Are Electric Cars Really Bad For The Planet? Simple Math Says No
Vintage Electric Cars Benefit From New Electric Car Sales Too
If you’re in the market for an electric car, the chances are you’ve resigned yourself... Read More
- #7LEADERBOARD RANK
- 1083ARTICLES CONTRIBUTED
- 21COMMENTS POSTED
Add to circle
Also See
-
BMW ActiveE: Extended Drive Report (Video)
-
Infiniti LE Concept Electric Sedan: New York...
-
Fisker Atlantic: Video, Photos From New York...
See more video »
We all know that electric cars charged from renewable sources of energy are much cleaner than gasoline-powered cars, but what about electric cars charged from electricity produced by a dirty coal-fired power plant?
For some time, those against the uptake of electric cars have claimed driving an electric car powered by electricity from a coal-fired power plant is as bad -- if not worse -- than driving a gasoline car on an environmental level.
Not so, says soon-to-be Nissan Leaf owner Mark D Larsen, who has taken some time out to demonstrate with some simple math why the 2012 Nissan Leaf doesn’t pollute as badly as a comparable gasoline car.
“I cannot tell you how many times I have heard the old, worn-out ‘long tailpipe’ argument against electric vehicles, i.e., that they are more harmful than gasoline cars on the environment because they get their electricity from dirty coal-fired power plants,” writes Larsen on his website. “It seems like every time an article, blog, forum, tweet, video or news release mentions an electric car lately, petrolpuppets immediately jump on it and post derisive comments with that same broken-record accusation.”
To silence the claims once and for all, Larsen decided to build a webpage which sets out the energy requirements -- and carbon dioxide output -- required to drive 100 miles in both a 2012 Nissan Leaf and 2012 Nissan Versa.
Taking into consideration the efficiency of the charging station, the grid efficiency of the power transmission from the power station to his home, and the carbon dioxide output of a dirty coal power plant, Larsen calculates that his 2012 Nissan Leaf would be responsible for creating 42,665 grams of carbon dioxide for every 100 miles travelled.
Larsen then takes a 2012 Nissan Versa and carries out the same calculation.
Taking into account the 6 kilowatt-hours of electricity used to refine one gallon of gasoline, the carbon dioxide ‘dirty coal’ footprint of that electricity and the actual carbon dioxide emissions from the car’s engine, Larsen calculated that the 2012 Nissan Versa produces 50,332 grams of carbon dioxide for every 100 miles travelled.
His conclusion?
Even if a 2012 Nissan Leaf is charged exclusively from electricity generated by coal-fired power stations, it produces 15 percent less carbon dioxide than a 2012 Nissan Versa.
But while he used 100 percent coal-fired electricity for his calculations, Larsen argues that for U.S. consumers, only 45 percent of electricity nationwide comes from coal-fired power stations.
In other words, electric cars are even cleaner.
Unlike some electric car emissions calculations we’ve seen, Larsens’ are particularly simple, and verifiable using the links provided on his website.
What do you think of the calculations? Has anything been left out? Let us know in the Comments below.
+++++++++++
Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.
Related Articles
-
Toyota Announces Tiny Single-Seat Electric Car For Short Trips
-
Wubbo Ockels' Electric Superbus Undergoes Winter Testing: Video
-
Battery Maker A123 To Supply Cells For Tata Hybrid Buses
-
Two Tesla Execs Leave Before 2012 Model S Launch, Stock Falls
-
Follow Us
On Facebook
Most Popular This Week
More »
10 Tips For Better Gas Mileage This Memorial Day Weekend 
Electric-Car Prices: Tesla, Nissan, Chevy Should Be... 
Green-Car Death List: 2012 Models To Which We Bid Adieu 
New-Generation Electric-Car Batteries Will Take 10 Years, DoE... 
Electric Cars Equal $1/Gallon Gas For Life + $1,200 Cash A Year Find Green Cars
More from High Gear Media
- Follow Us
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!
Also, what is the relative environmental destruction of coal mining versus oil drilling?
In the end, it is probably unimportant as we clearly need to move away from both coal and gasoline.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201202080012
It seems like an uphill battle though. Most people will prefer to gobble up the sh.t the likes of FOX news feed them than to actually take the trouble to educate themselves I'm afraid. Kudos to Mark D Larsen for his effort though.
But the worst state is 2.3lbs/kwh, so the Leaf generate 86.9 lbs of CO2, or worse than the Versa (emissions in DC would be even higher). In fact, in 10 states and Wash DC the Versa produces less emissions than the Leaf.
So by this calculation the Leaf is better in 40 states and worse in 10.
Since a gallon of gas produces 19.4 lbs. at the tailpipe, are you saying that refining that gallon upstream only produces... 2.5 lbs.?
All I can say is that the 6 kWh/per gallon in my table comes from a Program Analyst at the DOE, using stats from the Argonne and Oak Ridge National Laboratories. When we multiple that by the 11,050 grams (2.31 lbs.) of CO2/kWh emitted by 100% dirty coal, we get 6,300 grams (13.89 lbs.) at the power plant.
so the versa is probably even a bit worse! ;-)
It seems to me that, if we're going to use petroleum products to generate electricity, it be better to put those electrons into an EV's battery pack, rather than refine gasoline that produces even more CO2 when burned. And as other have pointed out, it also takes additional kWh (more CO2) to drill, extract, transport, and pump fossil fuels --something which these calculations do not even include.
The bottom line, I think, is that fossil fuels will run out. Sooner or later. I would rather not wait until then to develop other alternatives.
If you want to impact the planet the least, buy a used car that gets decent gas mileage. Not a cure to get us off oil though. Just don't tell me a new EV is doing the environment any good. What we need is cars that run on clean abundant fuel like hydrogen and/or solar power.
You realize of course he meant people like you by that?
Disposal is reuse, recondition and recycle. The amount of Li in an Li-ion battery is about 2%.
Clever battery management extends its life and makes reconditioning or even reuse viable. BTW the battery management is vastly different to that in your laptop (you want 4 hours of power for 4 years, not 2 hours of power for 8 years) There's more to be learnt, but we know some of the myths already.
Refurbishing an old car is probably better than building a new car with no better mileage or emission. But there's plenty of materials in any car that are no better for the environment than Lithium.
In other words, junking a low-efficiency car and replacing it with a much higher-mileage car is actually lower carbon despite the extra energy used to extract the materials and build it.
An expensive battery made with rare materials is not going to end up in a landfill.
Also, battery cost will be offset by avoided fuel costs.
A couple interesting related links
http://www.greencarreports.com/image/100381539_gas-car-vs-solar-powered-electric-car-costs-50-years-p-norby
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=geothermal-power-plants-could-help-produce-lithium-for-electric-cars
I will tell you that an EV is doing the environment good. As you said: what we need is a car that runs on solar power. My EV already does (and wind and other renewables)--I pay $16/month extra in my utility bill to buy 400kWh of renewable energy which is just enough to power my LEAF. And while I don't agree with your suggestion that hydrogen will save the planet, if that in fact is the case, then I'm covered there as well: if hydrogen makes sense my utility can generate electricity from it same as hydrogen cars do and my LEAF will be a hydrogen car!
It only seems fair, however, to line up side-by-side truly comparable vehicles, and the Versa is certainly closest to the Leaf on the market.
Besides, it is the petrolpuppets in this country who keep repeating ad nauseum their "long tailpipe" argument --not those in China. :-)
Coal: 44.9% (1.04 lbs.)
Natural Gas: 23.4% (.23 lbs.)
Nuclear: 20.3% (.03 lbs.)
Hydro: 6.9% (.002 lbs.)
Petroleum: 1% (1.72 lbs.)
Renewables: 3.6% (.003 lbs. at the highest)
TOTAL: 1.32 lbs. of CO2 per kWH nationwide.
The result? The Prius produces 54.63 lbs. per 100 miles. The Leaf produces 53.60 lbs. per 100 miles, i.e., just too close to call IMHO.
But... let's not forget that the Leaf will get cleaner over time. And... I can't charge the Prius with my solar panels. :-)
1) Replaced refrigerator, dishwasher, clothes washer (they each take less than half the KWH of the old units)
2) the new front loading clothes washer allowed the laundry to be hung up to dry as the clothes are almost dry when they exit the spin cycle.
3) Computers, put to slept when not in use
4) Desktop computers replaced with laptops (taking 1/4th the KWH)
5) CFL and LED lights replaced incandescent (1/4th KWH)
6) phantom load reduction with switches, timers and smart strips, energy star rated power bricks (AC adapters)
etc. I really need to make a blog post for it.
Down from about 1000 kwh/month to about 300 kwh/month.
Thats a great point that most people should understand. The average home uses 900hw a month. Just by increasing their efficiency they can shave 30% off of the their bill and that would be the electricity required to drive 12,000 miles a year in an electric car
http://www.chinacartimes.com/2012/02/14/researchers-claim-chinese-electric-cars-bad-enivronment/
However, they are talking about China, not the US, and appear to be talking about particulate emissions from China's (mostly) coal generate electricity.
Studies like this irk me, however. I mean, what general conclusion should the general public draw? "Oh, wow! Let's just keep burning gasoline then."
And when it runs out? Duh-uh!
Really, we all need to move beyond gasoline and coal, EVs can get us there, but the path matters.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2100936/Study-shows-impact-electric-cars-worse-petrol-powered-vehicles.html
Smaller vehicles is the answer, regardless of power source.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MGFRX_NUS_1&f=A
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mgfrz_nus_1&f=a
46.2 billion kWh purchased by the refineries:
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=8_NA_8FE0_NUS_K&f=A
Gasoline yield in 2010 is 45.7%:
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MGFRYUS3&f=A
(46.2 / 138.6) x 0.457 = 0.152 kWh per gallon. That's 152 Wh per gallon of gas.
But for the sake of argument, let's say refineries only use 300 Wh per gallon of gas. Subtracting out 6000 grams of CO2 from Mark's calculations still leaves the electric car as the cleanest choice in a worst case scenario.
- the natural gas that is burned by oil refineries as fuel
- the natural gas used by oil refineries as a feedstock to produce hydrogen (which also produces CO2 as a byproduct)
- the fuel produced from oil that is burned by oil refineries
- the energy (and CO2) to produce the oil in the first place
If you follow Mark's "EPA combined MPG estimate" and go to Energy and Environment tab... then in Greenhouse Gas Emission section, show dropdown box has the option to show tailpipe and upstream emission. Per EPA, Versa emit 369 g/mi so for 100 miles, it is 36,900 grams.
If you click on the "i" icon, EPA explained what was included in the upstream number:
These estimates include CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide emitted from all steps in the use of a fuel, from production and refining to distribution and final use—vehicle manufacture is excluded. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions are converted into a CO2 equivalent.
The second point is that if Chevron had not purchased and suppressed the NiMH battery in the 90's we would already have 20k electric cars widely available. The Toyota Rav 4 EV from the 90's is just as good as the EV's coming out today. Imagine how cheap that car could be today if we were using this battery. The lithium battery should be used for the Tesla, and the NiMH for the mainstream.
Now if you want to talk about how the resources required for meat production and consumption drives up other food costs that's a more legit issue. But I make no promises of giving up meat entirely
There aren't any cars sold in the USA warrantied for more than 20% biodiesel blended into diesel. Most will void warranty for more than 5% biodiesel!
BTW I've been a biodiesel user for the last 8 years.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/calc/
http://www.casteyanqui.com/ev/longtailpipe/index.html
Those who still dispute the results should let the EPA know that the agency's figures are wrong.
Anyone who's experienced I-90 into Chicago during rush hour or the Chesapeake Bay bridge toll during rush hour, etc., etc. should understand the huge advantages electrics provide in fuel savings and BREATHABLE AIR during traffic jams.
So, a "full" charge takes the battery pack from 5% ("empty") to 95% ("full") of its 24KWh rated capacity. This 21KWh charge is what the EPA says will get you 73 miles. (Nissan claims 100 miles. We get 85+ with a high mix of freeway driving, or 4.0 miles/KWh.) This improves the LEAF numbers by at least 10%.
It takes 8-10 kWh of electric to refine OIL into a gallon of gas. AN EV can go 40+ miles on that electric. So it has to be cleaner to drive electric than on gas or on diesel.
At night many utilties have excess electric since they can't shut off or even ramp down COAL, NUCLEAR or even hydro. So if you charge at night on the excess you really create no pollution more than what is already being produced.
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!