Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your online calculators are using bogus assumptions. It's almost always going to be better to use what you have for longer than to buy an entirely new product.

On the hybrid debate, the hybrid advantage is mostly lost on highways. And if you're driving it very infrequently, the environmental impact of battery production and lithium mining may actually be worse.

But, if you insist on a hybrid regardless of the facts, you might like the Prius V. That should meet your length/size and efficiency requirements.

I would think a plug in hybrid would be the way to go for her because then at least they get some mileage on all electric even on highways.

Sure, but those have pretty robust batteries, with a lot of lithium. What's her real goal here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
OP here, this is an interesting point. Right now I have a 2003 Volvo sedan with 137k miles. I've heard that I can push it to 175k, 200k miles. But on online environmental impact calculators, I am told that it is better to switch over to a hybrid, even with my low current usage. So my thinking was that it's best environmentally to get rid of the Volvo now. But maybe not?

I've talked to DH about ditching a car altogether, but we still make weekend drives, cross-town trips to the pediatricians office, etc., so he is against it.

I am not sure what calculators you are looking at, but is it considering the environmental impact of building a new car?

People don't like to talk about it, because it's not fun or sexy, but a lot of the time, the most environmentally-friendly thing you can do is keep using what you already have. Your Volvo already exists, and the environmental impact of its production has already been paid. The environmental impact for producing your hypothetical new car has not.

Maybe that has been included in the analysis you looked at. If it has not, you should be careful.

The designers of these calculators have hidden agendas. Take their advice with a grain of salt.

Anonymous wrote:Your online calculators are using bogus assumptions. It's almost always going to be better to use what you have for longer than to buy an entirely new product.

On the hybrid debate, the hybrid advantage is mostly lost on highways. And if you're driving it very infrequently, the environmental impact of battery production and lithium mining may actually be worse.

But, if you insist on a hybrid regardless of the facts, you might like the Prius V. That should meet your length/size and efficiency requirements.

I would think a plug in hybrid would be the way to go for her because then at least they get some mileage on all electric even on highways.

Your online calculators are using bogus assumptions. It's almost always going to be better to use what you have for longer than to buy an entirely new product.

On the hybrid debate, the hybrid advantage is mostly lost on highways. And if you're driving it very infrequently, the environmental impact of battery production and lithium mining may actually be worse.

But, if you insist on a hybrid regardless of the facts, you might like the Prius V. That should meet your length/size and efficiency requirements.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you are concerned about the environment, hopefully you are planning to keep your car a really long time. Two years out of fifteen aren't that big a deal.

OP here, this is an interesting point. Right now I have a 2003 Volvo sedan with 137k miles. I've heard that I can push it to 175k, 200k miles. But on online environmental impact calculators, I am told that it is better to switch over to a hybrid, even with my low current usage. So my thinking was that it's best environmentally to get rid of the Volvo now. But maybe not?

I've talked to DH about ditching a car altogether, but we still make weekend drives, cross-town trips to the pediatricians office, etc., so he is against it.

In your shoes, I'd keep the Volvo but continue to keep tabs on what else is out there so that you have a plan if you hit mechanical trouble with it--decide in advance that you will spend up to $x but any more than that and you will replace it. The calculators are generally just comparing mileage for environmental impact, assuming all else is equal--but it isn't in your case, since one car is existing and the other new.

Anonymous wrote:
OP here, this is an interesting point. Right now I have a 2003 Volvo sedan with 137k miles. I've heard that I can push it to 175k, 200k miles. But on online environmental impact calculators, I am told that it is better to switch over to a hybrid, even with my low current usage. So my thinking was that it's best environmentally to get rid of the Volvo now. But maybe not?

I've talked to DH about ditching a car altogether, but we still make weekend drives, cross-town trips to the pediatricians office, etc., so he is against it.

I am not sure what calculators you are looking at, but is it considering the environmental impact of building a new car?

People don't like to talk about it, because it's not fun or sexy, but a lot of the time, the most environmentally-friendly thing you can do is keep using what you already have. Your Volvo already exists, and the environmental impact of its production has already been paid. The environmental impact for producing your hypothetical new car has not.

Maybe that has been included in the analysis you looked at. If it has not, you should be careful.

My family has a Lexus Hybrid and we LOVE it. Such a great family car. Really comfy. My wife insisted on a Hybrid so we got one. Sometimes you just want a Hybrid.

Anonymous wrote:

If you are concerned about the environment, hopefully you are planning to keep your car a really long time. Two years out of fifteen aren't that big a deal.

OP here, this is an interesting point. Right now I have a 2003 Volvo sedan with 137k miles. I've heard that I can push it to 175k, 200k miles. But on online environmental impact calculators, I am told that it is better to switch over to a hybrid, even with my low current usage. So my thinking was that it's best environmentally to get rid of the Volvo now. But maybe not?

I've talked to DH about ditching a car altogether, but we still make weekend drives, cross-town trips to the pediatricians office, etc., so he is against it.

Thank you; these are all really helpful points! Good point that we don't drive the car that much these days, so what does it matter if DH is cramped for the occasional drive?

What about Lexus? They make very nice hybrid sedans.

We love our Prius and it’s roomier than it looks. Gets about 55 mpg. Agree that the rear facing car seat thing is a short term problem.
We also have a hybrid minivan which is great but better for carpool and errands—for trips over 50 miles, the mileage isn’t great because the battery needs to recharge after about 30.

We're researching SUVs and I was having a similar debate. We also don't drive a ton (close-in commute to DC mostly) except for annual trips to New England. I crunched some numbers and at the rate we drive it would take a very very very long time to recoup the additional cost of a hybrid SUV.

That's not the same question that you asked, but hopefully it gives you a sense of how limited the real gasoline savings would be for someone who doesnt rack up a ton of mileage. For my brother, who commutes an hour each way on the highway, a hybrid is a huge money and time saver.

If you don't use the car that much, how much does it matter that the passenger seat is a little cramped with a rear-facing car seat?
I don't know the current status of your child, but most people transition the child to front-facing by the two-year mark.

If you are concerned about the environment, hopefully you are planning to keep your car a really long time. Two years out of fifteen aren't that big a deal.

But, if it's going to be a low-usage vehicle with occasional trips to new england, I'm not sure a hybrid makes the most sense, environmentally. Hybrids have some benefits on the interstate, but it's not a major difference. Having a smaller, lower-horsepower engine is a much bigger deal in that case. And you also have to worry about the environmental impact of producing your battery, and driving a bigger vehicle in general.

I'm all for burning less fossil fuel. I'm just not sure there will be much, if any, difference in environmental impact based on the situation you describe.

Go with what gives you the best value for your money. Can never go wrong with that decision.

I've posted before about needing a long hybrid sedan and got good advice about checking out the Toyota Avalon hybrid. I tried a regular Avalon today, and while it drove and looked well, there was not enough room for a 5'9'' front passenger to be comfortable with a rear-facing car seat in the back.

After the Toyota dealership, I went to a Volvo dealership and found that the S90 sedan (the successor to the S80) was very long, with more than enough room in the front passenger seat with the car seat in the back. I could get a lightly-used S90 for $32k-37k. *But*, I really wanted a hybrid for environmental reasons. We don't drive much these days, but I would like to be able to drive up to my parents in New England and feel good that it's a hybrid.

I'm wondering whether to buy a regular car, like the S90, now, or wait another year and hope that longer hybrid sedans are on the market (for instance, maybe a used S90 hybrid, which is currently available as a custom build for $60k+.) I'm having my second kid in January, but DH could probably suffer for a few months.

For a couple of reasons, I strongly prefer a sedan to a crossover or station wagon.

Thanks everyone!