Etonnant non ?

[Defcounty90]

Petite étude de classement intérressante. De plus avez vous entendu la Pub de Renault sur leurs motorisarions ou ils expliquent que pour fabriquer des voitures propres ils dépenssent beaucoup d'énérgie…!! Hallucinant.

Bonne lecture :

Jeep TJ has lowest lifetime energy cost

Hybrids may use a little less fuel on the road than many of the other new models, but they're really poor performers when you count their lifetime energy costs, and when it comes to which vehicles use the least energy it's wrong to judge a vehicle by its cover.

(Photo: DaimlerChrysler)
So, if using less energy of all kinds is important to you, there are more than 150 better choices than any hybrid available today, starting with the Jeep TJ (soon-to-be Wrangler).

This is the compelling finding of a comprehensive study by CNW Marketing Research of the lifetime energy usage of all the cars sold in the U.S. This study shows that popular hybrids such as the Ford Escape, Honda Accord and Civic, and Toyota Prius are at the back of the pack when you add up the energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage.

Indeed, the study shows that those hybrids can cost society (if not their owners) three times more per mile in energy costs over the lifetime of the vehicle than many cars, trucks and SUVs of all kinds. Hybrid vehicles are even a lot more expensive than the same car with a traditional powertrain.

While the results are crafted from U.S. costs and wouldn't strictly apply in Canada, there's no question that the energy cost relationship between vehicles would be the same here.

(The Scion xB and Ford Escort actually get lower numbers than the Jeep TJ, but Toyota Canada hasn't seen fit to bring the former model to Canada yet and Ford of Canada stopped selling Escort some time back.)

The 20 vehicles with the lowest lifetime energy costs per mile (in U.S. dollars) are:

1. Jeep TJ (Wrangler): $0.604
2. Chevrolet Tracker: $0.694
3. Toyota Echo: $0.703
4. Saturn Ion: $0.709
5. Hyundai Elantra: $0.723
6. Dodge SX2.0: $0.728
7. Toyota Corolla: $0.732
8. Chevrolet Cavalier: $0.757
9. Pontiac Sunfire: $0.758
10. Chevrolet Aveo: $0.765
11. Mazda Protegé: $0.772
12. Chevrolet S10: $0.779
13. Ford Focus: $0.0803
14. Hyundai Accent: $0.840
15. Kia Spectra: $0.864
16. Mitsubishi Lancer: $0.872
17. Suzuki Aerio: $0.888
18. Nissan Sentra: $0.962
19. Kia Rio: $0.964
20. Ford Ranger: $0.968 But you could also serve the environment better by choosing a Hummer H2 ($3.027) or H3 ($1.949), a Cadillac Escalade ($2.753), a Lincoln Navigator ($2.617), a Dodge Ram ($2.484), or pretty much anything else for less than an Accord Hybrid ($3.295), Toyota Prius ($3.249), Honda Civic Hybrid ($3.238), or Ford Escape Hybrid ($3.178).

(Photo: DaimlerChrysler)
CNW president Art Spinella says his firm spent two years collecting data on the energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage. "This includes such minutiae as plant to dealership transportation fuel costs, manufacturer and supplier employee driving distances, electricity usage per pound of material used in each vehicle, and literally hundreds of other variables."

To put the data into understandable terms for consumers, it was translated into a "dollars per lifetime mile" figure, Spinella said in an interview from his Portland office. "That is, the Energy Cost per mile driven."

The 20 most Energy Expensive vehicles per mile sold in Canada in calendar year 2005 are as follows:

1. Mercedes Maybach: $11.582
2. VW Phaeton: $11.213
3. Rolls-Royce: $10.660
4. Bentley: $10.555
5. Audi Allroad Quattro: $5.595
6. Audi A8: $4.964
7. Audi A6: $4.963
8. Lexus LS 430: $4.734
9. Porsche Carrera GT: $4.528
10. Acura NSX: $4.453
11. Lexus GS 430: $4.416
12. Infiniti Q45: $4.243
13. Porsche Cayenne: $4.416
14. VW Touareg: $4.134
15. Lamborghini: $4.009
16. Jaguar S-Type: $3.989
17. Mercedes SLK: $3.982
18. Ferrari: $3.962
19. Infiniti M45: $3.876
20. Lexus: GS: $3.861


According to Spinella, one of the reasons hybrids cost more than non-hybrids is the manufacture, replacement and disposal of such items as batteries, electric motors (in addition to the conventional engine), lighter weight materials and complexity of the power package.

"If a consumer is concerned about fuel economy because of its impact on the family budget or social concerns such as depleting oil supplies," says Spinella, "it is perfectly logical to consider buying high-fuel-economy vehicles. But if the concern is centered on broader issues such as the environmental impact of energy usage, some high-mileage vehicles actually cost society more than conventional or even larger models over their lifetime."

Spinella points out that "basing purchase decisions solely on fuel economy or vehicle size does not get to the heart of the energy usage issue. The goal of overall worldwide energy conservation and the cost to society in general, not just the auto buyer can often be better addressed by being aware of a car or truck's dust-to-dust energy requirements."

SOURCE : http://www.auto123.com/fr/info/news/new ... 59574&pg=1

[Jam]

Salut.

Le truc interessant ce serait une vision de l'évolution de l'indicateur depuis X années et sur les Y prochaines.


Là, on a un point sur la courbe, c'est super. Et il a du coûter sacrément d'énergie à tracer ce point !

Et ce point dit quoi ? Que le ratio extrême est dans un rapport 12 à 0,6 c'est à dire 20 si j'ai bien capté.
Franchement, au pif, j'aurais plutot dit 200 ou 300....

[Fyms]

moi, je dis que le truc interressant ce serait d'avoir le même mais en français, que l'on puisse savoir et comprendre de quoi ça parle.

[NOliv']

... depuis X années ....

en particulier 1969 comprise ....

http://www.forum4x4.com/forum/showpost. ... stcount=22

[Jam]

[pattbo]

non c'est pas étonnant

je dirais même que l'étude est incompléte . Il faudrait parler aussi du bilan energétique pour la production de ces carburants de plus en plus "raffinés" pour ces moteurs "propres" et du retraitement des pots de la puissance absorbée par l'utilisation de ces derniers

on peut même aller plus loin : quid de la pollution des sols ? bien plus durable que celle de l'air ....

A++++

[arbrakham]

moi, je dis que le truc interressant ce serait d'avoir le même mais en français, que l'on puisse savoir et comprendre de quoi ça parle.

+1 ....

J'entrave quedalle à la jactance des rosbifs et de leurs chiards des "huéssa" !!!

Et dire qu'ils se prennent pour le nombril du monde..... le trou du c.l, oui !!!

[MaxJeeper50]

comme dis Fym's ce serait interessant de l'avoir en francais.

[OlivierLB]

[quote="arbrakham"]+1 ....

J'entrave quedalle à la jactance des rosbifs et de leurs chiards des "huéssa" !!! ]

les chiards temm....erdent et ont le merite de poser des questions que les grenouilles puantes ne se posent pas, oqpes qu'ils sont a refaire leurs vieilles colonies et a se regarder le nombril alors que le monde evolue!!!!

[arbrakham]

les chiards temm....erdent et ont le merite de poser des questions que les grenouilles puantes ne se posent pas, oqpes qu'ils sont a refaire leurs vieilles colonies et a se regarder le nombril alors que le monde evolue!!!!

Ouais !!! ils m'emm....erdent... tu as mille fois raison

le monde évolue ??? ouais !!! tu as encore raison : l'homme descend du singe, le singe descend du lémurien... je ne suis pas sûr que l'évolution aille dans le bon sens !!!

Peut-être que l'américain est le descendant de l'homme... mais on ne le sait pas encore