How clean is electric car?

mischascha

It annoys me when people say that electric cars are clean, and with that in mind they are charged way less for road tax and what not. Taxes supposed to be paid for real situations. Its shouldn't have been driven by media hype constantly trying to impose this way of thinking - ok you pay less because its a great idea that one day we wouldn't need to burn fossil fuels to produce electricity. In fact - electric cars are less efficient - as that 'clean' electricity is produced from fossil fuels mostly and in combination in losses via cables - its ridiculous that they are considered clean!

markpb

EVs definitely are cleaner, just cleaner in a very specific way. Diesel and petrol cars can only be powered by fossil fuels. EVs are powered by the electricity grid so that might be predominantly generated from fossil fuels today but it could change in a few years and the EV would take advantage of that. It's not entirely aspirational, last year about a third of all our electricity needs were met from renewable sources.

ICE vehicles burn those fossil fuels in the middle of towns and cities, producing pollution in the very place where people live. Generating stations are typically located away from urban centres so the pollution affects fewer people.

Killed

Motor tax on an EV is not free, it's €120 a year.

mischascha

People have free will to move out from the polluted city. Yes but another 75% of electricity is produced by burning that stuff so not so clean, I didn't mention about production of those batteries and its short life span.... Why clean bioethanolE85 idea was dropped in Ireland? Hmm mostly its the same answer:>

Arthur Daley

There could certainly be some counter balance to highlight that the UK for example gets nearly half it's electricity from Gas and Nuclear, so presenting electric as 'green' is not maybe being completely honest with the public. I'm sure there is a place for electric, but I immediately took an instinctive dislike to the way this agenda was suddenly pushed everywhere in 2016/2017, and most people have little insight into how slow the take up in electric actually is, and how wasteful it is for the environment to scrap perfectly serviceable old cars to replace them with shiny new metal.

Amirani

mischascha wrote: »

People have free will to move out from the polluted city.

This is a ridiculous statement. Your right to freely pollute a city is in no way greater than the right of people to live in an unpolluted city.

Electric cars reduce pollution in towns and cities, improving the quality of life of the inhabitants there. Therefore they are cleaner and it makes sense to incentivise them.

On an overall basis - ICE use all fossil fuels. EV will use a portion of fossil fuels within electricity generation, but also significant (and increasing) amounts of renewables. So on this metric they are cleaner too.

I drive a petrol car personally, but trying to claim it's just as clean or cleaner is mind-bogglingly stupid.

Harry Palmr

Some of electric cars greenery would depend on things like energy creation through braking.

jimgoose

The only fully "clean" way to perambulate yourself is to run around the place bollock-naked like a caveman, assuming you don't pollute the little fishies by shitting all over the place like a bullock.

Now that that's out of the way, more people living in cities is widely regarded as being a good thing, as it is much easier to deliver utilities, facilities and infrastructure to the vast majority when they live thus. Electric vehicles keep smog levels in cities down and centralize the power generation process such that, while fossil fuels are often used, it is at least considerably more efficient. You could argue that the process of manufacturing EVs is more environmentally harmful than that for conventional kit, but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the various data.

mischascha

My main problem is that there's a way to calculate amount of CO2 emissions - the main reason for taxation and all that.. a.and when one agrees that fossil fuel is main source for producing this fizzy power - it can be easily calculated - and truth will be revealed - that its all b...t

mischascha

rant about electricity as well;>

biko

As said above - electric cars runs on electricity that can be produced in a variety of ways - for instance by nuclear power or wind/wave/solar..

Regular cars use fossil fuel directly so cannot switch.

So electric cars might not be greener right now in Ireland, but the car itself is not to blame, it's the "fault" of the electricity provider.

stimpson

I hate to refute a good rant with actual science, but here we go. Electric cars emit less CO2 over their lifetime than diesels even when powered with dirtiest electricity

mischascha

they can be switched, check mass produced bio-ethanol cars in Brasil and try not to be amazed, or petrol cars with LPG installation.

BIGT4464

Got a Video worth watching on this subject.

Are Electric Cars Worse For The Environment? Myth Busted

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM

1) Doesn't EV battery production cause a lot of emissions?
2) Don't electric cars get their power from fossil fuels?
3) Isn't lithium mining terrible for the environment?

Seweryn

Not "clean" in one word.

Manufacturing batteries for a single EV (just batteries) have similar impact on the environment to driving an internal combustion engine car for 3 - 7 years depending on battery type.

And there is no such thing as renewable energy source - they only exist and will exist because of fossil fuels.

ELM327

My EV is not very clean.
But I haven't washed it for a while.

This post is more factual and relevant than the OP.

The fact remains that the ICE drivetrain is between 5 (petrol cold start in winter) and 30 (diesel driven at high load) pc and the electric one is over 70 pc efficient, power station to wheels.


Burning gas on individual inefficient generators (car engine) is not an efficient way to do it, better to generate power to the grid with it.

It's easy to calculate your actual CO2 emissions from wall/pump to wheels as both fuel and electricity have known CO2 emissions per unit. ESB publishes hourly values and for liquid fuel you can Google it and then figure out your individual numbers based on your driving.

BarryD2

markpb wrote: »

ICE vehicles burn those fossil fuels in the middle of towns and cities, producing pollution in the very place where people live. Generating stations are typically located away from urban centres so the pollution affects fewer people.

So basically you are arguing that rural areas should be sacrificed so as urban dwellers can live more healthily? When I see giant industrial wind machines being constructed in Dublin Bay and the residents of Dalkey and Clontarf etc. happy to accept them, I might be more amenable to the argument re wind etc as renewable source.

Arthur Daley wrote: »

...most people have little insight into how slow the take up in electric actually is, and how wasteful it is for the environment to scrap perfectly serviceable old cars to replace them with shiny new metal.

This is a very valid argument. You get the distinct impression that the hype about electric cars is being generated by the desire to drive sales and churn the market.

Seweryn

BarryD2 wrote: »

You get the distinct impression that the hype about electric cars is being generated by the desire to drive sales and churn the market.

Quite precisely, yeah... Which is obviously terrible for the environment, but it looks like we care more about the economy than the health of our planet.

KCross

Arthur Daley wrote: »

...and how wasteful it is for the environment to scrap perfectly serviceable old cars to replace them with shiny new metal.

Thats not being proposed though.

You drive your existing car as long as you like. Switch to EV when its time to switch.

I dont see anyone forcing anyone out of their ICE cars and scrapping perfectly good cars ahead of their time.

It will happen slowly and old ICE cars will just dwindle away over time.... no waste, as they would dwindle away anyway.

One very suitable aspect of pure EVs in the Irish context is that not servicing them doesn't have much effect on them.

I find the Irish registration system a real eco catastrophy. "It's only a '08" type of deal. There are many as good as new nice cars going down due to neglect. People think that a perfectly serviced car with 200k is a ticking time bomb, then don't check the oil for 2 years and then when the engine grenades, "told you so, was on its last legs". Every penny spent on regular maintenance is considered a rip off instead of an investment.

KCross

mischascha wrote: »

It annoys me when people say that electric cars are clean, and with that in mind they are charged way less for road tax and what not. Taxes supposed to be paid for real situations. Its shouldn't have been driven by media hype constantly trying to impose this way of thinking - ok you pay less because its a great idea that one day we wouldn't need to burn fossil fuels to produce electricity. In fact - electric cars are less efficient - as that 'clean' electricity is produced from fossil fuels mostly and in combination in losses via cables - its ridiculous that they are considered clean!

Any study or data to show that?

tbh, you dont need a study to figure it out. The Irish grid data is publicly available and easy enough to calculate the CO2 emissions per km for an EV vs an ICE.


It will clearly show you are talking rubbish but I get the impression its just a troll thread anyway.


CO2 emissions isnt the only emissions issue either so dont just focus on that. Would you rather stand behind a diesel car or an EV and breathe its fumes?

mischascha wrote: »

My main problem is that there's a way to calculate amount of CO2 emissions...

Exactly.... did you calculate it? Can you share your figures please and then we can have an informed debate rather than a rant/troll thread.

MrMusician18

Amirani wrote: »

This is a ridiculous statement. Your right to freely pollute a city is in no way greater than the right of people to live in an unpolluted city.

Electric cars reduce pollution in towns and cities, improving the quality of life of the inhabitants there. Therefore they are cleaner and it makes sense to incentivise them.

On an overall basis - ICE use all fossil fuels. EV will use a portion of fossil fuels within electricity generation, but also significant (and increasing) amounts of renewables. So on this metric they are cleaner too.

I drive a petrol car personally, but trying to claim it's just as clean or cleaner is mind-bogglingly stupid.

Not quite true. Irish road diesel is a biodiesel blend, up to I think 7%, with future scope to increase to 10%. However most cars on the market cannot cope with 10% bio content, 7% is the limit.

When we talk about clean cars, it's important to distinguish between what type of clean we are taking about, CO2 and PM. At first glance you might think that EVs are great on both fronts, but it's not that simple, and the benefits might not be as straight forward as you think.
Looking at CO2 first, for one unit of forward motion, an EV produce between a half to a third less CO2. Great your say, obvious win. But if we are to move to reduce CO2 emissions, is it better to wait until existing cars reach end of life and phase in EV, or start scrapping good ICE cars in favour of EVs? Personally I don't think the environmental case is there for the latter tbh.

As for urban pollution, while the tailpipe produces PM for an ICE so to does road dust, brakes and tyres. You will still have poor enough air quality in urban areas on a still warm day with EVs rattling around. Not as poor as with ICE granted, but not great.

I don't think you can really say that cars in any form improve urban life. They create barriers and make private space out of public lands. The transition away from ICE should be making us look at our urban spaces to get rid of cars completely, not replacing bad with less worse.

Just over final thing on air quality as an aside. The most polluted environments we tend to inhabit are indoors and we spend most of our time indoors too. A roast dinner produces indoor air quality several times worse than the streets of New Delhi, and a lovely timber open fire does the same. While we shouldn't lower our efforts to reduce outdoor urban emissions, if we don't change the way we live in other ways, the tangible gains to life expectancy may be inconsequential.

KCross

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Not quite true. Irish road diesel is a biodiesel blend, up to I think 7%, with future scope to increase to 10%. However most cars on the market cannot cope with 10% bio content, 7% is the limit.

EV's are at 30% renewable in this country. Diesel will never get to that not to mind the continuing improvements in our grid so biodiesel is no argument for diesel.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

When we talk about clean cars, it's important to distinguish between what type of clean we are taking about, CO2 and PM. At first glance you might think that EVs are great on both fronts, but it's not that simple, and the benefits might not be as straight forward as you think.
Looking at CO2 first, for one unit of forward motion, an EV produce between a half to a third less CO2. Great your say, obvious win. But if we are to move to reduce CO2 emissions, is it better to wait until existing cars reach end of life and phase in EV, or start scrapping good ICE cars in favour of EVs? Personally I don't think the environmental case is there for the latter tbh.

But who is advocating or encouraging that?
EV's are at <1% right now. There wont be a mass scrapping of perfectly good ICE cars. That would be ridiculous.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

As for urban pollution, while the tailpipe produces PM for an ICE so to does road dust, brakes and tyres. You will still have poor enough air quality in urban areas on a still warm day with EVs rattling around. Not as poor as with ICE granted, but not great.

I don't think you can really say that cars in any form improve urban life. They create barriers and make private space out of public lands. The transition away from ICE should be making us look at our urban spaces to get rid of cars completely, not replacing bad with less worse.

I agree with your general points. Not sure the brakes and tyre dust add up to that much but maybe they do.

The reality is we still need Cars. Thats not going to change any time soon. Using a utopian ideal of perfect public transport to everywhere in the country just wont happen. We cant even build a hospital not to mind that utopian ideal.

So, maybe the least worse option is a good direction to go in?

slave1

I think the point is cleaner

MrMusician18

KCross wrote: »

EV's are at 30% renewable in this country. Diesel will never get to that not to mind the continuing improvements in our grid so biodiesel is no argument for diesel.



But who is advocating or encouraging that?
EV's are at <1% right now. There wont be a mass scrapping of perfectly good ICE cars. That would be ridiculous.




I agree with your general points. Not sure the brakes and tyre dust add up to that much but maybe they do.

The reality is we still need Cars. Thats not going to change any time soon. Using a utopian ideal of perfect public transport to everywhere in the country just wont happen. We cant even build a hospital not to mind that utopian ideal.

So, maybe the least worse option is a good direction to go in?

That's not the point in was making. I wasn't arguing biodiesel was the way forward, but pointing out a factual inaccuracy in the post I quoted, that diesel cars (in Ireland at least) are not 100% fossil fueled.


While no one might be advocating mass scrappage in favour of EVs, manufacturers aided and abetted by policy makers may lead to that happening. While I don't have the numbers, I would bet my house that there are fewer pre 2008 cars still on Irish roads today than one might expect had the government not changed policy. Manufacturers are guilty of creating this waste too, with their promotional scrappage schemes, by insisting the cars that participate must have a valid NCT. My old car (only sold because it didn't fit our needs anymore) was bought by a couple who wanted it to qualify for some promotion. The same BS will happen again, but it's really just consumerism underneath a thin green veneer. Would that be cleaner? I wouldn't think so.

A transition without market distorting incentives is the way forward. The better product will win the day anyway.

grogi

mischascha wrote: »

they can be switched, check mass produced bio-ethanol cars in Brasil and try not to be amazed, or petrol cars with LPG installation.

And where do we get LPG from?! Bio-fuels are one of the biggest reason for cutting down forest and increased prices of food.

jimgoose

grogi wrote: »

And where do we get LPG from?! Bio-fuels are one of the biggest reason for cutting down forest and increased prices of food.

Yes. Meanwhile, we're using oil to make packaging, 90% of which is unnecessary, for useless consumer crap 90% of which is unnecessary, and chucking it into the sea just in case we don't fuck that up too. Jesus Wept. :pac:

grogi

jimgoose wrote: »

Yes. Meanwhile, we're using oil to make packaging, 90% of which is unnecessary, for useless consumer crap 90% of which is unnecessary, and chucking it into the sea just in case we don't fuck that up too. Jesus Wept. :pac:

90% of car travel is probably unnecessary as well. That's not the point.

Shefwedfan

My car is clean

I just got a full valet done on it....how dare you say it isn't

Water John

I think the biofuel content is now going to 11%. BTW you need to till land and spread fertiliser (oil) to grow the biofuel.

Samih's ratio is right, ICE car is an open fire, compared to an EV which is a stove.
If you're building a house nowadays which would you install, open fireplace or stove? BTW the regs won't allow you have the open fire place. Eventually the same will apply to cars.
Cars will go almost totally EV. It's just a question of time. It's then up to the Govn't to encourage a very high % of renewable energy on the grid.