CNW Marketing generated a widely discredited report due to some severe errors in expected vehicle life-time. However, they were quoted on the amount of energy needed to produce different cars in this news report:
Takes more energy to make a hybrid than it does an SUV | The San Diego Union-Tribune
Now the usual response by hybrid skeptics is to propose 'setting ones hair on fire and jumping off the nearest building.'
There are more credible reports that:
The consistent flaw in the CNW Marketing report was to cut every hybrid's expected life-time and annual mileage while showing the huge, SUVs as driving exceptional miles for double the life-time of the hybrids.
Reading the CNW Marketing report, if a family had a hybrid Camry and a gas Camry, they would choose to drive the less fuel efficient, gas Camry more than the hybrid. So do the mind experiment and walk to your driveway with a gas and hybrid equivalent vehicle . . . Only in a CNW Marketing world would you want to spend more money on fuel and take the less efficient vehicle.
Currently, my NHW11, 2003 Prius, has over 130,000 miles. Earlier this year, I helped replace the traction battery of a 2001 Prius with 250,000 miles ($1,700 built using battery modules from salvage Prius.) The highest mileage, NHW11 Prius in the USA had 350,000 miles when a Buick T-boned it in an intersection. It had never had the battery replaced and the transaxle oil had only been replaced at 300,000 miles.
Believing hybrid skeptics is like chastity, its own reward . . . and punishment.
Bob Wilson