Dark Side of the Hybrids

Sure,there are many people who just toss their batteries in the trash,just
because they are unaware of alternatives,or just take the easiest route.

But Radio Shack and other stores that sell batteries accept them for
recycling.And most auto stores require a "core" fee that is refunded when
you return the old LA battery,and they send them off for recycling.

 

They get charged before they run completely down;partial charges,"topping
off".They still are charge cycles.

 

I'm simply pointing out that, like any good corporate PR machine, Toyota
is spinning their side of the story very hard in order to sell more stuff.
By that token, you shouldn't simply believe it wholesale without
investigating it more.<<

Congratulations. You've just won the grand prize for missing the point.
They have data. You don't. You just assume that they're "spinning" because
they're a big, bad company with an axe to grind. YOU made the allegation
that they're "spinning." Where's your proof? Show us your data to prove
their data wrong. We're waiting.
be 100% correct and truthful?<<

Add to the above cited prize another one for putting words in someone's
mouth. I decided no such thing. I see, so far, no evidence to contradict
the press release, but that doesn't mean the evidence does or does not
exist. You, OTOH, just assume it's a lie.

Still waiting for that proof.

 

is spinning their side of the story very hard in order to sell more stuff.
By that token, you shouldn't simply believe it wholesale without
investigating it more.<<

Congratulations. You've just won the grand prize for missing the point.
They have data. You don't.[/QUOTE]

They have an agenda--sell more cars.

I don't. I simply don't like being spoon-fed by people who have an
agenda.

If you enjoy being spoon-fed by people who have an agenda--and
everything you say points that direction--that's your problem.

Is it, then, your assertion that they are NOT spinning?

Hmmmmmm.....I don't think I ever said that one way or another.

I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other
hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it
more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

One wonders why you would say that.

I see, so far, no evidence to support the press release. Toyota said
some things. I say, that's nice--but investigate further. You say, "if
they said it, I assume that it's 100% true and you have to prove
otherwise." That's your problem.

 

Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was safe.

And auto companies often have "hidden" warranties or don't bother telling
people about free repairs to correct deficiencies.Toyota is not any
"saint".They,like any other product seller,are going to paint their product
in the best possible light,and not disclose and downsides.

 

(just waiting here for Sid to respond. Not holding my breath, but
still...)

 

Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was safe.<<

I deeply appreciate you making my point for me. Just as multiple
disinterested parties came up with the data to contradict the tobacco
companies (which is what got them to admit that they had the same data), I'm
still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the data to contradict
Toyota.

 

I deeply appreciate you making my point for me. Just as multiple
disinterested parties came up with the data to contradict the tobacco
companies (which is what got them to admit that they had the same data), I'm
still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the data to contradict
Toyota.[/QUOTE]

Um, I don't believe it's up to me to come up with anything. I simply
warned you that Toyota in this case is in the same role as the tobacco
companies, and that you'd be best to be wary.

What part of that didn't you understand, Sid?

 

Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to you to
to do the investigating and come up with something concrete. So far the
assertion that they are lying through their teeth (as they must if the claim
they are recycling the batteries is false) is weaker than the "who shot
Kennedy" conspiracy theories. Give us something we can use. Either you can
catch them in a huge lie or you are blowing smoke.

Mike

 

Is it your position that Toyota's press releases are 100% truthful and
without omissions?

You miss my whole point.

Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something in black and
white like that, do you agree that one should be careful and not
necessarily accept what he says at face value?

That's all I said. Nothing more. I never said they were wrong; I said
they were spinning things, exactly like any politician or corporate
flack spins things.

Whenever a company puts out a press release, they're spinning things.
That's why corporations like that have big PR departments, and that's
why they have corporate policies that any contact with the press be done
only by or in conjunction with someone from their corporate PR
department.

All I said was, it looks good--but remember, they have an axe to grind,
and they spin things just like any other corporate or political entity.

Would it surprise any of us if we found out that they weren't being 100%
truthful? Not at all--because it's their job to obfuscate anything that
would be detrimental to their sole job of making money for their
shareholders.

 

However, they are not failing. Try googling "prius battery fail" and you
will see about 10K hits with a ton of speculation about when the battery
will fail and about failures of the 12 volt aux battery (which is as
vulnerable as the 12 volt battery in conventional cars)... but good luck
finding a report of one that has actually died a natural death. Then google
"acura transmission fail" and you will get about 22K hits; why the
transmissions are failing, what to do about the transmissions failing. One
member of the Yahoo Prius group just had his150K mile service done on his
2001 and has done nothing but scheduled maintenance and tire replacement -
no battery failure yet. That figures since Toyota warranties the hybrid
system, including battery, for 8 years/100K miles (150K miles in CA).
Even the original Prius, sold since 1998 in Japan, has no battery failure
issues.

There is nothing in chemistry that limits the number of charge cycles for a
primary cell. Edison cells, for example, have no natural limitations on
charge/discharge cycles and usually last for decades but have poor energy
density. We are familiar with lead acid and NiCads which have serious life
limitations because of their particular chemistry so we assume all
rechargables do. Then we look at the batteries in portable electronics -
they are designed to charge as quickly as possible, have the highest
possible energy density and be profitable to replace - and we decide no
rechargable battery could last longer than a couple years... just as we
might watch sprinters and conclude no human can run more than a mile.

When it comes down to it, the experiment is on the roads and has been
successful for 7 years. At least one Prius has exceeded 200K miles
http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm

Mike

 

oh dear, the old 'we're all familier with X, which is kinda like Y,
and so what we know happens with X, we also assume happens to y -
Sorry, thats complete and utter, unadulterated BULLSHIT. Save your
pop-psychology for the easily impressed - such as any children under
10 you might have.

NIcads and NIMH have lmited charge cycles. Why? conductive crystaline
formaton int he cell, producing an effectively 'shorter' cell. can you
fix this? yes you can, alsthough its tricky to do, and risky - you zap
the cells.

Whoopdie do. One has managed 200k miles, conrgatulations, pat on the
back there. I've a first gen caravan thats managed that too, doesn't
make it a particularly good van. Second, you keep making this song and
deal about a vehicle that is expensive to make, would have to be run
for over 300,000 miles before its actually more efficient in TOTAL
than a similarly sized conventional car, and which would probably be
more efficient if you just ran it as a straight petrol engine. Want to
be fuel efficient, two easy rules
1) be smooth with driving, and make speed ransitions smooth and slowly
2) remove any unneccesarry weight. - less weight = less fuel needed.
Take out the weighty electrical system, and you'll probably get around
the same mpg.


Lets look at it another way, EPA rating for prius 51mpg (very
optomistic rating, as with all EPA ratings) I've seen an Audi A8
(thats the big one) with a 4l V8 twin turbo engine (thats a big engine
too) return 40mpg. A car designed to be big, heavy, smooth,
comfortable - ANYTHING but fuel efficient - can get such figures
speaks volumes. i will admit that was highway driving, if you'd rather
have a small car, and think about fuel economy from the get-go, VW
group also make a lupo - agains non-hybrid - thats RATED at 65mpg.

People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right
old load of bollocks it is.

 

I have a solution for you!
Don't worry about what other people drive.

 

I note you edited out the comments about auto companies knowing about
product defects in their vehicles(hidden warranties),yet not revealing them
so they would not have to correct them at their expense,until enough
'incidents' occur and public indignation forces them to correct them,hoping
that the owners would fix them themselves at their own cost.Also,the
"lemon" laws that had to be passed to get auto companies to replace
vehicles with major recurring defects.


Actually,disgruntled tobacco employees revealed that the companies had the
data for many years.

It's also like the recent cellphone while driving debate;It's common sense
that it's a dangerous distraction,and the data has not been collected
sufficiently to prove it,but rational people still know that CP use while
driving is dangerous.

 

Mike,
It's difficult for most of us to conduct that sort of research. Perhaps a
disgruntled (sp??) employee might eventually sneak data out of the company
and release it to the news media. If that never happens, we will probably
never learn the true facts related to this issue. A Federal investigation
might also force them to release the true facts. On the other hand,
perhaps Toyota is being totally honest related to the data that they
release to the news media and post on the internet. Do you really believe
that any company is totally honest related to information they release to
the news media or post on the internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of
interest involved.
Jason

 

They don't call it the Toyota "Pious" for nothing.

 

(Jason) wrote in

There's certainly enough evidence that auto companies have had "hidden
warranties" to fix problems they do not want the public to know about.
And that they usually fight any effort of the consumer groups on class
actions concerning major auto problems.(like wheels falling off)

So,one should blindly trust the auto companies??

 

Back to the issue....
Let me put it this way: all Toyota has to do is enter into a contract with a
company to handle the recycling on a per-unit basis and add the cost of that
and the $200 deposit to the battery. Then they can make the claim in good
conscience. It greatly limits their liabilities and costs them nothing at
all. They would be incomprehensibly stupid not to... so what on earth would
make you think such a thing?

Mike

 

Fuel economy is only a side effect of hybridization. The major reason for
the change is to correct the fundamental engineering debacle of using a 260
hp engine to move a personal vehicle through city traffic or along a freeway
while we could have *better* performance and economy from a 100 hp engine
running when needed and electric power to do the rest. In effect,
hybridization separates engine power from acceleration performance. Honda
has a good example in their 2001 concept car, the Dualnote (
http://world.honda.com/Tokyo2001/auto/DUALNOTE/index.html ). 4 passengers,
400 combined hp, with off-the-line acceleration comparable to a 600 hp car
(according to Honda engineers interviewed in a Popular Mechanics article a
couple years ago), and fuel economy estimated around 40 mpg. Kinda like a
Super Lupo ;-)

Admittedly, hybrids are in their infancy now (but as an owner I can tell you
the Prius is a really nice infant!) As an engineer I believe it is safe to
say hybrids will be the rule rather than the exception for passenger cars
(but not trucks) within 20 years for very sound design reasons. You may
believe what you wish.

Mike

 

Was the orignal claim about Toyota not recycling their NiMH batteries or
the amount of battery life the batteries would have under ordinary service?
I thought it was the latter.

I do not doubt that Toyota would recycle the batteries.
Their claims on life expectancy,I might doubt.