Greenest / Cleanest cars (life analysis)

[Fat Charlie]

The problem is determining exactly where one ends and the other begins...

[niky]

True enough. They could go with multiple numbers, passengers, cargo and combined.

It just makes little sense calling a small car with a gigantic boot midsized. It's not like people are going to be riding in the trunk.



Most people, anyway.

[theaveng]

Originally Posted by spacemanspif

The RAM 2500 was the bottom vehicle with a score of 18 with a 5.7L V8. Is there anywhere to see the whole list??

The Ram 2500 is available in a cleaner version (22) that beats the Veyron and M-B luxury sedan. If you want the whole list, you can buy the complete Greenercars book. It grants you access to the last ~20 years of lists, calculations, analysis, etc.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by theaveng

Every year (since the mid-1990s) greenercars.org publishes the cleanest cars based on a factory-to-junkyard analysis. I went through the list and picked-out some of the more-interesting cars. The ones that surprised me I put in bold:

100 maximum score
59 SmartForTwo EV
58 Spark EV
57 Prius City

55 Leaf EV. Prius, Civic, and other compact hybrids.
54 Mirage, Fiesta (normal nonhybrids) (3 cylinders)(and cleanest manual shift cars)
54 Civic Natural Gas

One more honorable mention
The same CREEE Green cradle to grave score.

Gen1 Insight
Last score in 2006 (when they stopped making them) was:
MT 54
CVT 57

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by IamIan

Gen1 Insight
Last score in 2006 (when they stopped making them) was:
MT 54
CVT 57

That says there's something screwy about their analysis. Automatic transmission costs more to manufacture & maintain, gets worse mpg, and (going by accounts here & Insight Central) needs more maintenance, but still gets a higher score?

It's also (IMHO, anyway) pretty messed up to give a score to a new car, and not update that on the basis of experience.

[Hersbird]

I too would like to see their methodology and exactly where they are giving and taking away points. My bet is their first fail is to use EPA numbers, then they probably fail to penalize things they like that are harmful like added batteries and their replacement. Then add lots of points for how pure exhaust is even though the difference from high to low in modern cars isn't much. My pet peeve is the catalytic converter, it's time to rethink it's benefits to it's cost of production and use especially outside of big cities.

[sheepdog 44]

The only thing to account for the Insights lower score is that it's made entirely of aluminum, which is more energy intensive to refine than steel. However recent articles have stated it is less energy intensive to use aluminum than steel over a fullsize vehicles lifetime because of the mpg gained in weight savings.

The CVT gets a better score because it has less NO2 emissions making it cleaner. The MT has less Co2 emissions though.

As it stands the Insight is more eco friendly than many electric cars on that list. If you used the actual mpg you get, it would be equal or darn near close to superior. Which is already saying a lot for a the poor "mild" hybrid drivetrain.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

My pet peeve is the catalytic converter, it's time to rethink it's benefits to it's cost of production and use especially outside of big cities.

EFI, and even turbochargers, decrease both the amount of unburnt hydrocarbon emissions but also carbon monoxide that is more harmful than CO2. IIRC, the reason for cats to get widespread was exactly the carbon monoxide emissions...

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by sheepdog 44

The only thing to account for the Insights lower score is that it's made entirely of aluminum, which is more energy intensive to refine than steel. However recent articles have stated it is less energy intensive to use aluminum than steel over a fullsize vehicles lifetime because of the mpg gained in weight savings.

Also, if you happen to have the misfortune to live in places where the state dumps thousands of tons of corrosive chemicals on the roads, your aluminum body will not start looking like Swiss cheese after a few years, so the vehicle lifetime may well be much longer.

The CVT gets a better score because it has less NO2 emissions making it cleaner. The MT has less Co2 emissions though.

As I thought, their weighting scale is messed up, giving undue weight to NOx, which eventually winds up as soil nitrates - IOW fertilizer.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

if you happen to have the misfortune to live in places where the state dumps thousands of tons of corrosive chemicals on the roads, your aluminum body will not start looking like Swiss cheese after a few years, so the vehicle lifetime may well be much longer

And also, less energy and raw materials are required to manufacture the supplies needed to repair the rusty spots.