At this point, it seems certain that the old Prius versus Hummer "debate" is never going to die. Despite being proven false, the study continues to pop up every now and then as forum fodder or as ammunition for hybrid-haters all over the globe. It's alright if you don't like hybrids, but real factual data would be much preferable to lies and misconceptions of the truth. The most recent evidence of hybrid-hating comes from an article contained in the latest Autowritiers Newsletter and is penned by Bill Maloney, who cites the oft-debunked CNW Marketing study we mentioned earlier.

A bit of truth rings out from Moloney's column regarding some hybrid purchasers, as some Prius owners admit to basing their buying decisions out of a desire to appear green. It has been argued, and may in fact be true, that many consumers chose the Prius over another hybrid model due to the fact that it is readily recognized as a green choice. Still, to suggest that all hybrids are purchased solely to make a statement is ludicrous, as it is the savings in gasoline that prompt the vast majority of fuel-sipping choices.

[Source: Autowriters.com Newsletter]

The debate over which iconic vehicle - the Hummer or the Prius - uses less energy over the course of the vehicle's lifetime comes up again and again. See the example posts, in chronological order, here and here and here and here and here. (Alternately, there's also the little issue of women's assumptions about these two cars). It's the story that won't die.

Joseph Romm, writing at grist yesterday, tries to put the argument to rest - finally, hopefully - with his post "Prius easily beats Hummer in lifecycle energy use; 'Dust to Dust' report has no basis in fact."

Romm specifically says he's tackling the story because the original study, by CNW Marketing Research, that claims a Hummer is better for the environment than a Prius keeps echoing around the Internet while "a couple of good debunking studies -- by the Pacific Institute (PDF) and by Rocky Mountain Institute (PDF) -- haven't gotten much attention, according to Technorati."

Romm's done a lot of work in his post, and I want to give him credit by sending readers his way. The important thing to takeaway from the post, though, is this:

I am mocking this [CNW's] report because it is the most contrived and mistake-filled study I have ever seen -- by far (and that's saying a lot, since I worked for the federal government for five years). I am not certain there is an accurate calculation in the entire report. I say this without fear of contradiction, because this is also the most opaque study I have ever seen -- by far. I defy anyone to figure out their methodology.

All in all, Romm debunks like the best of 'em. Whenever the Prius v. Hummer debate comes up again in the future, we'll just point people to his post. You wouldn't think it'd be so hard to convince people that a car that gets 45+mpg is better for the environment than a vehicle that gets ~17, but with marketing firms like CNW mucking the waters, common sense sometimes has a hard time finding the light.

[Source: grist, h/t to Dan K.]

Oh goodness. Talk about setting the match a little close to the powder keg.

Two Cars.com interns were sent out into the streets of Chicago recently and asked women their opinions about various cars that a guy might show up for a first date in and what their reactions would be. Coming from someone who thinks about cars just a wee bit more than the average person on a daily basis, let's just say I cringed more than once while watching this clip. I feel kind of bad for these ladies, who are portrayed as harsh, simplistic and somewhat ignorant. Or maybe that's just who they are.

Starting at around 2:25, the video gets to the first of our titular items, the Prius. Aside from barely knowing that the Prius is "good on gas," most of the women react favorably to the hybrid. As for the Hummer H2, well, just watch.

I don't think the Prius v. Hummer debate is ever going to go away, do you?

UPDATE: Thanks to Alex's comment below, I've posted about the video with men answering this question as well.

[Source: Cars.com, YouTube, thanks to Linton for the tip]

Bengt Halvorson at The Car Connection has posted a critical look at the controversy over the total and complete environmental cost of hybrid vehicles. Yes, they do offer better fuel economy and lower overall emissions, but some critics and analysts say recycling and production costs--including the mining of materials needed for batteries--create an overall larger environmental footprint than a gas-guzzling Hummer.

Much of this debate falls back on a study from CNW Marketing Research that states hybrids use more energy in their lifetime than a large SUV. This dust-to-dust analysis has been blasted by an official at the Union of Concerned Scientists, saying the study was contradicted by MIT and other scientific communities. Toyota has also rejected the study, saying it doesn't reflect the data the automaker has compiled in its lifecycle analysis.

I won't go into all the points raised in Halvorson's lengthy story, which offers the argument that environmental damage and energy are not synonymous. But the biggest problem with engaging in a serious debate is that CNWMR won't release its data or methodology from its report for critical peer review. Meanwhile, the report's conclusions are often stated as fact throughout conservative and anti-environmental commentary.

Related:

• Hummer vs Prius Redux: This time to Hummer? I don't think so!

[Source: Bengt Halvorson /The Car Connection]

Here we go again, another writer putting out a story about the Hummer being greener than a Prius. Even Hummer manufacturer General Motors isn't foolish enough to try and make this absurd claim. It's not clear what the author's motivation is, but he might want to check some facts next time put clicking the publish button. The main evidence he references are the now debunked CNW research article that came out in 2006, that contained plenty of factual errors in their analysis of the manufacturing costs of the nickel metal hydride batteries and information about nickel producer Inco.

You can read Sebastian's follow up on the CNW study to get the skinny on that. The information on Inco is just plain outdated and wrong. Yes, Inco did a lot of probably irreparable damage to the area around Sudbury, Ontario over the many decades, and I will not defend them. The 1,247 foot tall Inco superstack definitely spread acid rain far and wide over eastern Canada for nearly two decades. However a major pollution control program was put in place in the late 1980s and since 1994, the stack has emitted almost nothing but water vapor. Most of the Ontario lakes that were damaged by acid rain in the 1970s and 1980s have since recovered and are now doing well.

Finally, the author references the changes to the EPA fuel economy ratings this year, and the fact that Prius ratings fall about 25 percent from 2007 to 2008. What he neglects to mention is that every vehicle for sale in the United States suffers a significant drop in the sticker fuel efficiency, including his precious Hummer. Admittedly, hybrids are not a panacea for our problems and they create problems of their own. But this article is just silly. You can find the article at the Read link, or just keep reading here.

[Source: Central Connecticut State University Recorder]

Remember that post from a few months ago about a Hummer being greener than a Prius? Well, the outfit that compared those two iconic vehicles, CNW Research, has gotten its study picked up in England (where the comparison is between a Jeep Cherokee and a Prius) and Toyota is responding by calling the study "Recycled Rubbish?".

I was skeptical of the Hummer = green claim at the time, and people certainly got to talking in the comments about the post. Now Toyota steps in and says CNW is wrong on a lot of fronts, from simple factual errors to larger methodical mistakes. It's important to remember that Toyota isn't an objective bystander in the debate, but I've got to their claims make sense to me.

You can read Toyota's entire argument after the jump.