A couple of years ago, I ran some numbers trying to figure out which was the better buy for the planet—a biodiesel Jetta or a hybrid Prius. And I came to the tentative, but perhaps counterintuitive conclusion that the best buy was…wait for it…a Toyota Corolla.
The Corolla, you see, was thousands of dollars cheaper than the Prius (the runner-up), even after I accounted for all the savings on gas from driving a fuel-miser. And if you were a green-minded consumer—someone whose top priority was reducing climate-warming emissions, say—you could probably put those thousands to better use somewhere else. Depending on the circumstances, I figured that lots of other investments—power-sipping appliances, say, or a furnace upgrade, or home insulation, or even donations to a worthy cause—might all count as “better buys” than a brand-new Prius.
But with recent gas price spikes, I wondered if my earlier calculations were still holding true. And I’ve got to admit it: if you’re in the market for a new car, a Prius is looking better and better all the time.
Take, for example, the most recent figures from Intellichoice, an online car buying & rating service. They compiled figures on total ownership costs—depreciation and financing , maintenance, repairs, fuel, insurance, yada-yada—for a boatload of new cars. From that, they picked the best buy in each vehicle category: the car or truck that had the lowest overall ownership costs for the first five years after purchase.
On this measure, the Toyota Prius rates as the best overall value among all midsized cars. It holds its value well over 5 years; repairs aren’t too costly; and the fuel costs are rock bottom. All in all, a pretty cheap car to own—proof that treading more lightly on the planet doesn’t have to lighten your wallet. Nice job, Prius!
But that’s not the final word. A lot of people looking to buy a “greener” car purchase would be willing to consider a much smaller car than the Prius—they may just want to get around town, and they don’t care if their ride is roomy or stylish. And with a low-end Prius still going for at least $21,000, it’s possible that a cheaper, smaller car would still have the edge—if the buyer’s willing to spend the difference on other green priorities.
So I looked at the best buy among subcompacts, which turned out to be the non-hybrid, 2-door Toyota Yaris hatchback. (The Honda Civic Hybrid, by the way, won in the compact car category. Hybrids are now, quite clearly, a cheap car to own.) With a sales price almost $10,000 less than a Prius, I thought, surely the Yaris would be a contender as the better buy overall.
Only not so much. Intellichoice puts the total, 5-year ownership costs of a Yaris at almost $20,800, counting depreciation, gas, insurance, repairs, etc. A Prius comes in at a little above $22,200 over the same span. So over 5 years, the difference isn’t all that great.
But then, when I dove into the numbers a bit, I think that the Prius makes an even better case for itself. Total fuel costs for both vehicles were calculated at $2.19 per gallon. But actual prices at the pump haven’t been that low in well over a year; these days, $3.00 seems cheap, at least to me. And when I bumped up the price of gas to a more reasonable level, the gap between the Prius and the Yaris narrowed even more.
Then, if you include all the “externalities” of gasoline—including international security costs, which really don’t figure in coal or natural gas—the it looks like the 5-year cost gap between the Prius and the Yaris is pretty negligible. (See, e.g., p. 2 of this analysis of cafe standards for a description of the plausible range for gasoline externalities.)
This is a point worth repeating, so I’ll say it again: based on this data, buying a new Prius, and driving it for 5 years, costs only a teensy bit more than buying a Yaris—even though the sticker price of the Yaris is $10,000 less.
I don’t have the data to extend this analysis past 5 years. It could be that, after year 5, the Yaris starts doing better than the Prius—perhaps the Yaris depreciates slower, since it’s got less value to lose and no battery to replace. But at the same time, the fuel efficiency savings of the Prius will keep racking up, and racking up; and if gas prices rise even a bit from where they are now, those will keep the Prius looking better and better.
Obviously, your mileage may vary. If you don’t drive your car all that much, then the fuel-saving beneifts of the Prius shrink. If you drive a lot, then they’ll rack up faster. Also, I haven’t compared the manufacturing emissions of the two cars—and on that score, the Prius batteries weigh against it, since they require a fair amount of energy to make.
Still, consider me chastened. Despite what I said a few years ago, if I had to recommend a new car right now, I’d probably shade towards the Prius; even if it winds up being a few hundred dollars more expensive than the Yaris, all things included, the hedge against gas price spikes could be worth it. So even if you don’t need the roomier ride, or care about the extra features of the Prius, you could still come out ahead in the end—and with a few spare nickels to spend on something far more worthy than a car.
Update: I’m still not sure how I feel about a new Prius vs. a good-quality used car. I’ll let y’all know, if and when I run those numbers.
MichelleV.P.
*sigh* Thanks to this thoughtful post, after 25 years of living car-free, I’m dreaming of a nice Yaris 🙂
barry
Buying a used car doesn’t affect the overall mpg of the nation’s fleet…or the ghg output per mile travelled. It might make sense for lots of reasons but i don’t see it as a better buy for the planet.Of course, not driving as much and car-sharing and biking and all that is better for planet than driving. But if people are going to keep driving we need all NEW vehicles purchased to be as low-ghg as possible.
RMC
I’ve been thinking about this alot lately, as I will be in the market for a new car next year. I will be driving twice a week round-trip to Olympia. Too bad the Sounder doesn’t go that far…so I’ll drive. (I’m also going to rent a room down there and bike…so at least I’ll save some impact there). Originally, I wanted to get a plug-in, but I know that those won’t be really available at a price I can afford until ’09 or ’10, so I was stuck. Perhaps replacing my 1994 Chevy S-10 with a used Civic or Corolla is the way to go…What I’m wondering is why Toyota doesn’t offer a souped-up Prius with Carbon fiber body panels. This would reduce the weight of the car significantly, and would thereby increase the gas mileage. I believe I’ve seen that a carbon-fiber, plug-in Prius gets around 200 mpg, if you actually ever need gas. Does anyone know if there is a safety reason for not offering such a model?
RMC
According to this web site, its the market for carbon fiber. Maybe its prohibitively expensive? Anyone know?link
Gary Durning
I think carbon fiber is market more for performence cars, or young kids that have put too much money in their old honda civic. I think the most economical car to buy would be a used VW Jetta diesel. My friend katie has a diesel bug, drives to school and work 5 days a week, and fills up hardly at all, like once every three weeks. For people that don’t want a Jetta (don’t blame you) there is a diesel VW passat. Back to the VW Jetta diesel, you can get a 2001-2003 for around 9-13 thousand dollars. Thats pretty cheap for a car with a turbo and gets 40 miles to the gallon or more. My dad and I were talking about the Chevy Tahoe hybrid thats coming out next year. I know alot of people on this site hate SUVs but a hybrid tahoe would save roughly twice as much fuel per year as a hybrid prius. The focus needs to be making the big suvs and trucks more efficent too. Peopele arn’t going to give up their trucks and suvs for little civics. Especially not where I live. The single biggest fuel saving move that would mean alot would be for Ford to put a diesel in their F-150 pickup, which is the best selling vehicle in America. Since that vehicle also makes up a lot of fleets it would benefit companies and contractors that used them more. In addition, since a diesel is alot cheaper than a hybrid, their isn’t as much as a start up cost. Also hybrids are kind of seen as hollywood mobiles. Coming across as holywood is probably the last thing you want to do in Pullman.
Beacon Hiller
We’re quire happy with our Prius purchased in June. Savings at the gas pump cover about 2/3rds of the monthly payment to the credit union; that was the deal-maker for us. Rather put those $$ into acquiring an asset for the family instead of into the pockets of BP.Next generation Toyota hybrid will be a plug-in, due in 2 – 3 years, so we can consider trading then. Dealer also said that eventually all Toyota models will have a hybrid option.
Jon Stahl
Great to see some non-shallow analysis of this! 🙂
gerneitz1
Gary Durning-I ran across some info the last Sunday in the paper relating as Ford produces a truck down in the South American market with a diesel but not for up here. Politics/money could be a reason? Don’t know for sure. Maybe your politico people could ask Ford officials for the reason? We are wondering in Twin Cities(St. Paul/Minneapolis) as we face a Ranger shutdown of our plant. Putting a diesel in a Ranger should give it pretty good mileage not to mention the F150?
Gary Durning
Putting a diesel in a Ranger would give it great mileage, not to mention that would be pretty cool. I realized as I was reading this blog that we should also be talking about diesel hybrids.
sf
Did you hear about Al Gore III. Arrested for driving 100MPH and unauthorized possession of prescription drugs. At least, he was driving a Prius.
jct3
I strongly agree with barry above about used cars. We have met the enemy and they are us, or at least our internal combustion engines. The pollution problems we have here in the Puget Sound region because of cars (emissions and fuel runoff) are among, if not THE, biggest environmental problems for us. For environmentalists to endorse the purchase of used cars is self-defeating, even kind of absurd. It endorses technology that is unsustainable for multiple reasons (greenhouse gases, toxic by-products, the “global insecurity premium”, etc). Plug-in electric opens up limitless possibilities on the supply side, and allows you to focus on relatvely few production sources, rather than a zillion individual consumers. To me, it’s a no-brainer.
wc
The thing about buying a used car, especially an efficient one, is that it saves the entire cycle of manufacturing and disposal. The same argument applies, to some extent, that applies to reusing anything, and it’s why Recycling is the 3rd of the three R’s =)
jct3
The point about reuse of autos is not lost on me, it’s just not very compelling. The message needs to be that the whole gasoline internal combustion engine regime is the problem.
ctimmins33
I bought a new Prius in February and loved everything about the car(the first car I’ve owned where I had no complaints). Last month, I had an accident due to brake failure and Toyota is ignoring the problem. I’ve discovered there is lots of info on the internet about Prius brake failure. Check this out thoroughly before you buy one.
Morgan Ahouse
Consumer side expenses (in current dollars) and emissions from driving are important considerations, but the ecological story is much more than this. For starters, it includes the impacts of production, disposal and maintenance.I’m disappointed that there isn’t much in the way of life cycle assessment info. readily available on the net. On the other hand, I did locate this company that has been working on what some call automotive economics. You can go straight to their controversial report, Dust to Dust Automotive Energy Report .One of the interesting and controversial conclusions centers on the dirty business of nickel extraction and processing. Also inciting controversy is that they are withholding much of the technical data for proprietary reasons.
Patrick
Good analysis, but like most discussions of hybrids we seem to be fixated on mileage. I like the lower gas costs of my Prius but like even more the fact that it’s still at the top of the EPA list for lowest greenhouse gas emissions. Also, if I plan to keep the car for 100,000 miles or more I’ll have to spend $3000 to replace the nickel metal hydride batteries, and take Toyota’s word about what they do with all that used heavy metal, which makes me a little uncomfortable.
Morgan Ahouse
Regarding buying a used vehicle – I suspect that if the CNW report I cited about is at all accurate, one would have to be buying a vehicle from near the bottom of the heap to be making an ecologically worse decision than buying a new vehicle (all other things being equal).Regarding fleet conversion to advanced technologies – I don’t have time to dig up the research right now, but I believe I have seen the conclusion that converting all automobiles to plug-in hybrids will only neutralize expected VMT growth in our region. Deep GHGe reductions will only come from redesigning our communities. Also, we don’t currently have the capacity for that much conversion to electric vehicles.My conclusion is that those who feel they must have a new vehicle for reliability reasons and because they ‘must’ drive a great deal of miles should be purchasing vehicles with advanced technologies. Those who poke around town, should definitely be riding hand-me-downs.
frankjohn
I like to keep the local economy going with the big purchases I make. I’m also going to try to keep my driving miles to less than 5 000 miles a year and hopefully even less in the future. I admire those folks who are able to get around without vehicles at all, but I’m a farmer so that complicates things. And I’m going to keep my 2000 Pontiac Montana (grandkids to look after) for as long as I can (it actually still gets 33 mpg on the highway)with all its airbags, etc. And even new ones are far more reasonably priced than the competition. However, I am pleased that my daughter and son-in-law living in a big city now own one electric bike between them.
Jon Morgan
I think the focus needs to be taken beyond internal combustion engines—we need to slash car use period. There’s no way around the environmental and other devastation cars cause, no matter what fuel they run on and what emissions they pump out. The land consumed by a car-based infrastructure (roads, parking, gas stations, car dealerships…) is outrageous, not to mention the raw materials and fuel needed to build each car. Traffic congestion, road rage, sprawl land use patterns, and 43,000 deaths a year from car accidents have no relation to car fuels and emissions—they’ll be with us as long as we keep driving cars. We need high-quality rail transit networks with dense transit oriented development around each stop/node. I don’t see an environmentalist way to continue using cars. It’s definitely harder here than it was on the East Coast, but I haven’t owned a car in 8 years. Behind weapons, I can’t think of anything humankind has ever invented that it so utterly destructive as the car.
Corey
@ Jon Morgan:Yes!You should go to Japan to see the first-world country closest to realizing the goal of giving rail and livable communities primacy over the automobile. I lived there for 4 years and it has forever changed the way I see things.Keep preaching the gospel – as will I!
Cirno
The toyota prius is truly a great car. It is one of the greatest innovation in the automotive industry.