Skip navigation
Sell your car on Carsguide for free

Elmer Rudd

  • By Neil Dowling
  • Share
  • Email
  • Print
  • Text size
image

Shhhhh …Be vewwy qwuiet … I’m hunting hybwids.

So Rudd has committed $35 million of taxpayers’ funds for Toyota to build a car that Toyota was going to build anyway.

The Toyota Camry Hybrid — available since last year in the USA — arrives in Australia in 2010 aimed at those people who still have money left in their pockets.

Where did the $35 million come from? It's the money Mitsubishi returned to the Federal Government after giving up on building the 380.

I guess more money will be needed from us to give an equal amount of money to Ford and Holden who may have similar ideals. Maybe the Victorian government can foot that bill after personally coughing up $25 million to further help the Toyota hybrid scheme.


Is the price of petrol hurting you? Tell us how ...


In an amazingly naive, off-the-cuff gesture with our money, Rudd reckons hybrid cars should be produced by car makers and sold as low-emission, low fuel consumption answers to personal mobility.

It's a warm and cuddly idea that will go nowhere. In the same week as Rudd's announcement — incidentally it was World Environment Day during that week — our own carsguide.com.au website survey found very few motorists were interested in hybrid cars.

As we have found, they are expensive and compared with a similar-sized petrol car, take more than 10 years of driving before their economy compensates for the purchase price difference.

Did I mention the hybrid battery. In fact, did anyone mention the hybrid battery?

This overgrown, overpriced mobile phone battery costs about $5000.

It will last anywhere from five to 10 years before needing replacement. The battery cost is falling, so guess $2500 as a future replacement cost — or in layman's terms, equivalent to the cost of 21 months of petrol at the average annual car distance.

The old battery will then need to be disposed of with considerable safety.

So we have a new Toyota Camry Hybrid costing about $5000 more than a petrol Camry but is estimated to be 43 per cent more economical.

The official fuel consumption of the Camry Hybrid is 5.7 litres/100km, compared with 9.9 l/100km for the Camry petrol.

The breakeven point — when the Hybrid's better fuel economy finally catches up with the Hybrid's $5000 extra purchase cost, is five years. (at $1.60 a litre and 15,000km a year).

So if you keep the car for five years and maintain the official fuel figures the Hybrid will work for you.


Find cheap fuel: search by suburb or postcode


But do you really need one?

Australia sold 1437 Toyota Prius in the five months to May this year. That's a mere 7.4 per cent of the sales of the much cheaper Toyota Corolla.

So who's pushing the hybrid line?

Does the Federal Government's sudden interest in hybrid cars go deeper?

Rudd wants hybrid cars made here because he has heard — later than any other motoring journalist and their readers, it seems — that Toyota intends to build a hybrid version of its Camry.

Last year, during the Tokyo motor show in October, Toyota president Katsuaki Watanabe told journalists that the Camry hybrid would be made at an additional factory in the Asian region. When asked, he did not dismiss that Australia would build that car.

Toyota's Victorian plant manufactures or assembles Camry and Aurion models. It has room for a third model and, using imported hybrid powerplants, it is feasible to make a hybrid version of the Camry. Toyota has never denied or refused to acknowledge this fact.

But the point is: Why? Why would Toyota spend millions and millions of dollars to make a hybrid car that will cost motorists more to buy and yet show limited long-term economic benefits?

The over-riding error in Mr Rudd's thinking is that the car industry is self-policing. It doesn't need — and won't listen to — a politician telling them how to make cars. Customers do that.

If the Toyota Prius hybrid is such a great car every Australian family would have one. Not only that, but every other car maker would be making a hybrid rival.

Better benefits for ourselves, the environment and a future of reliable energy may be found on our rooftops.

Except for the Federal Government's very anti-environmental stance of cancelling the subsidy on solar cells.

The demise of the subsidy on solar panels for domestic and commercial buildings was one big — and unexpected — hit, especially for West Australians.

Do you know how many Australian homes can have “free” domestic electricity — without contributing anything to greenhouse gases — by restoring the $8000 subsidy?

With the $35 million picked up by Toyota to do what it was going to do anyway, the answer is 4375 homes that will dramatically reduce energy needs from coal, gas or nuclear.

Time to look after the needs at home, Rudd, not in Tokyo.

 

Comments on this story

Displaying 10 of 40 comments

Page 3 of 4

  • Just a plain good excellent article.

    Greg Brinkley of Sunshine Coast Qld Posted on 18 June 2008 4:06am
  • The PRIUS can’t be charged off the mains for a cheap quick shopping trip.
    The electric drive only replaces the gearbox. So what’s new?
    A tiny bit of regeneration on slowing down will save you enough to buy a box of matches to burn the mongrel car when the battery goes dead.
    Oh and it still runs on petrol.

    Charlie Posted on 18 June 2008 2:33am
  • What, a politician being seen to be doing the “right thing” instead of actually getting with reality? Surely not! My only wish is that governments (and the media) would stop blaming the car industry for all of the worlds supposed problems and start concentrating on the real problem - mainly dirty electricity production, and manufacturing plants. Toyota has already said that their next priority is Hybrid cars that plug in to your home electricity for recharging overnight - blind Freddie should be able to see that this will only increase the need for electricity production, therefore only producing more greenhouse gases than ever! Surely our governments should be concentrating on making clean electricity production an urgent priority, be it solar or wind power. Australia has plenty of both, and plenty of empty land that could quite easily be utilised for endless miles of solar panels and/or wind turbines. Why didn’t the $35 million go into finding ways of doing this cheaply? It would have been money netter spent, and we would all benefit from this sort of investment, rather than giving money to a company that doesn’t really need it!

    Dean Turner Posted on 17 June 2008 10:41pm
  • Let’s face it - the inmates are in charge of the asylum, and the head wardsman has no idea what’s going on.

    We have no solar rebate, but a hybrid car policy that is neither responsible, equitable or cost effective.

    We have changes in FBT rules that are impacting low paid instead of the high paid that were meant to be restricted.

    We have working families getting hit by the increasing fuel impost made worse by the fuel tax and the double counting of FBT, yet they keep saying that the goal is controlling inflation.

    Time to stop massaging their egos Australia and realise that inflation is going to get worse before it gets better, and that all the hybrid cars in the world won’t contribute to the positive outcome we need.

    Australia - learn from Winston Churchill - “You get the politicians you deserve”.

    Ross Wilkinson Posted on 17 June 2008 10:26pm
  • We`ve already had this Dudd for 6 months ...How much longer??Are we there yet??

    simon aniere Posted on 17 June 2008 7:28pm
  • Very well said Mr Dowling, and especially as today 17th June, Honda has released it’s Hydrogen car in limited numbers in the US. Petrol Hybrids were never going to be an answer with all of the environmental problems of disposing of the batteries and their replacement costs each 5 to 10 years.

    Roger Knight of Adelaide Posted on 17 June 2008 6:57pm
  • Elmer is pretty well right isnt it? Elmer Fudd, Rudd, DUD!
    It is ridiculous to GIVE Toyota a lot of money to MAKE money off of us…

    bill williams of gawler Posted on 17 June 2008 6:19pm
  • I think bb from adelaide has a great idea.  why can’t we have more funding for research into other ways to power cars.  I wouldn’t even care if the top speed of my car was only 90-100kms/hr, as long as i’m not paying ridiculous amounts to run my car.  The government should get more behind our inventors than large car companies that can fund themselves.

    J Tilley of Perth Posted on 17 June 2008 5:49pm
  • Even if you discount the environmental aspects, it’s sensibleto consider the economics of buying a Hybrid car in terms of break-even point, but when we expect to see this car in a couple of years at the earliest, and petrol could realistically be $2.50 a litre by then, the maths presented here is entirely out the window. Worse, you’re making calculations of 10 years of fuel basing the price of petrol on the first year. Before you call someone an idiot, I would like you to sell me some petrol today at 1998 fuel prices.

    Rod Whiteley Posted on 17 June 2008 5:40pm
  • Fuel Efficiency, Fuel Economy, A Safer Environment!
    The right market with the best product..for the 21st Century, and Beyond!
    Tomorrow’s Solution for Today’s Fuel
    This is not a water additive and for anybody that is interested in this product contact me via carsguide.

    Julie Eden of Werribee Posted on 17 June 2008 5:30pm
Read all 40 comments

Add your comment on this story

Indicates required

We welcome your comments on this story. Comments are submitted for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited. Please provide your full name. We also require a working email address - not for publication, but for verification. The location field is optional.

Cars for sale

Sponsored Links

Feedback Form
Feedback Analytics