Slashdot Mirror
Just One Out of 16 Hybrids Pays Back In Gas Savings
thecarchik writes with this snippet from GreenCarReports:
"One of the criticisms of hybrid cars has historically been that there's no payback, especially given the cheap gasoline prices in the US. The extra money you spend on a hybrid isn't returned in gas savings, say critics. Well, that may be true, especially when regular gasoline is averaging $2.77 a gallon this week. But as we often point out, most people don't buy hybrids for payback — they buy them to make a statement about wanting to drive green. Nevertheless, a Canadian study has now looked at the question of hybrid payback in a country whose gasoline is more expensive than ours (roughly $3.70 per gallon this week), with surprising results. The British Columbia Automobile Association projected the fuel costs of 16 hybrids over five years against their purchase price and financing fees. In a study released in late July, only a single one of the 16 hybrids cost less to buy and run than its gasoline counterpart."
The one car that would save you money, according the study, is the Mercedes S400 Hybrid sedan — and it will only cost you $105,000.
The one car that would save you money, according the study, is the Mercedes S400 Hybrid sedan — and it will only cost you $105,000.
The retail price of that car seems to be ~$80k. The given figure includes gasoline costs over time.
Well here in the UK my local garage is selling petrol/gasoline at 1.20 GBP / litre, there are 3.79 litres to 1 US gallon = 4.55 GBP / gallon, x 1.45 (pounds to dollars) so we're at $6.60 /US gallon. You can probably find it for 1.17, a few pennies cheaper, but probably it's around the 1.20 mark give or take a tiny bit across the country. Rest of Europe probably similar.
So quite a difference from the 2.77 you pay in the USA and so hybrids perhaps more economically viable here.
Your battery pack is 99% recyclable into new batteries
They have flawed comparisons in their "hybrid-only" cars.
They compare the Prius to the slightly smaller and noticeably less well appointed Matrix XR. The Prius has a unique spot in Toyota's lineup, falling between the Corolla and Camry. The Matrix may be closest - being basically a Corolla wagon, but it is still smaller. The $1700-over-5-years buys you more than a $1700 upgrade in car size and appointment.
Same with the Honda Civic DX-G vs. Insight. The Civic is a smaller, less well appointed vehicle, the upgrade to an Insight is more than worth the $1200-over-5-years difference.
Not to mention they quote some of the hybrids at higher-than-base packages, while the conventional equivalents are base. (Or they compare versions that have higher-than-base stock to the base conventional, such as all the Lexus models - which all come at higher-than-base packages compared to their non-hybrid equivalents. The LS coming at 'fully loaded' as the only choice on the hybrid.)
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
that is how the market worked. For some period of time you could sell a used Prius for about what you paid for it.
1. buy a prius
2. dive it around for a year
3. buy another one
4. sell the old one
5. get a tax credit
6. profit!
no ????. The size of the 'profit!' depended on the value of the tax credit, the cost to buy and sell a car (taxes, fees), and one year of depreciation after supply rose to meet demand.
My civic hybrid cost $4000 more than the non-hybrid version. I figured I would have to put about 100,000 miles on it to reach break-even, even with $3/gallon gas. However, I now have over 120,000 miles on it, so it is now actually saving me money. (There have not yet been any additional maintenance expenses because if it being a hybrid, but the IMA light on the dash is now on all the time.) Of coarse buying fuel-efficiency now partially protects you from future volatility in the fuel markets -- I'd be willing to pay extra for a true multi-fueler if one was available.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Most hybrids are only a couple of years old, and will be on the road for at least another decade. At the moment, my Prius is an environmental statement and a fun engineering toy, but beginning around 2012-2013, I expect it to start looking like a very good investment.
Sigh. Personally, I think it is about saving money and using less fossil fuels.
I bought a 2005 Honda Civic Hybrid after running the numbers. I broke even at around 27,000 miles and it's been gravy since then.
I didn't take the price difference as between the base Civic and the HCH because the HCH was much closer to the EX version in terms of features. I got a $1500 tax rebate, did not have to pay excise tax, and until I switched to Michelin tires, was getting 50-54 mpg. The closest I came to that mileage before was with the Civic HX where I got 42-44 mpg.
This was also through the time that gas creeped up over $3.50/gallon and such, but it worked for me.
In fairness, my hybrid battery did need to be replaced at 67,000 miles but that was done under warranty and didn't cost me a penny. Spooked me a little though since the repair cost would have been $5000 instead of the $1500 the dealer had told me a replacement pack would cost at the time I bought the car. On the other hand, there are rebuilders out there who will take a bad pack apart, replace the dead cells, match all the other cells, and give it back to you for around $700.
The study assumed several things and was way too narrow in scope.
I bought a 2002 Prius at 1 year of age. The purchase cost covered all maintenance for the first 100,000 miles. Some other cars do that too. I commute 30 miles one way to work. The study was limited to the first 5 years of a new car purchase. This covers the depreciation of driving it off the showroom floor which I have never purchased.
Now for some stats, I'm averaging 46 MPG. I have driven 135,000 miles. I'm well into the gas payback as this purchase was planned to be kept until the wheels fall off. The payback not covered in the study has been maintenance.
I have had to buy the usual replacement sets of tires. No savings there. Oil changes are less frequent. Some savings there. I have had to replace the small 12 volt battery twice, about the norm for a car that age.
Now compared to cars the same age I used to drive.. I have had no need to change any belts, hoses, starters, water pumps, brake pads, etc. The sum total of items failed has been the bulb in the dome light.
Due to the lack of a starter motor, this is won't ever be a repair bill. The car has only one belt, the AC belt. The new model eliminated that belt. There is no belt driven water pump. The electric pump has been very reliable. The regenerative breaking drastically reduces brake wear. At my 80,000 miles tire change I checked the brakes and had 80% remaining. They will need changed at about 200,000 miles. The car has a linear electric motor for the power steering assistance, not hydraulic. Hose and pump failure won't happen.
The mechanical portion of the transmission has less than 10 moving parts, none of which is a clutch, band, or disk, or friction part. A mechanical transmission failure is very unlikely. If the hybrid battery pack fails, it is less expensive than most transmission replacements. I will be unlikely to need to replace the entire pack. Replacing a failed 7.2 volt module from the 36 module pack is much more likely. The modules are recyclable. Finding a used one at the same age of the rest of the pack won't be too difficult.
I am well into the payback period and loving it. My wife's car of the same age has already been in for a couple repairs exceeding $300 each.
I bought the car knowing that low repair bills was part of the payback. I figured the payback for 100,000 miles at the time I bought it. The gas prices then was at the 2003 gas prices.
The short sighted report listed a 5 year ownership. It did not list a 100,000+ mile study. I did my study when gas was under $2/gallon. Over the life of my car ownership, the gas prices were higher as anticipated and the payback period started well before 100,000 miles. The Prius replaced another smaller 4 cylinder car, not a large gas hog.
If you counted the first five years of my car's ownership, the study would have been correct as the payback period was just being reached.
The truth shall set you free!
There's a reason that gas cars are cheaper. The oil companies are not stupid. They know the price point at which alternative fuels become competitive with gas and they keep the price a little below that. The price of oil is not high enough for anything else to compete....and it'll stay that way barring government interference. It's good for oil companies, they're rolling in the dough. It's good for consumers, gas is cheap and plentiful. It's good for politicians, their voters are happy with them. When glitches happen to the fuel supply and price drives high then all sorts of alternative power supply comes out of the woodwork. The price never stays high for long though. No one wants expensive fuel.
Dragging out the tired old oil company conspiracy again huh? So the car companies co-operate with this evil plan despite an overwhelming demand for a product that they could profitably sell, to prop up another industry? I suppose that works under the assumption that all big companies are evil, and thus colluding to screw the planet like some evil super-villain alliance. In the real world, I severely doubt that type of cartel-esque arrangement would hold up long. Forgive me, but I only see the Quid, but the pro quo seems to be missing in that arrangement. Gas never stays expensive long because it is still extremely plentiful, and so far the most efficient way to produce mechanical energy for mass consumption.
Because they have surprisingly little grip, increasing stopping distance and causing loss of control during fast cornering. In other words, they suck. What, you thought the efficiency gains were free? No, they come from reducing friction between the tire and the road, and that friction is what tires are for.
Which begs the question, why aren't the gas-saving tires much more available than they are, on both hybrids and non-hybrids?
Gas saving tires have a lower rolling friction. That also means that along with getting better gas mileage, the also reduce the effectiveness of your brakes and reduce your ability to make emergency evasive maneuvers. Pretty shitty trade off if you ask me.
They are available aftermarket. I checked tire rack and they have 3 choices available in the OE size for a 03 civic hybrid.
Market price is not the *true cost*.
This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles and the internal combustion engine that are notreflected in the retail price Americans pay for gasoline. These are costs that consumers pay indirectly by way of increased taxes, insurance costs, and retail prices in other sectors. The report divides the external costs of gasoline usage into five primary areas: (1) Tax Subsidization of the Oil Industry; (2) Government Program Subsidies;(3) Protection Costs Involved in Oil Shipment and Motor Vehicle Services; (4) Environmental, Health, and Social Costs of Gasoline Usage; and (5) Other Important Externalities of Motor Vehicle Use. Together, these external costs total $558.7 billion to $1.69 trillion per year, which, when added to the retail price of gasoline, results in a per gallon price of $5.60 to $15.14
.
http://www.icta.org/doc/Real%20Price%20of%20Gasoline.pdf
That is only one example. Feel free to Google "true cost of gasoline."
icta is a nutty organization. From their mission statement:
"Using legal petitions, comments, and litigation ICTA is at the forefront of the battles to limit genetic engineering, end the patenting of life, address greenhouse gas emissions, protect animals from abuse in research and agriculture, and halt deforestation. "
Effectively, they're against the use of fossil fuel, therefore, they will demonstrate they really cost lot more than you think.
Our Camry Hybrid requires an oil change and tire rotation every 5K miles. A coolant flush? Every 100K. Brakes? Every 100-150K miles due to the regeneration. I'm fairly certain hybrids require less maintenance than your standard ICE vehicle. We're only at 60K miles on ours, but I'm fairly certain the battery is going to last us until 200K miles, as it's NiMH and not a LiIon that starts losing capacity the moment it's manufactured.
Very, very wrong.
Rolling resistance is not related to the coefficient of friction of the rubber. It is primarily related to the suppleness of the tyre casing allowing it to roll over minor variations in the road surface without giving up lots of energy in heat associated with the deformation of the tyre. (It is also related to inflation pressure - which is one reason why car manufacturers recommend you maintain your tyres at optimum pressure.)
These sorts of tyres are well know for bicycles and the effects can be dramatic and noticeable when it is your own legs supplying the power rather than an engine. Indeed, the tyres with the lowest rolling resistance also tend to have the stickiest rubber. When I ungraded my bike tyres I got: lower rolling resistance, better cornering, and better wet weather performance. On a bike at least, they also give a more comfortable ride because you are not bouncing over the micro-contours of the road nearly as much.
FYI - 1 oil barrel (bbl) is 42 US gallons
Yes - I rented a Prius for a couple of weeks while I was between cars, and liked it quite a bit, so much that I looked fairly earnestly for a used one. Unfortunately there were very few used Priuses available, and they were about twice my budget.
Overall I was surprised by how comfortable and roomy the car was, and how well it went on the freeway - I often see Priuses putting along in the slow lane, and assumed that they were gutless. I was wrong - they step out OK, and they can keep up on the freeway just fine. I think the snazzy dashboard display showing the moment-to-moment fuel consumption changes the driver's 'race' motive from speed to economy - it's a challenge to try to get the average up from 44 to 45, then to 46, ... So I think this feature by itself would have a good effect on most driver's habits.
The one thing I didn't like in the car was that the seats are too short front to back for my long legs. I always felt like I was falling out.
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/