Thanks to the persistent popularity of the Prius among American drivers, who buy 65 to 70 percent of all Toyota hybrids sold worldwide, the company is considering developing a bigger, badder version of the gas-sipper. James E. Lentz III, the head of Toyota Motor Sales USA, says he has proposed creating a separate Prius brand akin to the auto giant's Scion spin-off. The new line, which would be sold in regular Toyota dealerships and available only in the U.S., could include various sizes -- including, said Lentz, "one on steroids." Sa-weet! Company officials, who recently announced the long-term possibility of converting their entire high-end Lexus line to hybrid models, are said to be mulling over the idea. "We're catching the wind on this," Lentz said. Or is that the breeze from a thousand F150 owners laughing?
source: The New York Times, Reuters
Cautious optimism for Copenhagen deal as Barcelona climate talks end
Another coal plant bites the dust
Barcelona outcome: White House strategy is plea for more time
Comments
View as Flat
Wolfy Posted 9:25 am
10 Oct 2008
Permalink
archigeek Posted 11:03 pm
10 Oct 2008
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 2:37 am
11 Oct 2008
Permalink
christophersj Posted 2:38 am
11 Oct 2008
Of course its not enough, but the compass is pointed in the right direction.
Permalink
saluki Posted 3:18 am
11 Oct 2008
Who the hell are you to tell people what they can and cannot like. Fascist attitudes simply overwhelm this forum. You people are ready to force everyone to live the way that you want them to at the drop of a hat.
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 3:29 am
11 Oct 2008
...for Al Gore III use in his drug deals.
Permalink
Angelsnecropolis Posted 3:40 am
11 Oct 2008
The Prius has the stigma of being a wimp car. American auto heritage has almost always been emphasized by big engines with big power aka Muscle Cars. A "Prius on steroids" will expand the consumer base to those that like more HP.
The problem is whether or not they sacrifice efficiency for more power. If they can make a more powerful Prius that doesn't lose it's efficiency then it would be a good sell. If the car loses MPG then I think it's a step backwards.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:00 am
11 Oct 2008
That is good for government use too. Fancier, muscled up models will always be around. Just concentrate on mass producing a folks wagon now.
To haul just plain folks around, economically. Like the model T did.
Hot rids won't dissapear, they will run on plugin electric spare motors most of the time. Only firing up the 500 hp engine ocasionally.
Permalink
Angelsnecropolis Posted 4:05 am
11 Oct 2008
Permalink
yoder Posted 5:29 am
11 Oct 2008
The Prius is made to get great mileage. Many people (including myself) like the way it looks. I also like the way the Tesla looks, but the Tesla cannot carry 3' x 5' sheets of plywood, my toolboxes and a stack of 2x4's.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 8:41 am
11 Oct 2008
With electric cars you can actually trade horsepower for mileage with the flip of a switch. Many electric bikes already have this feature.
Permalink
saluki Posted 1:38 pm
11 Oct 2008
Lessen your impact as much as you like. Just leave me the hell alone.
"I can't speak for everyone but I feel the persons not taking the situation seriously are, in a way, threatening my existence as well as the existence of everyone else."
Yes, that was why they used to torture and burn people durning the Spanish Inquisition. Just a bunch of honest, humanely motivated priests that wanted to save peoples immortal soul. They were every bit as sure of the rightness and justice of their cause as you.
"This is why I get worked up because I know there are a lot of people that won't do anything due to laziness or ignorance."
For example, the ignorance of climate scientist like Lindzen, Christy, Spencer, Schwartz, Loehle, Moberg, etc., that all disagree about there being any climate emergency. Instead you are running around ranting because of the output of some climate models, absolutely non of which have yet been proven accurate.
Yes, that was why they used to torture and burn people durning the Spanish Inquisition. Just a bunch of honest, humanely motivated priests that wanted to save peoples immortal soul. They were every bit as sure of the rightness and justice of their cause as you.
"I would have to concur that if people don't make changes of their own free will then the government will have to force them to for the sake of everyone."
Thank you for admitting that you are an eco fascist. You are like the communists of the Soviet Union who demanded that everyone sacrifce themselves for the good of all. But somehow sacrifce for the good of all simply yielded the misery of all those that were being sacrificed, and they were the all.
"I would have to concur that if people don't make changes of their own free will then the government will have to force them to for the sake of everyone."
Permalink
naught101 Posted 2:47 pm
11 Oct 2008
There hasn't been any evidence refuting the anthropogenic global warming theory for years. Lindzen and co. don't deny that it's happening, they just disagree about the severity. You can choose to side with the radicals or the conservatives, but either way, now, or some point in the future, climate change is a serious issue.
Permalink
saluki Posted 3:07 pm
11 Oct 2008
There hasn't been any evidence supporting the magnitude of the anthropogenic global warming claims - ever.
"You can choose to side with the radicals or the conservatives, but either way, now, or some point in the future, climate change is a serious issue."
No, it's not a serious issue. If Lindzen, Spencer and others are right, climate sensitivity would be around .6C per CO2 doubling. It's doubtful that there would be any serious effect on the earth until we get more than 2.5C. It would require 4 CO2 doublings to get to this point. Starting at 280 PPM, 560 would be one doubling, 1120 would be 2, 2240 would be three, and 4480 would be four. So far we have moved from 280 PPM to about 385 PPM. The odds of getting even that second doubling that would take us to 1120 PPM before we run out of fossil fuel is extremely remote. And that second doubling would only give us 1.2C total of global temperature change. So there is only danger if the higher numbers for climate sensitivity - like 3C per doubling - are true. So far we have zero emperical evidence to support such a number. All we have for that number is models that make feedback assumptions that have never been verified. So their acceptance is really no different than the inquisitors believe about people's immortal soul.
The global warming editor of wiki ran for the green party in the UK. He is a certified eco nut. Try giving me impartial links if you don't mind, because I don't waste my time with the enviro sections of wiki.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:23 pm
11 Oct 2008
We need a plugin hybrid model T for the masses. No frills, low power, utilitarian, no complication, we are dealing with industrial re-evolution.
Nothing less will revive our economy and cure our climate.
Lovins has the right design, it just needs to be stripped of the frills.
Let car companies decorate their models differently, but insist that the guts meet a set of simple specifications for weight, mileage, HP, and efficiency. make the million vehicle per year orders from government based on those specifications.
Just like the government did in WW2 war production.
This would be a revolutionary mass produced world beating, oil saving export too. restoring our manufacturing sector, stopping oil imports, and boosting exports.
Even me-firsters like saluki who wouldn't buy one, would have cheaper gas. Us country firsters would all buy them to stop oil imports and boost our american manufacturing juggernaut, revived once again. And save lots of money doing it.
Give us a 15,000 dollar plugin hybrid carbon fiber hypercar, a 21st century model T.
Permalink
naught101 Posted 3:27 pm
11 Oct 2008
pre industrial (1750) = ~275ppm
now = ~383ppm
now = temperatures ~0.8 above pre-industrial levels.
THAT is empirical evidence, and it makes 0.6C sensitivity look fairly uncertain.
"It's doubtful that there would be any serious effect on the earth until we get more than 2.5C"
Now = Arctic melting more each year, well below previous averages for summer sea ice extent. The North-sea passge open for the first time in many millenia. Seems like at least one "serious effect".
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 2:28 am
12 Oct 2008
Permalink
Pangolin Posted 5:34 am
12 Oct 2008
Make several sizes of electric engines to power everything from micro cars to 2-ton flatbeds.
Modular battery packs in specified dimensions and voltage outputs allow customers to pay for range, speed and power in chunks.
If cars had the kind of modular component sharing that computers have performance would increase for small increases in price. Rather than replacing the entire package a module could be upgraded.
Permalink
saluki Posted 6:11 am
12 Oct 2008
That is emperical evidence, but it does nothing to dispute the 0.6C. First, we were still comming out of a little ice age near the start of the modern industrial period. So some warming would have been expected regardless. We have also had an increase in solar activity in the last 100 years.
http://reallyrealclimate.blogspot.com/2008/07/20th-centur ...
In addition to this, Spencer has been able to show that 70% of the warming of the last 30 years can be accounted for using ENSO, PDO, AMO, etc.
So the .8C that we already have is not meaningful in determining climate sensitivity, because other climate factors were at work at the same time.
On top of that, we have had no warming for the past 11 years, and ENSO does not account for it. So if the overwhelming 3C per doubling that the IPCC advertises is at work, what has been strong enough to overcome that for the past 11 years?
"Now = Arctic melting more each year, well below previous averages for summer sea ice extent. The North-sea passge open for the first time in many millenia. Seems like at least one "serious effect"."
I don't really care about the Arctic melt. The Holocene optimum had temperatures that were 2C warmer than today for a very long time, and most species seem to have done great.
Concerning the passages; the Northwest passage has been sailed through about a dozen times since 1904. Concerning the passage on the European side, we have no clue how often it has been open. We only have 30 years of satellite records of the Arctic.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 10:33 am
12 Oct 2008
Permalink
RossBleakney Posted 3:59 am
15 Oct 2008
In general, most American cars have way to much horsepower than they need (I don't need all the power that a Prius has). Unless you are towing a boat, you don't need any more horsepower than what a Prius provides (again, passing slow vehicles up hill is no problem). Many of the hybrids focus on performance almost exclusively, rather than gas mileage. The result is a green washing, in my opinion.
The key here is not whether Toyota will make bigger (and smaller) hybrids, but whether they make them with good gas mileage. As good as the Prius is, it is not an SUV. It is not a mini van. There will always be a select group of people who want a vehicle that can go over rough terrain or carry more people. If Toyota, for example, made the RAV4 a little sleeker (to reduce drag) and added a hybrid, they could probably get 30 or 35 mpg out of that car. That would be a huge accomplishment.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:34 pm
15 Oct 2008
Permalink