The automotive press are teeming over the wonder of modern engineering that they are calling the Prius.  It now gets 50mpg on the combined cycle, is bigger, looks fresh – and will be available to consumers in the spring. What else could a consumer want other than a $25-$30 thousand dollar Toyota Echo?

The problem here is that the Prius is a gimmick, it was not really invented to be anything other than a fashion statement. I imagine that some Prius drivers, on their way to the dealership were considering either the eco-friendly Prius or getting a tattoo on their forehead: “I <3 Polar Bears!”.

I think that Toyota have done a brilliant job in marketing the Prius, and an even better at keeping the bad press off of their cash cow.  Toyota gave their consumers a reason to feel good about their car purchase. This illusion comes in the form of “good gas mileage” when the car is on the road. What isn’t marketed, and what people don’t realize is that cars have an enormous carbon footprint not only when they are exploding your money in their engines – but also when they are built. This comes down to how they are made, the production and design process, who the manufacturers use as suppliers, how easily they can be recycled and reused, and even how they are sold. This is what you might call the real environmental impact of a car.  A couple of independent studies have investigated this “dust to dust” cost.

For instance, think about the super-awesome battery systems in a Prius – they are made from heavy metals like Nickle and Cadmium. They have to be dredged up from the bowels of the earth, cleaned with acid – go through several refinement processes and jump on a giant diesel freight boat and shipped to Asia where they are then put into the car. This is “energy expensive”. Also take into account that the manufacturers sometimes do specifically dirty parts of the construction of car parts in places where environmental standards are set by dictators in countries you have never heard of, and can’t pronounce. 

One such study publishes the actual “dust to dust cost per mile” for many cars. Each year they take into account the total global impact of a given car – given ALL information.  Their 450 page study found that the Toyota Prius’ dust-to-dust cost was $2.191 per mile.  To give you some perspective – a Ford Focus is $0.621 and Toyota Corolla is $0.748 and a Mazda 3 is $0.876. The turbocharged, fun to drive, and fantastic looking Mini Cooper S is a mere $1.894. Even my old turbocharged Audi A3 edged out the Prius at $2.181.

Now there is no question that ti gets worse from here on out. My new car, the M Roadster is a whopping $2.832. But that is nothing compared to the Honda Accord Hybrid which lands at $4.228 which just barely edges out the Ferrari 430 ($4.317) or the Lamborghini Gallardo ($4.444)

If people really wanted to help the environment they would pay attention to these studies and buy a normal, oil burning Ford Focus, or at least acknowledge that gas mileage and running costs aren’t everything. If people want to save the planet, they should go and do it for real – but instead they make the half ass, short sided, easy way out effort by just getting a car with a giant battery in it, which also happens to have a brilliant “green” marketing campaign. That way EVERYONE WILL KNOW that you care. A tattoo might of been easier. It would of at least been better for the environment. 

I think people like this sort of bliss, and that’s fine – buy what you want. But don’t come to me giving me dirty looks when I pull up to the local hippy coffee shop in my “gross polluter” – something tells me that you wouldn’t of given me that sort of hassle had I pulled up in an Accord Hybrid, but you should have. I would of definitely deserved it.