So conspicuous virtue is no virtue at all?
I don't care why people do the right thing so long as they do it, feel free to disagree with me.
I thought the previous Prius got 40PMG, I must have been looking at Imperial gallons.
As for nobody buying these cars, who thinks oil is going to stay at $40 a barrel forever?
Wait a year or two, we'll see the return of higher oil prices.
PeakOil is You
THE Toyota Thread (merged)
Re: 2010 Toyota Prius Revealed
by Tyler_JC » Tue 13 Jan 2009, 15:56:37
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
- Tyler_JC
- Expert
- Posts: 5438
- Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Boston, MA
Re: 2010 Toyota Prius Revealed
by the_red_pill » Tue 13 Jan 2009, 16:08:16
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Schmuto', 'T')he 09 prius gets 48 mpg, according to toyota, so it's a 4% increase at best.
The Prius is to idiot liberals what the Escalade is to moronic conservatives.
So let's see. You pay 25 large for the right to drive a car that gets about 10 mpg more than, say, a Honda Civic. At 4 dollars a gallon, over 100,000 miles, you save 2,000.
So the math is, spend 10 grand more to save 2 grand over the next 5 years?
That's at 4 bucks a gallon. At 2 bucks a gallon you're barely saving anything.
Nothing says, "I'm an idiot douchebag liberal with lots of money to spend trying to look like an environmentalist" like ownership of a Toyota Pious.
Want proof?
OK - Honda had to redesign its first hybrid because they weren't selling. When the idiot douchebag liberals were asked why they weren't buying the hybrid, the main answer was, "it doesn't look like a hybrid."
Oh lord.
The Prius is to idiot liberals what the Escalade is to moronic conservatives.
So let's see. You pay 25 large for the right to drive a car that gets about 10 mpg more than, say, a Honda Civic. At 4 dollars a gallon, over 100,000 miles, you save 2,000.
So the math is, spend 10 grand more to save 2 grand over the next 5 years?
That's at 4 bucks a gallon. At 2 bucks a gallon you're barely saving anything.
Nothing says, "I'm an idiot douchebag liberal with lots of money to spend trying to look like an environmentalist" like ownership of a Toyota Pious.
Want proof?
OK - Honda had to redesign its first hybrid because they weren't selling. When the idiot douchebag liberals were asked why they weren't buying the hybrid, the main answer was, "it doesn't look like a hybrid."
Oh lord.
Well said....I have a 2005 Civic I paid $14k for and I hyper-mile it to 48mpg average.....
-
the_red_pill - Peat
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Re: 2010 Toyota Prius Revealed
by mos6507 » Tue 13 Jan 2009, 18:09:44
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Munqi', '
')
Could it be that the money that is saved from gasoline is not the only reason why people buy these things?
Try not to call people idiots so much. It makes you look bad when you're not making any sense yourself.
')
Could it be that the money that is saved from gasoline is not the only reason why people buy these things?
Try not to call people idiots so much. It makes you look bad when you're not making any sense yourself.
The worst posters on peakoil.com are the ones with the lowest post count (and a few with the most
).- mos6507
Re: 2010 Toyota Prius Revealed
by mos6507 » Tue 13 Jan 2009, 18:23:42
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', '
')I'm not convinced that EVs pollute less. The great portion of electricity comes from FFs, and that isn't likely to change a whole lot.
')I'm not convinced that EVs pollute less. The great portion of electricity comes from FFs, and that isn't likely to change a whole lot.
This is a stale argument. They do pollute less even when fed coal fired electricity. However, once a car is on the road, the world is stuck with it for a very long time (kind of like a human being). An EV especially is likely to have a long lifespan (battery pack exempted). So it will become progressively cleaner as its electricity source changes. A gas car will always only be as efficient as its engine design permits across its entire lifecycle. So I think it's an important stepping stone to start the achingly slow process of moving the fleet to EVs and to follow that up in parallel with the achingly slow process of cleaning up electricity generation so they can later converge.
To illustrate, let's say the goal is to transition a town powered by a single coal fired power plant over to EVs in 10 years. By the end of those 10 years the plant will be replaced by a nuclear plant (I'm using a nuke to diffuse all of you who say renewables won't scale). So let's say when the turn the power off on the coal plant and they power up the nuke plant, 50-60% of the fleet has switched over to EVs. From that instant onward, all the EVs have now gone totally zero carbon at once.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', '
')I'd rather see a trend toward smaller, fewer, more efficient IC cars, with a view to phasing them out completely down the line and reorganizing how we live (localism, public transport, railroads).
You'll never phase them out completely because people will still want the freedom of personal transportation.
Now, if battery prices never come down, then gas cars may ride off into the sunset of irrelevance post-peak before EVs attain any sort of foothold. EVs need to compete on a cost basis with gas cars otherwise they will only ever be a niche. They barely did when gas was $4/gallon and they certainly do not today. Batteries either have to get a lot cheaper or last virtually forever (EESTOR).
- mos6507
