You are currently browsing the forum as a guest which gives you limited access. To make use of all forum features such as posting to topics, reply to other postings, starting polls and using the Private Messaging System (PM) you are invited to register. Registration is free and simple. All you need is an e-mail address and a password and you are ready to go! Sign up and join the Green Car Network today!
Should you have problems with the registration process, please contact us.
Myth: Electric cars are not greener
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Written on: 21 October 2009 [21:56]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
Topic creator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 583
|
It is often claimed by people that the electric car is not greener when looking at the ecological balance sheet. Just read an online newspaper article and you see that usually half of the people write very critical comments. Some say that the battery manufacturing uses dirty energy from coal power plants, other are convinced that the disposal, resp. recycling issue is far from solved and a real threat to the environment. I guess its just one way to stick your head into the sand and ignore the reality. Others go on to say that samll electric cars with limited speed should not be allowed as they are a traffic obstacle... Opinions expressed in the press can also been experienced on the road. Interesting to note that children are the biggest fans of EVs. Followed by women. Women do not care so much about power, size and prestige. They often think much more practical  What are your experiences in regard to this issue? Ho do you judge the opinion of the people in regard to EVs? Positive and negative experiences on the road? Twike 890
 |
|
Written on: 22 October 2009 [00:22]
|
|
|
iamian
 
registered since: 23.02.2009
Posts: 110
|
It has been my experience that in general most people as they age tend to bow more and more to the constant relentless pressure of the masses... The rebelliousness of youth eventually fades. The next stage seems to be they get defensive about anything that suggests they are doing something wrong. The response I have seen the most as a defensive measure is to try and tear down the target that shows itself to be better... It seems greatly preferred to try and pull down something else instead of of lifting one self up. For instance instead of looking at their life and seeing what they could do to improve it... and make it more 'green' ... instead they prefer to try and tear down / pull down any example that shows anything better than what they are doing. In this sense they find it is easier to try and tear down / pull down the 'greeness' of EVs instead of trying to green up their own transportation. The last part is that sense they are convinced they are already correct from the beginning they don't bother to actually find out the actual data about their claims... they will say it shifts the pollution to the power plant without ever actually looking into it to see if it is better or worse... If anything they go out of their way to avoid learning anything that might make them have to then get defensive again about themselves. ---------- I don't think these masses intend ill , or anything like that ... they have done what got them where they wanted to go the easiest way they saw... and they get defensive from that position. In short it is easier for them to justify to themselves their position.. and it is easier yet not to waste the effort to study the issue and just make assumptions. RE & Efficiency enthusiast
|
|
Written on: 22 October 2009 [23:56]
|
|
|
Yardonn
 
registered since: 22.08.2007
Posts: 160
|
This week i read an article, that changed my mind. EV's are realy not greener, just because they are EV's. Electircity is one major source of polution, and as long as this has not improved greatly, only using an eletric Motor instead of a combustion engine does only move teh Problem to the powerplants. Buying "green" power or even using electricity from an renewable source does not solve the problem, because this power could otherwise be usted to reduce the polution caused by a conventional powerplant when producing energy... EV is today not "the" solution. Energy-Efficient cars or other mobility-concepts are the solution. But of course, there are "green" EV. Twike and CityEl for example use very little Energy (cerncerning the time they were designed....) for transportation. In fact most EV's today are build quite efficient, Due to limited Battery-capacity they had to be quiet efficient in order to get an acceptable range... Of Course EV's have some features, that can make them superior in efficiency to a combustion engine, even if charged from a "dirty"! grid. Regenerative breaking and no "standby" Energy-Consumption for example. While fuel burners definitly have no future (i think almost nobody claims oil to be ther for ever), EV may become green and "renevable" by creating a green power grid. But we are far away from that point... We have to do a lot, and after we have done so, efficient EV's may have a future als indidual transport solution. But i think the future will bring much less individual transport than today. I guess, the electric Car will not live so long after the death of the fuel burners as mean of mass transportation. In a world of a "green" electric grid i believe that electric power will be to expensive so that many people will noc be able to buy many kWh just for their personal transportation. But i stumble into unprovalbe ideas... For me it is a fact, that an EV is not inherrently green. But also that most EV's today running are much green than the majority of the regular cars. We have to stay open for critical statements against EV's, not everyone who argues against EV's is in favour of regular cars or paid by an oil company. Alleweder 4
http://www.akkurad.com allmost full weather protection for one person at 0 - 1.5 kWh / 100 km CityEl as secondary E-Car |
|
Written on: 23 October 2009 [02:07]
|
|
|
iamian
registered since: 23.02.2009
Posts: 110
|
I don't see it as a black and white thing... there are things that are greener than other things... it is a stepping stone of improvements... but that just goes back to actually looking into the specifics of a particular situation and weighing out the pros and cons. Being a EV does not make a vehicle perfect ... but it is still greener than a non-EV counterpart ... this is true for many reasons ... the easiest is that a EV gets greener as its source of power gets greener A EV from an old 'dirty' electrical power source is less 'green' than one from a solar , wind , ect... types of Renewable energy sources. Separate from EV or non-EV... better efficiency can work as a pro or con for a wide variety of things ... it is 'green' as well in and of itself... but EVs are more efficient than combustion engine counterparts, so this is also a benefit to the EV. For example... a Gasoline powered Twike would be more 'green' than most other gasoline vehicles on the road... but a gasoline Twike would pollute more than a EV-Twike charged from a Solar panel. I would say a that a H2 is such an un-efficient personal transportation device that it is entirely possible that a Gasoline powered Twike could end up being more green than a EV H2... but the EV H2 can still be greener than the Gasoline H2. ------------ Of course if one is trying to go all out for greenness and efficiency... it is really hard to beat Velomobiles or bicycles... Which are even greener than a Solar power EV Twike... but it never really stops... There are always situations , conditions, circumstances, specifics , etc... There is no universal truth. ------------ As for the idea of buying 'green' power... any reason at all that encourages a consumer to pay for the 'green' power promotes the 'green' power industry. Yes some uses of power might be better or worse... more or less green... than others. But no matter what the person buys it for... the act of buying it promotes it... and results in more being made / built in order to sell to that market demand. ------------- I agree reducing individual energy life style consumption is a major part of the issue... and down sizing ones commute definitely is a big piece of that. I argued with one guy I know who does tons and tons of driving... and while in his I1 he has an average LMPG of like ~80+ MPG... and he regularly gets 100+ MPG tanks... I told him one day... it is greener to drive at 50MPG for a 5 mile commute than 150 MPG for 15.1 Mile commute... while ideally he could get the 100+ MPG and the short commute... if ones has to choose there is a tipping point where the shorter distances dominate and becomes the 'greener' option, no matter MPG one gets. RE & Efficiency enthusiast
|
|
Written on: 23 October 2009 [09:18]
|
|
|
Yardonn
registered since: 22.08.2007
Posts: 160
|
Of course it's not a black and white issue. But it is an interessing idea, that it is as important ( or even more important) to clean up the power grid than to cleean up the transportation. Intersting thought, that usind EV's shift the problem to the power grid, which is only slowly getting greener. If you see it on a large scale, your EV is powered by the tody-power mix, not your special source. Yea, you can say, my solar pannel powers my EV, but the question is, if it wouldn't be greener Today to give yourt clean electricity to the grid and use a smal size fuel burner. Considering the german power mix, i believe the figures that say that today in Germany EV's are not greener. Of course there are two point still in favour for an EV: Usualy EV's are smaller and driven with more consciousness regarding energyconsuption and the electric grid will become greener, so it is only a question of time when EV;s will be definitly greener than even efficient fuel burners. The point is, that today even a Twike or a CityEl with a combustion engine would be today a reasonable green car. Just think about the possibilities of a range extended twike or cityEL. Just put in half the batteries and replace the rest with an efficient generator. These RE-EV might be quite a succes, and move these car-concets out of ther litte niche of enthusiasts. We might do the enviroment some good to think that way, instead of neglecting the logw efficiency of today's electric grid and promoting a "only EV ist green" campaign. But of course, it is very hard to argue in a way, that is not white or black. The question is how to bring progess to the green issue. the truth is very complicated, no chnace to reach the mass withso complex if - then argumentation... Yes, we shoud promote that EV ist greener, but the truth is a little bit more complex. I no longer drive EV's because they are greener. I drive them because i love the technique and because they are cheaper for me because i can to a lot of maintanace and battery-buildng by myselft. But i will in future argue more for smaller cars and a renevable electrc powerd than for EV's. I will not argue against EV's (not even the bad ones like the Ampera...), because EV's only have a future when they are efficient, the electricity-burners will vanisch from the market without much struggle because they are jeut to expensive in their overall costs..... Alleweder 4
http://www.akkurad.com allmost full weather protection for one person at 0 - 1.5 kWh / 100 km CityEl as secondary E-Car |
|
Written on: 23 October 2009 [23:29]
|
|
|
iamian
registered since: 23.02.2009
Posts: 110
|
I agree the details and specifics can make it overly complicated rather quickly ... especially for the average person who really doesn't have much personal interest in it. I agree promoting the down sizing is a very worth while direction .. and there is lots of potential in that. I agree the source of the electrical power does matter... but, that to just becomes another complicated issue by itself ... The same vehicle powered by gasoline instantly takes allot of hits just by being gasoline powered... how dirty does the electrical power have to be in order to break even? ... Then you have to find out exactly how green or dirty the electrical power source you are using is... depending on the specifics and details , it is possible the EV could be dirtier than gasoline ... but that is far less likely than most people think ... and no matter how clean or dirty the current electrical power source is... the EV can become greener by getting electrical power from a cleaner source... the gasoline is pretty much set and has a much much harder time trying to get cleaner / greener. I will also agree that the downsizing of ones energy needs, weather it be for a smaller vehicle... or a shorter distance to travel ... or a more efficient home ...etc... the down sizing of ones energy usage is a very big part. ----------- While different application offer different levels of pros and cons. I think it would be a rather unusual situation / set of specific details that could result in renewable energy being better used to offset grid energy usage than vehicle energy usage. The biggest potential gains for improvement I see is in lowest efficiency parts of the system... after that there are also significant gains to be had in the greeness of the energy sources themselves. In short ... the grid can get more efficient... but there is massively more potential for efficiency improvements by moving to EV and away from mobile ICE systems... or by down sizing the transportation to properly match its use... A tank makes sense on a battle field... it is just a waste of fuel as a daily commuter vehicle. The power grid already enjoys lots of benefits that are much much more expensive and difficult to implement in a mobile ICE. Even if I powered a power plant with gasoline and used that gasoline produced electrical power in an EV... that would be a net benefit over using gasoline in the mobile ICE to move that vehicle... this is often true for many reasons. A large centrally located power plant is more efficient for the fuel distribution system just to get the fuel to it ... much more potentially efficient than distributing to all the gas stations. A large centrally located power plant is always going to be more efficient of converting any fuel source it uses... A co-generation gasoline power turbine could be well over 80% efficient... a mobile ICE will never be able to get that efficient for use of fuel. The electric motor itself is massively more efficient than the ICE ever will be... Electric motors are usually between 2x and 3x as efficient as a ICE. The Electric motors efficiency does not suffer as much as the ICE does from the variations that are required in a mobile application. Yes greening of the grid is important... but there is more potential room for getting greener in the very wasteful transportation / vehicle systems than in the grid electrical systems... plus a EV automatically benefits from any future greening of the grid. RE & Efficiency enthusiast
|
|
Written on: 24 October 2009 [21:00]
|
|
|
childress
Administrator
registered since: 14.08.2007
Posts: 140
|
I work in the IT (info-tech, ie computer) industry, and a comparison factor is something that I've argued and wanted for several years already: a weighted green/sustainability matrix taking into account as many cradle-to-grave factors as possible (in the car fuel debate, it would be termed 'well-to-wheels'). Only when you have this, will you have a standard baseline of comparison. Let me give you a few examples: Computers A standard desktop computer uses the same amount of energy over it's lifetime (cradle-to-grave) as a refrigerator. However a fridge lasts 20 years, while the standard business replacement schedule for a computer is 3-5 years. Also, 75% of the energy a computer uses is in its manufacture, while a fridge is the opposite -- so on a fridge, the Energy Star ratings mean a lot more than the equivalent energy star ratings on a PC (Energy Star does not tell you how much energy went in to MAKE the thing, only how much it consumes when it's used). Therefore keeping and using a computer as long as possible is the best/most sustainable. But at what point does the energy consumption of an old CRT/G3/G4 computer outweigh the e-waste? When can/should you draw the line? Cheap Motorbikes From a CO2-per-mile-traveled standpoint, a 2-stroke motorbike is a much greener vehicle than your standard automobile. Greener? Yes, in that category. However, South East Asia is currently choking to death from the smog produced by the numbers of high mile-per-gallon BUT high emissions motorbikes. Sustainable? No. Note that detractors from motorcycles (even the less-polluting 4-strokes) will quote emmissions in a 'per-gallon' statistic, making them look far worse than they really are. Gasoline v. Electricity, (and the big elephant in the room everybody's avoiding -- the most wasteful practice of all) One of the things that has been left out of the discussion so far in this thread is WHERE DOES YOUR OIL/GASOLINE COME FROM? Regardless of your politics, there are some items I think we can agree on: In the USA, we import over 2/3rds of our oil to produce gasoline, much of it (not all) from regions of the world that don't particularly like our Government. We have soldiers in those regions to keep them stable, so that our oil-based economy remains stable. And both our soldiers and their civilians are dying. To me (especially as an IT worker who beleives computers were invented to alleviate us of the repetitive, mundane tasks), waste of human life (and time) is the most unsustainable and least green practice. It takes far too much of society's resources and time to create a good citizen and then waste them in war -- whether a soldier or a civilian. Because the electricity the US produces is 100% locally produced in the USA (with the exception of nuclear-based fuel sources), on that basis alone, driving an EV will ALWAYS be greener than a gasoline vehicle until the USA (or insert your country here) stops importing oil and the need to export our citizen as soldiers to support our addiction vanishes. You only see these things when you take a long-term outlook cradle-to-grave look at the problem. This does not work for most newspapers/media or sadly, many of my fellow Americans. However there are also a lot of them out there that DO get it. Commute suck? Twike it; You'll like it!
http://www.uiuc.edu/goto/twike |
|
Written on: 25 October 2009 [13:34]
|
|
|
iamian
registered since: 23.02.2009
Posts: 110
|
I agree local production food , power, t-shirts... local production always brings with it significant benefits and significantly reduces energy use in transportation. I see that though as just one more benefit to a central power plant and EVs... it uses less energy to transport even oil like we do today , to fewer centrally located places than it does to distribute it like we do today. The other thing is that central power plant don't tend to ship their fuels across the globe... a coal burning power plant is located near the coal mines... the waste gas power plant at the RI state land fill is located at the land fill... wind power plants are at the source of the wind power ... solar power plants are at the source of the solar power...etc... then of course there are the separate local arguments in favor of the local domestic economy, etc... RE & Efficiency enthusiast
|
|
Written on: 25 October 2009 [18:08]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
Topic creator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 583
|
Hi all, I read all your comments with great interest. The issue of the emerging EV market is often a hot topic when discussed and it is easy to get stuck somewhere. Way too often time is running out when a lively discussion has started and many things had to be left unsaid. You have all pointed out some strong points. - Locally produced energy is to be preferred. - New EVs have to be lighter, optimized for max. efficiency. - Cleaning up the grid is a must, the EV alone is not the solution (Government Policy, that EVs have to be recharged using renewable energy only?) - EVs have a high potential to become greener by using greener energy There will always be a need for individual transport, but like Yardonn said, costs are likely to be higher for it in the future (cheap oil gone). Going into the direction of EVs is a good thing, but traffic increase and congestion, manufacturing of vehicles, road building and maintenance are environmental threats which are not reduced by switching to an EV. Public transport systems and (EV) car pooling will continue to be a an environmentally friendy way to get around. But I can see you all do your part and that makes me feel good  So is there anyone going against what has been said in above posts? Twike 890
|
|
Written on: 21 November 2009 [17:54]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
Topic creator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 583
|
Dear all, Just followed a discussion on evworld.com where an article has been posted by Bill Moore with the title 'Is a Prius Really Cleaner Than an Electric Car?' I always find it interesting to feel the pulse of the people commenting these articles. Have to say that most of them agreed that the EV wins the competition Cleaning up the power grid and reducing the overall electric power consumption is essential to make EVs a good choice. As long as little is done to do so, a sceptic will always have room to argue. Here a few links with information and discussions on the subject: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/co2_report/co2emiss.pdf http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/hybrid_sbs.shtml http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/420f05001.htm http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/273.pdf http://hubpages.com/hub/Prius http://www.world-nuclear.org/education/comparativeco2.html Cheers and happy reading. Twike 890
|
Portal information:
At the moment there are 8 users online, thereof 0 registered users and 8 guests.
Today 3 registered users and 534 guests were already online.
Now online
ecocarforum.com has 707 registered user, 606 topics and 1205 answers. On the average 1.09 posts are written per day.
Today 3 registered users and 534 guests were already online.
Now online
ecocarforum.com has 707 registered user, 606 topics and 1205 answers. On the average 1.09 posts are written per day.