# Unclean at Any Speed: constructive criticism or anti-EV hit job?



## CHARGED EVs Magazine (Nov 14, 2011)

In a recent editorial in IEEE Spectrum, author and former GM employee Ozzie Zehner asserts that electric vehicles are not as environmentally friendly as boosters claim, and may even be browner than ICEs... Newswire >


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

Well I didn't see any "research" to back it up thought I didn't go over it with a scope. It just seemed to be yea, maybe a hit piece!


----------



## Siwastaja (Aug 1, 2012)

The article looks like carefully designed propaganda. It starts with emotional stuff, mostly making the point that EVs are heavily subsidized greenwash (which, indeed, may have _some_ point in it, but not in the sense as given in the article).

Then, the article goes on to give you a feeling like the author was neutral and only doing a meta analysis on large number of research available. But this is a lie; the next step is, he finds and focuses on the results of a few anti-EV research papers, going through the results in detail and claiming that their methods of research are "right" while all the others "wrong", but leaving out all the details (let alone proof) why it is so.

The author tries to provide any kind of factual claims only a few times at all, and those are all ridiculous, like the claimed huge environmental unfriendliness in having a few pounds of copper in the motor. Like, really? I was laughing my ass of at that point.

But the emotional side is effective. It makes a nice argument (for a propaganda artist, at least) that EVs move the pollution from the rich to the poor. Sadly, there is no source nor any kind of evidence for such a strong claim.

Science mostly agrees on the benefits on EV's, so much it could be called a consensus. Extraordinary claims against common wisdom require extraordinary evidence. This article gives none. Funny read anyway. I wouldn't be very surprised to find out if this guy was directly connected to an oil company, as many "EV critics" have been.

He does, however, give some valid points outside the EV/gasoline scope. It would make a lot of sense to design our infrastructure and communities so that there would be less need for a car. This isn't only a matter of public transportation, but having services close to each other by careful city planning so that you could actually walk to most locations you need.


----------



## PStechPaul (May 1, 2012)

I am a pragmatic environmentalist, and I found the article to be fairly reasonable, especially if one considers that the real problem is the overall issue of transportation and efficiency of lifestyles, which has for so long depended on cheap and virtually limitless supplies of energy. In fact our entire economy and estimation of wealth is based on continued growth and a paradigm of isolationism and reliance on technology for our entertainment and well-being. 

Cars and trucks have become a major component of our folklore, and the ability to command hundreds of horsepower is a compelling antidote to the growing frustration and lack of self-esteem experienced by many. So even though electric cars (and ICE cars) could be made with 100-200 mpg fuel economy, they do not satisfy our craving for power, and cannot be driven safely on most highways when the majority of drivers engage in aggressive and competitive driving, in large, heavy vehicles. 

We really do need to address our core problems that make it dangerous and unattractive to live efficiently in cities, and instead seek to escape ever further into suburbs and rural areas to live in isolation in our McMansions, promoting increasing sprawl and major road projects that damage the environment as well as contribute to our decreasing ability to get along with each other. Electric cars will probably remain status symbols of the rich and famous, or essentially toys built by the technologically adept, and may never replace cars and trucks in the sense that they are now used. Reality will be a huge reduction of personal driving habits as well as massive shifts in transportation to promote more local products and to move most freight by rail rather than truck.


----------



## Siwastaja (Aug 1, 2012)

PStechPaul said:


> We really do need to address our core problems


I'm also an idealist to some extent, but the reality is that what you describe never works alone. It would be nice if we could always solve the large "core" problems, and I agree we should do everything in our power to find and discuss the actual underlying big problems ---

but at the same time, we also need to take smaller steps to remedy the easier problems on the surface. Electrifying the cars is a relatively easy remedy that has real potential on fixing the city air quality problem, which is a major cause for serious health and comfort problems. This is a simple fact and relatively easy to fix. And I think it's happening more quickly than most people believe. I'd already consider it done.

Fixing one problem doesn't prevent us from fixing more problems. It is a very poor argument that electric vehicles somehow would prevent us from developing our city infrastructures. Quite the opposite; the discussion on electric cars has drawn the public attention to the problem.

I want to give an example from Finland. Here, the politicians have simply decided to do everything in their power to, at the same time,

(1) require everyone to have a private car by poor (if not horrible) city planning and nonexistent public transport

(2) to make having a car as expensive and difficult as possible (taxes and fees)

(3) to make driving the car as difficult and slow as possible (street/traffic design etc.)

This really sucks. This is practically the principle of always doing wrong, whatever you try to do. And you always get a punishment, for example, in the form of sitting in a traffic jam just for fun.

Real city planning should go along these steps:
(1) Design so that you can reach most locations by foot (< 1 km)
(2) Add public transport to satisfy 90% of the needs
(3) Allow the use of the cars and don't make driving artificially difficult for the rest of the use; this way, the cars are faster in their destinations and less time in the traffic.

A real city of course is not planned but grows and grows. But if the process is not artificially disturbed, the result can be quite good (I'd take Tokyo as an example).

Finnish city planning, however, goes along these steps:
(1) Design cities to have only large apartments even though people would want smaller ones, and make apartment blocks only three stories high. This way you can artificially increase the distances. (And get artificially high rent -- and the politician gets corrupted money from the companies that build and own these houses.)
(2) Put wide roads that could accommodate large amounts of traffic, this again increases the distances. But prevent people from actually driving on these roads, or use them to create traffic jams, by using traffic signals, "construction works" that go on for years without nothing happening, etc.
(3) Add public transportation that goes only through city center, not diagonally. Make the city center a totally useless place with every shops etc. scattered near the city borders (where you cannot get with public transportation in less than 2 hours)
(4) Talk about green things and punish the private car users. Don't offer any solutions, just make scapegoats and punish them.

I'd guess half of our CO2 and particulates from the traffic in cities comes directly from politicians desire to artificially make us stand still in "traffic jams". I understand traffic jams in the New York City, but come on, a small rural town in f*cking Finland may have a traffic jam consisting of 10 cars and still going on for 10 minutes. No one goes anywhere and all are idling, and there's no choice!


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

Here's a nice response to that article.... showing how Zehner came away with different conclusions than the writer of the following article did:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/07/21/are-electric-cars-really-that-polluting/


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

Hey guys!

I'm wondering a bit about people's daily driving practices.

Would you guys mind doing this survey I just made? I'll try to share the results when I get enough responses. Looking for honest answers. Its not perfect and may not cover all cases... but I think its close.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TWXM6W6

Thanks,
Travis Gintz
www.emf-power.com


----------

