and country or countries of origin.

Whether hybrids consume more energy to manufacture is a point of debate. “Some people have argued that hybrids do require much more energy to manufacture, partly due to the low production volumes, and partly due to inherently more complex systems and more exotic materials,” said Mark Delucchi, a research scientist with the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies. “My own view is that the ‘inherent’ differences due to greater complexity and more exotic materials probably are only modest.”

The impact of manufacturing

A spokeswoman at Ford, which makes a hybrid version of its Escape SUV, said that vehicle’s total manufacturing energy consumption is slightly greater than the conventional model’s “due to advanced lightweight materials, additional electronics, battery stack and other components unique to hybrid vehicles.”

But how much greater, she couldn’t say. “Ford is working with industry to measure this exact figure and lower the number,” said the spokeswoman, Kristen Kinley.

Hyung Chul Kim, a researcher at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, agrees with Delucchi that whatever the pollution associated with manufacturing a hybrid, it’s small compared with the energy saved by driving a hybrid. Kim wrote his doctoral dissertation at the University of Michigan on vehicle lifecycle energy demands.

“Forget about the manufacturing,” Kim said. “It is true it’s very complicated to produce a hybrid car, but it’s very complicated to produce a (conventional) car, too. One thing is sure: If you have a chance to buy a hybrid car, you have to buy it. It’s a lot better. You’ll save lots and lots of energy.”

The American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy likewise gives hybrids a thumbs-up. In its 2008 list of the “greenest” cars, hybrids occupy two of the top three spots.

Natural gas vehicle tops list

The Toyota Prius and Honda Civic hybrid were outscored by an alternate-fuel vehicle, the Honda Civic GX, which runs on natural gas. But while the Civic GX was the best performer, based upon a calculation of pollution produced -- or not produced -- in manufacturing and operations, council vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan said natural-gas vehicles haven’t been the smoothest ride to an automotive revolution. That’s because filling stations are few and far between, a significant inconvenience.

Hybrids, on the other hand, are convenience incarnate. Drivers need do nothing different: They gas up, press the accelerator, and go. The battery in the vehicle contributes oomph along with the gasoline, reducing demand on the gas tank.

If car buyers are enthusiastic about hybrids, carmakers are trying to respond. For 2008, there are 15 models of hybrids available -- 21 if you count 2WD and 4WD versions of SUVs separately -- according to www.fueleconomy.gov, a website of the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

However, only seven of those models get ratings of 30 mpg or better. To reiterate, hybrid luxury cars and SUVs, while more efficient than their conventional counterparts, are not among the most efficient vehicles out there.

Automakers also may be trying to capitalize on the popularity of hybrid vehicles without investing fully in the technology. The Union of Concerned Scientists warns, for example, that two full-size pickup truck models coming out in 2009 are hybrid in name only.

What makes a hybrid?

By UCS’s definition, a full hybrid -- such as the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape -- have four characteristics:

• The engine shuts off at idle, such as at stoplights and in stop-and-go traffic.
• The vehicle operates above 60 volts and uses a battery pack large enough to store significant regenerative braking energy (energy that’s normally thrown off as heat during braking is captured and stored in the battery for later use).
• The vehicle incorporates an electric motor that helps accelerate the vehicle.
• The vehicle drives at times on electricity alone.

The Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra hybrid pickups coming out in 2009, UCS says, shut off the engine at idle, but their batteries and electrical motors are too weak to significantly stem gasoline guzzling.

At the other end of the efficiency spectrum, Toyota and GM are competing to be the first to introduce plug-in hybrids. Incorporating bigger, more expensive batteries, plug-ins can travel longer distances on electricity only, and can be recharged at a standard 120-volt wall socket. The two auto companies say their plug-ins should be available in 2010.

Overall, the outlook for hybrids is good. But what if you can’t afford to buy a new car? From an environmental point of view, hanging onto an older conventional car is a reasonable option, providing it’s well maintained.

Remember that manufacturing a new car is a polluting process. When Kim, the Brookhaven scientist, was at the University of Michigan, he studied the trade-off between manufacturing pollution and operating pollution. He and his colleagues found that for midsize cars driven 12,000 miles a year on average, 18 years was the optimal lifespan for minimizing output of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas.

Unfortunately, the older the car, the more likely it is to produce other types of pollutants that contribute to smog. To minimize bad actors such as oxides of nitrogen and non-methane hydrocarbons, cars produced since 2000 should be used for only seven to 14 years, the researchers found. That’s why maintenance, especially of emission controls, is so important.

Of course, if you have options other than driving, so much the better. Driving less, carpooling, using public transportation, bicycling and walking are all good choices.