# EU Warned 'Zero Emission' Message on Electric Car Is Deceptive



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

European policymakers are urged to provide greater transparency on the benefits and drawbacks of electric cars.

More...


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

That's true. We also need to warn consumers that their toasters, hair dryers, refrigerators, and anything else that uses electric are not zero emission. At least not indirectly. And never mind that usually when we say such things we mean them in the direct sense, not indirectly. For example, emission from the vehicle or toaster itself, rather than in producing the energy to operate them. That's why we usually don't include the emissions that result from the extraction, transport, and refining of fossil fuels as part of the exhaust of internal combustion engines. But I understand that this is striving to be completely clear - like the pzero, partial zero, emission rating on some Subarus. But maybe we should explain what part of zero the emissions are. We also need to compare well-to-wheel energy use and pollution for ice powered vehicles and evs. 

And yes we need to compare operating costs. I'll start. My 2001 Suzuki Swift has an EPA rating of 32 mpg. DOE uses a value of about 33kWh/gal gas, so the EPA rating is equivalent to about 1030 Wh/mile. It uses about 216 Wh/mile as an ev, so a bit more than 1/5 the energy per mile as the ice powered version, and no resources consumed and waste produced for routine maintenance such as oil changes, radiator flushes, belt changes, and tune ups.

Yes, we need to do a very careful comparison. But you won't see such comparisons in any of these articles, only innuendo and misrepresentation, because the results of such comparisons favor evs.


----------



## rochesterricer (Jan 5, 2011)

I don't know why writers and politicians keep trying to make this argument. There is nothing deceptive about calling the zero emission VEHICLES, because the VEHICLES produce zero emissions. It isn't the fault of the vehicle if the source it plugs into isn't zero emissions. Its the power source that produces the emissions, not the vehicle.


----------



## DavidDymaxion (Dec 1, 2008)

We have the opposite problem in the USA -- there is a PZEV (Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle) classification, available to gasoline (not necessarily hybrid) vehicles. One claim is the exhaust can potentially exit the car cleaner than the air that entered the engine in a polluted area.


----------



## John (Sep 11, 2007)

Not having any local emissions is sometimes enough. It would certainly help with air quality issues in cities. But if you were considering the cars green credentials you would certainly want to factor in how clean your power supply is. This is not the only thing to consider though. Even if mile for mile a petrol and an electric car put the same amount of CO2 into the atmosphere (unlikely I know) the electric car would source its energy more locally than the petrol car. The USA consumes 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day of that 5,000,000 is produced domestically. At $100US per barrel that is $1.5 billion per day that is imported or $550 billion per year. That will rise to $660 billion when oil increases to $120 per barrel. Consider the impact of having that much money pass out of the economy each year. Those dollars ultimately have to come back to the US and be spent. That could be by the foreign holders of those funds purchasing iconic American buildings, American companies, utilities, etc. If it goes on for too long Americans (or any other nationalities for that matter) could wind up tenants in their own country working for foreign owned enterprises, buying their food and essential services off foreign owned enterprises. Once you are in that situation how much control do you exert over your own destiny? Besides the enormous human cost of ensuring security of supply of oil there is a cost to the greater economy of individual oil importing countries that goes well beyond security of supply. That is a reason to go electric even if your electricity is generated by burning coal.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

If I burn my toast then I have to add local emissions to my toaster output


----------



## devilmaycry (May 27, 2011)

Yes, they are true.
We are supposed to use products/services from oil companies thru our lifetime and we must believe that we do need complicated inefficient ICE engines fixed into our vehicles that is light years away from Zero Emission.


----------



## hans j (Mar 31, 2008)

I just think everyone should be aware about what they are doing. For EV's I believe the well to wheel emissions are far less then any combustion engine.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/26/disrupt-transportation-brammo-ecomotors/

I haven't had time to watch the entire clip but it is about this subject. I am sure the guy protesting an EV's source of electricity grows all his own food and his own cotton and weaves fabric, then sews them with a hand made sewing machine he powers with donkeys walking in a circle around a generator...


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Why point of use emissions matter


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

JRP3 said:


> Why point of use emissions matter



Perfect illustration.


----------

