moonbattery logo

Feb 15 2012

Electric Cars Are More Environmentally Harmful Than Real Cars

It’s a good thing the point of liberal policy is to help moonbats feel righteous about how politically correct they are, not to actually accomplish anything positive in the real world. Otherwise, they would have to rethink their devotion to hideous and hazardous electric vehicles in light of this:

Electric cars have been heralded as environmentally friendly, but findings from University of Tennessee, Knoxville, researchers show that electric cars in China have an overall impact on pollution that could be more harmful to health than gasoline vehicles.

Chris Cherry, assistant professor in civil and environmental engineering, and graduate student Shuguang Ji, analyzed the emissions and environmental health impacts of five vehicle technologies in 34 major Chinese cities, focusing on dangerous fine particles. What Cherry and his team found defies conventional logic: electric cars cause much more overall harmful particulate matter pollution than gasoline cars.

“An implicit assumption has been that air quality and health impacts are lower for electric vehicles than for conventional vehicles,” Cherry said. “Our findings challenge that by comparing what is emitted by vehicle use to what people are actually exposed to. Prior studies have only examined environmental impacts by comparing emission factors or greenhouse gas emissions.”

The perceived harmfulness of greenhouse gas emissions depends on political ideology, whereas particulate matter can affect you physically.

Particulate matter includes acids, organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles. It is also generated through the combustion of fossil fuels.

An example would be the coal plants used in both the USA and China to generate electricity for use in electric cars.

The conclusion:

In terms of air pollution impacts, electric cars are more harmful to public health per kilometer traveled in China than conventional vehicles.

Meanwhile, back in the alternate reality from which our liberal rulers issue their decrees, Comrade Obama has just increased the government subsidy to anyone sufficiently obedient to be seen driving a Volt to a staggering $10,000 per buyer. Yet even that is pocket change compared to the actual cost of these pointless moonbatmobiles to the taxpayer, which may be as high as $250,000 per vehicle.

On tips from The MaryHunter, Bill T, and Bob Roberts. Hat tip: Sad Hill News.




20 Responses to “Electric Cars Are More Environmentally Harmful Than Real Cars”

  1. StanInTexas says:

    Most Liberal ideas are more harmful that the situation they are tring to resolve. Just look at the “crisis” in this nation over plastic grocery bags, which were the LIBERAL SOLUTION to cutting down trees to make paper grocery bags.

    And as always, when Liberals use the government to force something on us all that turns out to be harmful, their solution will be MORE governmental intervention in our lives to fix the problems that THEY caused!

  2. AC says:

    This is purely the fault of liberals and their rabidly neo-Luddite anti-nuclear stance.

  3. Sam Adams says:

    Nobody mentions the fact that if these electric cars catch on, the electric power grid is woefully undersized to recharge them all. Of course, with “smart grid” technology, you can wait your turn to be recharged.

  4. Jess says:

    “Of course, with “smart grid” technology, you can wait your turn to run heat, A/C, refrigeration, or cook.”

    FIFY

  5. AC says:

    Nobody mentions the fact that if these electric cars catch on, the electric power grid is woefully undersized to recharge them all. Of course, with “smart grid” technology, you can wait your turn to be recharged.

    That’s half-true. We have a ton of surplus capacity at night, which is the perfect time for charging electric vehicles. Much of this capacity is straight wasted. If the government would stop picking winners and losers, capital would instead flow to more promising battery technologies, hopefully enabling a mass market-based adoption of plug-in hybrids within five years. With capitalist research, American electricity can displace Islamist oil.

    Too bad the bureaucrats have hijacked the very capitalist time-of-use billing and transformed it into a social engineering program.

  6. LarryG says:

    ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.
    An electric car owner would have to drive at least 129,000km before producing a net saving in CO2. Many electric cars will not travel that far in their lifetime because they typically have a range of less than 145km on a single charge and are unsuitable for long trips. Even those driven 160,000km would save only about a tonne of CO2 over their lifetimes.
    The British study, which is the first analysis of the full lifetime emissions of electric cars covering manufacturing, driving and disposal, undermines the case for tackling climate change by the rapid introduction of electric cars.

    The study was commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which is jointly funded by the British government and the car industry. It found that a mid-size electric car would produce 23.1 tonnes of CO2 over its lifetime, compared with 24 tonnes for a similar petrol car. Emissions from manufacturing electric cars are at least 50 per cent higher because batteries are made from materials such as lithium, copper and refined silicon, which require much energy to be processed.

  7. LarryG says:

    Electric cars are a stupid and failed enterprise.

  8. Spider says:

    AC says: February 15, 2012 at 8:24 am
    This is purely the fault of liberals and their rabidly neo-Luddite anti-nuclear stance…

    No AC. It’s purely the fault of the mindless masses who are too dumb to realize that no liberal social experiment has ever worked as advertised. For generations, Leftists have been engaged in reengineering our society into the imaginary utopia they dream of. All they have ever accomplished is to prove that Einstien’s definition of true insanity was 100% correct.

  9. czuch says:

    Thay had em in the 20’s.
    Ever wonder why they didnt catch on?
    Plus the added bonus of fire and needing it grounded so the first responders can cut you out incase of an accident. I’m glad they feel good though.
    2012/2013

  10. Ghost of FA Hayek says:

    Actually this is even MORE insidious than at first glance.
    That ten thousand in “incentive” to buy this junk is in fact ten thousand per car that will never again be available to develop a new technology that WOULD replace the internal combustion engine.
    How ironic, that the economy and the Volt together, side by side should go up in flames

  11. KHarn says:

    “AC says:February 15, 2012 at 9:19 am”

    >Nobody mentions the fact that if these electric cars catch on, the electric power grid is woefully undersized to recharge them all. Of course, with “smart grid” technology, you can wait your turn to be recharged.<

    "That’s half-true. We have a ton of surplus capacity at night, which is the perfect time for charging electric vehicles."

    No, AC, today's world runs 24/7 and the streets in Florida are lit up like a shooting gallery at night. Mayby by 1:00 am the demand slacks off and people turn out their lights, but that leaves only a few hours to charge up. Now imagine THOUSANDS of cars charging in a dozen citys at the same time and we have a problem.

  12. AC says:

    No, AC, today’s world runs 24/7 and the streets in Florida are lit up like a shooting gallery at night. Mayby by 1:00 am the demand slacks off and people turn out their lights, but that leaves only a few hours to charge up. Now imagine THOUSANDS of cars charging in a dozen citys at the same time and we have a problem.

    Here in Florida, demand starts to slack off at about 7:00 PM after offices empty and the air conditioners run less aggressively. Later in the evening more businesses close and cooling demand is even less. By about midnight, most businesses have closed, the A/C isn’t running like a fiend, and most people are asleep. It is then that the system has the most excess capacity.

    Data from the Florida utilities commission

    Begin reading halfway down on document page 12 (page 18 according to your PDF viewer). See Figure 4 in particular.

    This is true of most electricity markets. There is a huge difference between demand at its peak and demand at night. Peak demand must be met by fast responding peaker plants, typically natural gas. The capacity is built out to ensure reliability on the hottest day in the summer; we pay for those capital costs on the days and nights where demand isn’t hitting record levels.

    Coal and nuclear burn 24/7. Much of that energy goes to waste because nobody is using it.

    Nuclear is the future. Nuclear reactors can’t be conveniently switched on and off based on the overall demand profile. The capacity factor of a typical nuclear power plant exceeds 90%.

    Visit your electric company’s website and look for time of use pricing. They offer it for a reason. Here in Florida, most of our utilities are capitalist enterprises, not moonbat socialist power companies.

    Cheap electricity is one reason why many energy-intensive businesses pay extra for labor during a night shift.

  13. KHarn says:

    “AC says:February 15, 2012 at 4:11 pm”

    My dear fellow Florida Cracker;

    I’m going mostly on what happens in the Bay area, (You can READ in my front yard at night by the lights of the shopping malls a hundred yards away) so I’ll conceed your data.

    But I’m sure you’ll agree that the “less power usage at night” is not as valid as when we were young. Yes, there IS less usage, but hardly enough to make up the demand.

    I don’t know, put a SOLAR PANEL on top of these things and you can play the radio, heater, or AC; that should help, I guess.

    You’re right about nuclear power, the restrictions that were put on American nuke plants have caused us to fall behind. We not only have to build these things, but make up for tech we invented, but lost.

    Saludo!
    Ken the Cracker boy.

  14. Jimbo says:

    You can tell by the picture that coffin is defective. It appears to be missing 4 handles.

  15. batman says:

    If we had the battery that could store enough energy that could compete with the range of a full gas tank; And, that battery could recharge as fast as refueling a gas tank; And, vehicle weights and payload weights remain unchanged; And population and usage profiles remain unchanged; And, all electric cars are as efficient as Prius; The electric power grid and the nation’s nameplate electrical generating capacity would need to be increased by 2 TW. The last I checked, the nation was at about .7 TW nameplate generating capacity. Our country was at 1.0 TW before Monica blew Bill. We’ve subsequently reduced our capacity to comply with Clean Air and the New “Service Based” (Third-world) “Economy”; That all happened when we moved almost all of our energy-intensive manufacturing (and attendant jobs) to China. So, now we’d need an additional 2TW, to run our ground transportation. That would amount to adding 40 1.2GW nuclear reactors per state (If you don’t want carbon) Or, more Democratically expedient, the government could just start disposing of the “excess” population into concentration camps to make do with the current generating capacity. Take out about 2/3 of the population, returning to the wild those hated suburban areas and other fly-over areas. And, they’d have achieved their heaven on earth New World Order Utopia.

  16. AC says:

    Competing with a full gas tank is not required. Most miles are expended on short trips, allowing for a smaller battery to take the load off a gasoline engine,

  17. […] here to read the rest: Moonbattery » Electric Cars Are More Environmentally Harmful Than … ← No free rides: States consider taxing electric cars | […]

  18. Winston Smith says:

    Those tiny clown cars should be given to liberals free – it will get rid of them faster. Full size SUV, truck or bus vs. Clown Car? No contest.

  19. Gary says:

    This study does not take into account the pollution from the electricity required to refine gasoline, only the pollution from the electricity required to charge the cars. These amounts are about equal, and it ignores all the pollution from the entire oil extraction and transport process. Most studies take all this into account in a “well to wheels” comparison for gas and electric. This would be a real apples to apples comparison and it always shows that EV’s create much less pollution overall (see pluginamerica.org for a summary of 30 different studies). What they did here (I read the report and emailed the author at UT to verify) is a “station to wheels” comparison which only looks at a small part of the big picture.

  20. Doug says:

    That’s one of those stupid cars in front of the Royal Institution in London.

    Imagine a wacky hare-brained English scientist driving one of those things around and you’ve got it spot on.

    Unfortunately, it has four and not just three wheels (Mr Bean anyone?)

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy