Environment & Energy

mahatmakanejeeves

(57,613 posts) Tue Apr 30, 2019, 11:40 AM Apr 2019

Enough with the 'Actually, Electric Cars Pollute More' Bullshit Already

I apologize my uncharacteristic profanity, but that's the headline.

RANTS
Enough with the 'Actually, Electric Cars Pollute More' Bullshit Already

Michael Ballaban
Yesterday 2:25pm

I know, I know, dunking on the Wall Street Journal editorial board is a bit like smacking your four-year-old nephew’s would-be jumper out of the air before it even leaves his hands. But in an Op-Ed last week it peddled the tired and disingenuous notion that electric cars, by the very virtue of their production, pollute more than fossil fuel cars. This is wrong, and it cannot stand.

Specifically, the Journal cites a German study that says that, over the life of the vehicle, a diesel Mercedes would pollute less than an electric Tesla. (German-made diesel cars are the center of a bit of a culture war in Germany at the moment, but that’s a lot to get into.) From the Journal:

{snip}

Let’s go to the Union of Concerned Scientists, which looked at this non-issue back in 2015, and found that the whole “batteries produce more carbon dioxide to manufacture” argument goes straight out the window and down into the pit of hell itself as soon as you drive anywhere (emphasis mine):

{snip}

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Enough with the 'Actually, Electric Cars Pollute More' Bullshit Already (Original Post) mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2019 OP

Well you see, they have this technique where thet can program the cars ECM to magically lower CentralMass Apr 2019 #1

Okay. This was a new one on me. underpants Apr 2019 #2

One may rant all one wishes... NNadir Apr 2019 #3

Why would you lie about them not being scientists? Eko Apr 2019 #7

Also from their intro. Eko Apr 2019 #8

It's not quite that simple OKIsItJustMe Apr 2019 #4

If you charge your U.S.A. highway approved automobile from your rooftop solar you are wealthy... hunter Apr 2019 #5

You're right. Everyone might as well drive Hummers! OKIsItJustMe Apr 2019 #6

There are too many people on earth for every adult to own a car, electric or otherwise. hunter May 2019 #11

Sure. There's no need for every adult to own a car. OKIsItJustMe May 2019 #12

I remember a time when only the wealthy had a cell phone or a flat screen TV. Finishline42 May 2019 #9

"My" solar panels are leased from a solar farm OKIsItJustMe May 2019 #10

CentralMass

(15,265 posts)

1. Well you see, they have this technique where thet can program the cars ECM to magically lower

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Original post)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 11:48 AM

Apr 2019

lower exhaust emission readings. I think VW developed it. If a diesel engine is putting out too many pollutants you can just tweak the settings and make those bad readings go away.

underpants

(182,881 posts)

2. Okay. This was a new one on me.

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Original post)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 12:19 PM

Apr 2019

The stoopid it hurts.

NNadir

(33,547 posts)

3. One may rant all one wishes...

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Original post)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 12:48 PM

Apr 2019

...but science is science.

Environmental Justice Aspects of Exposure to PM2.5 Emissions from Electric Vehicle Use in China (Shuguang Ji*†, Christopher R. Cherry*‡, Wenjun Zhou§, Rapinder Sawhney†, Ye Wu∥, Siyi Cai∥, Shuxiao Wang∥, and Julian D. Marshall?, Environ. Sci. Technol., 2015, 49 (24), pp 13912–13920)

Sustainable development aims to address economic development, social equity, and environmental protection.(1) Plug-in electric vehicles (EVs) are often considered as a technology to support sustainable development in the transportation sector.(2, 3) Several prior studies have focused on environmental sustainability of EVs, focusing on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions(4-8) or local air pollution,(9) and public health.(2, 10-12) For conventional vehicles (CVs), use-phase emissions occur where vehicles are used; for urban EVs, use-phase emissions instead occur at (for fossil fuels) the power plant where electricity is generated. This shift remedies some intraurban environmental justice (EJ) challenges,(13-17) but potentially creates new challenges by exporting pollution to populations far from urban centers.
In China, EVs, including electric bikes (e-bikes) and electric cars (e-cars), are often considered an approach toward sustainable transportation, balancing mobility, energy security, GHG emissions, and air pollution. From 2011 to 2014, the annually estimated sales of e-bikes in China grew from 31.0 million units to 34.2 million units.(18) In the meantime, the annual sales of full plug-in e-cars in China increased from 5579 to 45 048 vehicles.(19, 20) The Chinese central government also designed an ambitious plan to add 5 million pure e-cars and plug-in hybrid e-cars on the road by 2020.(21) In the short and medium term, EVs may not reduce GHG emissions or local air pollution due to reliance on coal electricity generation.(2, 4, 7, 22, 23)

Of course, a scienitfic journal mentioning "environmental justice" may be a little bit of a reach for a scientific journal, but in my opinion it beats drivel out of the Union of Concerned "Scientists."

The Union of Concerned "Scientists" is anything but a union of concerned scientists.

What the Union of Concerned "Scientists" thinks is important is very different than what I, as a scientist, for one example find important.

They think that the end of the world took place at Fukushima, that it's more important than 7 million deaths per year from air pollution.

I think that climate change is a far more serious issue.

Ed Lyman, UCS's "nuclear expert" can go fuck himself. His paranoid scare stories kill people.

Now, if electricity were supplied by nuclear energy electric cars might be less obnoxious, but they'd still be cars, and the environmental justice of child slave laborers digging Cobalt in the Congo would still apply.

Eko

(7,351 posts)

7. Why would you lie about them not being scientists?

Reply to NNadir (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 08:50 PM

Apr 2019

They have 20 scientists on their team. https://www.ucsusa.org/about/expert-search?f%5B0%5D=sm_field_bio_expert_type%3AScientist
You are also lying that they think the end of the world took place at Fukushima and that its more important than 7 million deaths per year from air pollution. There is something obnoxious here though. You got problems.

Eko

(7,351 posts)

8. Also from their intro.

Reply to NNadir (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 09:15 PM

Apr 2019

"We find that low-emission electricity sources such as renewable energy can help mitigate EJ issues raised here."
For some reason you didn't include that.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

4. It's not quite that simple

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Original post)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 01:36 PM

Apr 2019

Last edited Tue Apr 30, 2019, 02:07 PM - Edit history (1)

The environmental benefits of electric vehicles depend on where (and how) the electricity powering them is produced. If you're charging your EV from your rooftop solar, that's great! If you're charging it from the coal power plant across town, that's not as great.

It's worth noting that the Union of Concerned Scientists has analyses for 14 states:
https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/state-electric-vehicle-benefits-2019

In most cases, an EV pollutes less, however, in an extreme case, like Wyoming… a gasoline-hybrid may actually be better for the climate…
https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html
https://afdc.energy.gov/files/u/publication/ev_emissions_impact.pdf

However, even in Wyoming, an EV is better than a conventional gasoline vehicle.

hunter

(38,328 posts)

5. If you charge your U.S.A. highway approved automobile from your rooftop solar you are wealthy...

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 03:29 PM

Apr 2019

...by any standard, world or U.S.A., and your lifestyle has huge environmental footprints.

Even if you are charging your 50 kilometer per hour electric moped from your rooftop solar you are affluent by world standards.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

6. You're right. Everyone might as well drive Hummers!

Reply to hunter (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 07:06 PM

Apr 2019

It makes no difference whatsoever!

hunter

(38,328 posts)

11. There are too many people on earth for every adult to own a car, electric or otherwise.

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #6)

Wed May 1, 2019, 10:13 PM

May 2019

Even small cars are resource hogs, not just in and of themselves, but in the highway and energy infrastructure required to support them.

I think we can build a world where most people are happy not to own a car.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

12. Sure. There's no need for every adult to own a car.

Reply to hunter (Reply #11)

Thu May 2, 2019, 10:52 AM

May 2019

However, at the same time, making cars more efficient is a good thing™.

Finishline42

(1,091 posts)

9. I remember a time when only the wealthy had a cell phone or a flat screen TV.

Reply to hunter (Reply #5)

Wed May 1, 2019, 09:23 AM

May 2019

But economies of scale reduced the cost to where basically everyone has them now.

Prices on home solar are falling fast but the fact that most people don't stay in their homes long enough to break even on their investment is a problem. If the price drops enough that the loan payment for the system = monthly cost for electricity then we will have reached the tipping point for solar, IMO.

The Calif requirement for solar on all new homes changes that a bit as that reduces the labor component of the cost.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

10. "My" solar panels are leased from a solar farm

Reply to Finishline42 (Reply #9)

Wed May 1, 2019, 10:36 AM

May 2019

I can move all I want…

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/49930.pdf

Reply to this discussion