# Electric Vehicles Seen Having Only Small Impact on Reducing Emissions



## Caps18 (Jun 8, 2008)

Eventually they could have a big impact. Especially if there was more of an effort to drive hybrids and electric vehicles instead of F-150s and Hummers.

Transportation is just one part of what needs to be an overall push to reduce emissions and pollution from all sources.


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

Most academic studies concur. Electric vehicles are no better than fossil fuel vehicles. One big part of the problem is the usage of somewhat exotic materials used to build EV's and hybrids. Rare earth metals used in high power magnets and alkalines such as Lithium are imported from countries where environmental regulations are very lax. Also, the production of aluminum bodies used in electrics are much more energy intensive than production of steel, for instance. Also, more than 2/3 of electric power in the US comes from burning coal and natural gas. So overall, I would say that from a carbon footprint standpoint and overall environmental impact the EV's are a wash. 

What is different about the EV's is that it puts the problem of pollution out of sight. Instead of choking our citizens with toxic tailpipe emissions, we have moved the point of pollution to power generation stations and manufacturing sites such as neodymium mines and copper and aluminum foundries.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

sergiu tofanel said:


> Most academic studies concur. Electric vehicles are no better than fossil fuel vehicles. One big part of the problem is the usage of somewhat exotic materials used to build EV's and hybrids. Rare earth metals used in high power magnets and alkalines such as Lithium are imported from countries where environmental regulations are very lax. Also, the production of aluminum bodies used in electrics are much more energy intensive than production of steel, for instance. Also, more than 2/3 of electric power in the US comes from burning coal and natural gas. So overall, I would say that from a carbon footprint standpoint and overall environmental impact the EV's are a wash.
> 
> What is different about the EV's is that it puts the problem of pollution out of sight. Instead of choking our citizens with toxic tailpipe emissions, we have moved the point of pollution to power generation stations and manufacturing sites such as neodymium mines and copper and aluminum foundries.


_Most academic studies concur. Electric vehicles are no better than fossil fuel vehicles. _
Only those paid for by the oil companies

_Rare earth metals used in high power magnets and alkalines such as Lithium are imported from countries where environmental regulations are very lax. _
What - even worse than the USA?

_aluminum foundries_
The biggest Aluminium manufacturer is in Iceland using renewable energy,
Our one here is not quite as big but it uses 100% renewable energy as well

Overall a lot of bollocks


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

Duncan said:


> _Most academic studies concur. Electric vehicles are no better than fossil fuel vehicles. _
> Only those paid for by the oil companies
> 
> _Rare earth metals used in high power magnets and alkalines such as Lithium are imported from countries where environmental regulations are very lax. _
> ...


I did not mean to bring any political bias into the discussion. I was just being realistic. While I do believe that we need to wean ourselves from dependency on the internal combustion engine, I also have no illusions that today's electric cars are the panacea that the tree huggers want us to believe. That being said, I believe that EV's have the greatest potential to ameliorate the environmental problems caused by today's transportation sector.


----------



## dougingraham (Jul 26, 2011)

I am always surprised when rare earths are brought up. I don't have any in my car and I can't think of any conversions I have seen that have any either.

One thing about rare earths and copper and aluminum is that they are easily recyclable. They are not used up like coal or oil are.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

Dr. DeCarolis must be funded by the North Carolina mining industry because this study was based on using dirty coal fired electric generation plants.
It is such bullshit to believe this biased study.
Most EV owners are capable of installing solar panels on the roof for the cleanest energy.
It is only a matter of a few years before we have long range battery packs.
Just imagine, gas stations and Starbucks with EV chargers.


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

dougingraham said:


> I am always surprised when rare earths are brought up. I don't have any in my car and I can't think of any conversions I have seen that have any either.
> 
> One thing about rare earths and copper and aluminum is that they are easily recyclable. They are not used up like coal or oil are.


That's because we use AC or DC motors that do not have any permanent magnets in them. Car manufacturers like Toyota, make heavy use of powerful magnets in their designs to get the power densities they need from their electric motors. However, that is about to change. Because China controls 90% of the world's supply of rare earth metals, Toyota just announced it is working on redesigning the hybrid drivetrain to induction AC. 

As far as copper and aluminum usage is concerned, all is well if we use recycled materials. However, if we plan to put an EV or hybrid in every garage, the manufacturers must rely on "virgin" materials derived from ore. This is where the EV's and hybrids lose environmentally because of the manufacturing processes.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

_As far as copper and aluminum usage is concerned, all is well if we use recycled materials. However, if we plan to put an EV or hybrid in every garage, the manufacturers must rely on "virgin" materials derived from ore. This is where the EV's and hybrids lose environmentally because of the manufacturing processes.

_Why?
These materials are mined and smelted in a much less polluting way than steel or plastic_.

_This argument would have some credence if we were talking about replacing horses or bikes - but replacing SUV's and pickups - LOL


----------



## subcooledheatpump (Mar 5, 2012)

Regardless of if the materials are new or recycled, it still takes energy to process them. 

Sure, some refineries use 100% renewables. That's great.

That doesn't mean the shipping, machining, and assembling of these materials is done using 100% renewable energy. 

Don't get me wrong, I believe EV's are the best bet in transportation really. When (and if) battery technology improves, and prices fall there will be no question.

nonetheless, making anything takes energy, and you cannot make anything without doing some sort of environmental damage.


----------



## McRat (Jul 10, 2012)

Saving the Blunt Nosed Lizard isn't what is going to create demand for electromotive cars. 

Consumers will switch when the electric cars become superior transportation. 

As far as "little to no effect" on emissions? Well, that really is hard to judge.

Based on the 90% of drivers, you need about 10 kWh a day for your car. Solar yields about 5 effective hours per day. So a 2kw array (roughly $5000) will cut the power use.

A higher than average number of EV owners have solar arrays.


----------

