Last November, a British tabloid newspaper called the Daily Mail published an article titled “Toyota factory turns landscape to arid wilderness” reporting that with the production of its hybrid cars, Toyota has devastated Sudbury, Ontario as a dead-zone with its nickel mining and smelting needed for the car batteries. Last December, CNW Marketing Research, Inc. released a study called, “Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal.” The company, a well-reputed firm based out of Bandon, Oregon, evaluates all stages of production of a vehicle, from research and development, to operation, to the end of its life. In its report, CNW made claims that in the scope of vehicle life, hybrids like the Toyota Prius consumed more energy than many criticized SUV’s, like the Hummer.
The advent of these two stories spurned hundreds of articles and editorials in the past year in newspapers, colleges, and blogs, either promoting the shocking information or avidly discrediting it. The issue was even incorporated into to ABC’s TV series Boston Legal (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/01/29/hummers-are-greener-than-prius-study-makes-it-into-an-episode/).
The study by CNW illuminates that the Prius’s original EPA ratings (60 mpg city/ 51 mpg highway) were outdated and based on unrealistic standards of 55 mph and 3.3 mph acceleration per second. When the government updated the EPA testing to 80mph and 8mph acceleration, the Prius’s speculations dropped by 25%, getting only a 45 mpg average. It estimates that the Prius has a lifespan of 100,000 miles and costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven within that time. Whereas the Hummer, with a long life span of 300,000 miles, will only cost $ 1.95 per mile.
The Daily Mail accusations focused mostly on Toyota’s nickel plants based in Sudbury, Ontario. Allegedly the plant, dubbed the Superstack, has “caused so much damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used this ‘dead zone’…to test moon rovers.” (“Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage,” Chris DeMorro, The Recorder 2007)With all the emissions and sulfur dioxide spread, it can no longer sustain any life for miles. Acid rain alone destroyed all the plants and soil on the hillsides.
The advent of these two stories spurned hundreds of articles and editorials in the past year in newspapers, colleges, and blogs, either promoting the shocking information or avidly discrediting it. The issue was even incorporated into to ABC’s TV series Boston Legal (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/01/29/hummers-are-greener-than-prius-study-makes-it-into-an-episode/).
The study by CNW illuminates that the Prius’s original EPA ratings (60 mpg city/ 51 mpg highway) were outdated and based on unrealistic standards of 55 mph and 3.3 mph acceleration per second. When the government updated the EPA testing to 80mph and 8mph acceleration, the Prius’s speculations dropped by 25%, getting only a 45 mpg average. It estimates that the Prius has a lifespan of 100,000 miles and costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven within that time. Whereas the Hummer, with a long life span of 300,000 miles, will only cost $ 1.95 per mile.
The Daily Mail accusations focused mostly on Toyota’s nickel plants based in Sudbury, Ontario. Allegedly the plant, dubbed the Superstack, has “caused so much damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used this ‘dead zone’…to test moon rovers.” (“Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage,” Chris DeMorro, The Recorder 2007)With all the emissions and sulfur dioxide spread, it can no longer sustain any life for miles. Acid rain alone destroyed all the plants and soil on the hillsides.
Many people and organizations, including Toyota, refuted these claims. One of the most influential to discredit the CNW study was a paper titled "Hummer versus Prius: 'Dust to Dust' Report Misleads the Media and Public with Bad Science" by Dr. Peter H. Gleick of the Pacific Institute. Gleick points out many holes in the research, including poor assumptions about the quotes on each vehicles lifespan. Numerous Prius owners attesting that their vehicles is still currently running well over 100,000 miles.
Many other papers sought to do further research on the plants in Sudbury. Toyota has only been purchasing nickel there in recent years, while the addressed environmental disaster occurred more than thirty years ago. Since then, the same factory has decreased its emissions significantly, 90% since 1970, and still declining. Also, while Toyota is definitely not the only company that uses nickel, they have a 100 % recycling plan for all their car batteries.
In conclusion, although the headliner of a Hummer versus Prius has many inaccurate facts, the issue raises important concerns. The consumer should never take the “green” aspect of a car at face value, like purchasing a Prius only based on its MPG and EPA rating. Consumers should take into consideration everything in regards to how much energy and resources it took to make that car and how much it will cost to continue to drive it until the end. For the same reason that certain bio-diesels, like corn fuel, isn’t necessarily the cheapest alternative when you consider how much it actually will take to grow it, reap it, refine it, etc. There are always more than 2 sides to any story.
The original article found on the online version Daily Mail, Mail Online, has thus been removed, to be replaced with the editorial letter discrediting it.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-417227/Toyota-factory.html
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-417227/Toyota-factory.html
No comments:
Post a Comment