George Will Passing Along Whoppers about Hybrids

[Dardedar]

DAR
For a consistent right-winger I usually like George Will. He is very articulate and well spoken. Even when he is passing along BS he usually does it with eloquence. However, observe how in the following he is either being dishonest or sloppy. More likely he is passing along something because it agrees with his bias. Either way it is the sort of practice that disgusts me.

Consider, from his Washington Post op. ed entitled Fuzzy Climate Math:

"Speaking of Hummers, perhaps it is environmentally responsible to buy one and squash a Prius with it. The Prius hybrid is, of course, fuel-efficient. There are, however, environmental costs to mining and smelting (in Canada) 1,000 tons a year of zinc for the battery-powered second motor, and the shipping of the zinc 10,000 miles -- trailing a cloud of carbon dioxide -- to Wales for refining and then to China for turning it into the component that is then sent to a battery factory in Japan.

Opinions differ as to whether acid rain from the Canadian mining and smelting operation is killing vegetation that once absorbed carbon dioxide. But a report from CNW Marketing Research ("Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal") concludes that in "dollars per lifetime mile," a Prius (expected life: 109,000 miles) costs $3.25, compared with $1.95 for a Hummer H3 (expected life: 207,000 miles)."

DAR
Apparently this CNW article "Dust to Dust" was printed in The Oregonian. Here are three responses from readers that show the obvious flaws (howlers):

***
Hybrid vs. Hummer: Question research
Tuesday, April 10, 2007

James L. Martin's essay concerning the alleged non-green effect of hybrid autos such as the Toyota Prius ("Hybrids might look green, but look behind that battery," April 8), makes a completely fallacious comparison between the hybrid and the Hummer. (Note: I do not own either vehicle.)

By pegging the life expectancy of a Prius at 100,000 miles and that of a Hummer at 300,000 miles, Martin automatically triples the impact of the Prius' fixed manufacturing costs. The 100,000/300,000 comparison itself is erroneous in that given the reliability records of the two manufacturers' products, the Prius is far more likely to last the greater distance.

The Prius is generally expected to last a minimum of 250,000 miles, and many have already exceeded that figure. Martin's article is just another example of how, by massaging numbers, any preordained position can be supported.
--DENNIS McNISH Lake Oswego


You would think by reading James L. Martin's essay that hybrids are to blame for sulfur dioxide-scorched earth in Canada. After all, Hummers don't have a battery-powered engine, and they have a lower energy cost impact than the Prius.

But batteries don't have anything to do with the purported high energy cost of the Prius. Instead, the problem is substandard research by CNW Marketing Research. Martin has merely imputed a bad conclusion from bad research.

After spending eight hours on Sunday reading and analyzing the 458-page "Dust to Dust" report from CNW Marketing, I can report that this document has no basis for its findings, and lacking these, I can only attack the ludicrous conclusions that follow from the endless tables of results.

Did you know that at the end of a car's life, the societal energy cost to dismantle the Prius is $326,000; $363,000 for the H3 Hummer, and $400,000 for the Honda Civic? There is no information to suggest why the end-of-life energy costs are about 10 times higher than the car's initial purchase price. And this is purported to be only energy cost -- no labor, no equipment.

Here is the crowning gem: If you take the reported energy cost and apply it to the 14.6 million vehicles scrapped each year, you can calculate that the total annual incurred societal energy cost is $6.2 trillion. This is higher than all U.S. energy expenditures as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Keep driving the hybrids and don't trust marketers to report societal energy cost information!
--CONRAD EUSTIS Southwest Portland


James L. Martin claims that the "energy cost" of a Toyota Prius is $3.25 per mile, relative to $1.95 per mile for a Hummer. While there is some interesting thinking in the research, examining the energy cost of manufacturing and disposing of a vehicle as well as its cost of use, the difference in these numbers seems to be primarily based on the assumed life expectancy of the vehicles: 100,000 miles for a Toyota Prius vs. 300,000 miles for a Hummer. There is no justification or evidence cited for this significant disparity.

Using similar logic, payday loans are the cheapest money on the street, at a mere 10 percent per week -- clearly much less than a credit card at 18 percent per year!

CNW Marketing Research's Web site states that its "clients include major automobile manufacturers . . .." I wonder who is its larger client, GM or Toyota?
--MARK FRISCHMUTH Southwest Portland
***

DAR
What bugs the hell out of me is the dishonesty of the CNW material. Turns out they are a marketing research BS firm who make a living out of trying to fool people with such unsufferable nonsense. These people and their dishonest lying word games and debate tactics are a waste of time. And George Will elevates this material by citing it.

At the CNW research site link given above they have a 1 1/2 page downloadable defense of their claims regarding the Prius. I read it. It's pathetic. It is sly, crafty and misleading but because it is written by profession bullshit artists it would take a sincere person, someone interested in the truth of the matter, a little while to unpack and properly roast. Since very few people will likely take it seriously it would be a waste of time. Why do these people waste everyones time with such CRAP?

D.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Darrel - You know perfectly well why people "waste everyones time with such CRAP" - they are paid to give Libertarians and Anarchists and other fantasy-world sheep excuses to not deal with reality or have to change their ways (with the concurrent profit for GM). It is a pity that once-reputable people like George Will "elevate" their fantasies among people who don't realize Will & Co have sold out. However, GM's profit margin does illustrate that fewer people are being taken in by such "fun with numbers" pseudo-factoids.