The reality is that a hybrid carries a huge initial and huge recycling energy cost that is hidden. The most efficient vehicle remains a high MPG small diesel as there are no extensive electronics and batteries to deal with.

__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life-
'15 GLK250 Bluetec 118k - mine - (OC-123,800)
'17 Metris(VITO!) - 37k - wifes (OC-41k)
'09 Sprinter 3500 Winnebago View - 62k (OC - 67k)
'13 ML350 Bluetec - 95k - dad's (OC-98k)
'01 SL500 - 103k(km) - dad's (OC-110,000km)
'16 E400 4matic Sedan - 148k - Brothers (OC-155k)

I agree, most reading I have done states that the overall environmental cost of a Hybrid vs a regular car is negative.
You save gas while in use, but the energy creating and disposing of the various specialty item negates any savings and then some.

While I drive a gas vehicle, I personally feel diesel is the way to go. They (mostly from my readings here) provide better gas mileage, seem to last much longer, are just as clean and biodiesel is much less destructive overall.
It does not disrupt food stocks and is not as energy energy negative, ethanol from what I've read takes about 7 units of energy to produce 10. Ethanol IMHO is a government boondogle here.

I have also read some information that refining oil to diesel requires less energy than gas.

I do feel though that Hybrids are a good interim solution until a better solution is found.

I think pure electrics (even the volt) are also very good interim solutions, many people can do much of their general driving within it's limited range.
Although I feel they need to do better, I figure 75ish miles to a charge is about right. Despite GMs claims of 40 miles to a charge, I am reading the real number is in the mid 30s, which is BARE minimum IMHO.

__________________
KLK, MCSE

1990 500SL

I was always taught to respect my elders.
I don't have to respect too many people anymore.

My wife drives a 2001 Prius. We bought it in 2006 with 53K miles. It now has 110K. We spent $13K to buy the car, which is admittedly high for a subcompact its age at the time, but mileage was obviously quite low.

But beyond that, the cost of operation has been outstanding.

In 54K miles I have done the following maintenance to the car:
New tires, summer and winter; Change coolant (engine and inverter); Change trans fluid; Change plugs (tho they probably didn't need it); a new accessory battery (a little gel type unit); and a new serp belt.

Most recently I replaced some light bulbs for the climate controls, changed the PCV valve at 100K and installed a new gasket on the fuel filler cap to resolve a check engine light.

That's it beyond oil changes (the car takes three quarts per change).

So the "hidden costs" seem to have remained in hiding for me.

The main traction battery appears to be doing fine. There was a service bulletin on the car to reseal cell terminals to prevent electrolyte leakage, which has the potential to shorten battery life. But my impression from Internet forum chatter is that the batteries are generally holding up quite well.

As a driving experience, the early Prius feels like an economy subcompact. I drove it on a 200-mile round trip last summer and felt pretty beat up by the time it was over. The newer models are a more refined ride on the highway. And they all seem to do better on economy while driving in town. The EPA mileage numbers reflect that.

I had been commuting (40 highway miles one way) in my 300td but it's been semiretired in favor of a car I've found cheaper to operate: a '95 BMW 540i. Miles per gallon is about the same as the diesel, for which fuel comes at a premium these days.

No offense, but you should read more, or at least try different sources.

Most of what I have read is consistent with kknudson's statement. If you have some sources that say otherwise I would truly like to read them, I think its an interesting perspective/argument that transcends the usual gas mileage discussion.

__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth

You might try http://priuschat.com/forums/ ... it's an active forum that includes some pretty technical content. Obviously, you're going to read from the other side of the coin there.

Here's a recent thread at Prius Chat that might be of interest: http://priuschat.com/forums/generation-1-prius-discussion/90268-do-hybrids-hold-up-over-time-video.html

http://priuschat.com/forums/environmental-discussion/

Their environmental discussion looked promising...but in reality they completely (I mean 100%) ignore this question. The one post I found they immediately called a troll and berated the poster for having a pickup truck. I am genuinely interested in this topic, and it is relevant to my academic studies (thinking enviro marketing paper)...on to digging up scholarly resources

__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth

I'm sorry -- I lost the thread on your reference to "this question" that they ignore ... do you mean recycling the batteries?

When you take the rare earth metals required for the motors and batteries, add in the energy to produce those batteries then to dispose or hopefully recycle the batteries the savings in energy over the life of vehicle is negated.
I agree there are conflicting opinions as to how much, but everything I have read shows most or all + of the savings are lost.

From what I have read Solar is somewhat similiar, although they have gotten much better.
An article I read a few years back showed that over the life of the solar cell, it will only procduce about 80 to 90 % of the energy used to produce them.
I do not agree, but it was written by a scientist from one of the producers of solar cells.

Finally, VOLVO Diesel Hybrid
http://www.smartplanet.com/technology/blog/transportation/volvo-launches-worlds-first-plug-in-diesel-hybrid/135/

__________________
KLK, MCSE

1990 500SL

I was always taught to respect my elders.
I don't have to respect too many people anymore.

No way Jose. When you take the rare earth metals required for the motors and batteries, add in the energy to produce those batteries then to dispose or hopefully recycle the batteries the increase in energy required is about 1% more than a conventional vehicle.

Where you probably pulled your information from was a "study", and I say that very loosely, by CNW marketing where they equated vehicle cost with energy use, then made all sorts of other weird assumptions about vehicle lifespan to "conclude" that a Hummer used less energy than a Prius, which was total BS. That said, it was very good marketing since people believe a marketing firm more than they believe scientists from MIT.

The same has been said for solar panels, but it's pure BS just like the CNW blurb was.