Topic: Did you know?

[Otto Puzzell]

According to a study conducted by CNW, a market research firm from the northwest and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE):

A Chevrolet Tahoe SUV has a lower energy cost-per-mile (CPM) than Toyota Prius. The Toyota's CPM is $3.25, while the Tahoe's CPM is $2.94.  The math, they say, is simple:  The Tahoe has a lifetime expectancy of 268,000 miles while the compact import has an expected service life of 109,000 miles.

[neilshouse]

I didn't know that but I can well believe it.

With all the recent hype about hybrid and 'green' cars the fact that more carbon emissions are produced building a car than the car will produce in 5-10 years has been conveniently overlooked.

Maybe the way forward is to produce simple cars that will last indefinitely and limit their production.

[Allan L]

I claim quite good green credentials on the basis of lifetime energy consumption as my three cars were built in 2006, 1938 and 1912.
The fact that they consume fuel at about 32, 25, and 20 miles/Imp. gallon (27, 21 and 17 /USgall) is offset by an average age of 56 years!
Also the energy for manufacture of the older cars was quite low by modern standards, and a lot of it would have been in the form of pie and beans for the coachbuilding workers.

[Allemano]

About the environmental aspect:
Often ignored is that modern/new cars need LOTS of more energy during process of production (esp. high-tech-light-weight materials/Aluminium cause much more emissions during production)
No Toyota Prius will ever compensate this in its life time even with hybrid technology, less fuel-consuption and less CO2 emissions.

My advice: get yourself a classic car.