The impact of driving EV

Once again an inaccurate comparison.
While the final conclusion is true (that the production of co2 depends upon where you live) the degree is inaccurate.

I would think an accurate analogy would be...
CO2 emissions at each car.
If you want to go one step further...
Emissions at electrical generation plant vs emissions at gasoline generation plant (refinery).
And if you want to go another step...
Emissions to dig up and transport fuel for electric generation plant vs emissions for drilling and transporting oil.

Once we have the true comparison we can more accurately judge the value of EVs from a solely CO2 standpoint.
From a national security as well as national economic health level EVs are definitely a winner (unless we can find 10 ANWARs and get them all to peak production).

 

It really depends on future trends to me. Petrol production/refining is getting more energy intensive and environmentally harsh. Electricity production is getting cleaner/more environmentally benign.

 

It seems like a good technology summary, full of positives and negatives far beyond carbon dioxide. Some here won't like the insults to their favorite car or the praise for their hated one, but it seems to be balanced.

Finally we can start talking about the trade off electric versus gas, and from the intro - some worry most about co2, some imported oil, some todays and tomorrows cost of gas. There is no denying that if you use electricity instead of gas, you will not be responsible for importing oil. The other 2 depend on your local conditions. We have had too many discussions of co2 on electric cars versus the prius to rehash it here but,...

Exactly, the official numbers for 2009 have been released, and that has given us the largest decrease in carbon dioxide in the grid ever. We have over 7000 plug ins on the road today the bulk of which are leafs, volts, and teslas. We know where they are, and they are where they produce less co2. There are only 5 deep red states on the map in the article - Wyoming, ND, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Indiana. All of these states can add wind and have excess green power at night, but does anyone think they are going to get a high percentage of the plug-ins. Take the projections, place them on the map with likely co2 in those places and you should have your answer on whether plug-ins add to co2. But ... even many of those pink states have ev owners that are less polluting than a prius, and we aren't exactly finding new deposits of co2 free oil

 

There's 9000 evil gas burners in the US for every EV. This is only privately owned passenger cars of course. Trying to quantify their impact, CO or otherwise, on our environment is as silly (and pointless) as trying to predict climactic trends on a 4 billion year old planet by using only the most recent few hundred years of comprehensive observations. Oh waitaminute...I guess we're doing that too.

EV's are here.
They're being used by dozens..no wait, sorry. They're being used by thousands of people, and EV development is not only being encouraged, but it's being rather generously subsidized by our government...a policy that I rather agree with!
Nissan has done a fabulous job with their Leaf (if you only have to go 70 miles) especially considering that they're doing direct sales. The Volt has similar promise---especially if they graft the drive train into a more plebian car that more people can afford to buy and drive. The PHV also promises to be a really great semi-EV car too---if they ever start selling them.

EV impact?
I think we're going to have to give them more time to make an impact!
Give them some time.

 

Correct if I am wrong, but I don't think the study takes into account the natural selection made by buyers to match car purchase to need.

What I mean, for example, is that my short trip EV miles are mostly on a cold engine getting well below EPA (no matter which gas car I take).

When I get a EV or PHV, my short trip low mpg miles will switch to EV, while my long trips remain on the Prius (or PHV Prius in HV mode).

So even in the "reddest" state, the EV miles on the whole will be significantly greener than using a gasser.

 

That type of argument should not be hissed at. Buyers do self select.

Well my argument on the red states is two fold, first they will not get many plug ins so worrying about them adding more coal plants to supply these cars is a false argument. Second, these are the bottom 10% (worse 5 of the 50) and they should clean their grid for their own sake. These states not only have a large proportion of coal plants, they have a good number of grandfathered plants that are hugely inefficient and belch out huge quantities of SO2, NOx, mercury, coal ash, etc. Its time to end the grandfathering and reduce the caps.

The prius is a fine choice to reduce CO2 and oil use versus conventional vehicles. But if you are worried about balance of trade or running out of oil plug-ins make sense, including the future prius phv. If we look out 20 years it is important for CO2, oil, and the economy to find alternatives to gasoline cars. Here is the take from motor trend on the prius, which I didn't include with the words on the volt and leaf.

+1

For those against subsidies that help develop these plug-ins, here is motor trends take.

I would say it might be better to wait a little while, let these companies shake out some initial problems and have the leaf built in Tennessee, the volt engine built in Michigan, and the prius phv to actually ship to customers.

 

Good article but you can call me Thomas Paine (the author branded EV-questioners as such). Noted Delaware is a red state, for those EV drivers my backyard. The "red" states are based on CO2 "costs" only. If you include all the costs of electrification (Hg, SOx, NOx, particulates, nuke waste, habitat loss, etc etc) then I personally see Gen-2 Prius as greener in even more of USA. This goes back to my first eco-post a few months back (re: Coal EV vs. Gaso Prius). Meanwhile, I have put Common Sense on my reading list to see what Thomas Painers are like.

 

of course doesn't matter how "dirty" your state's electrical system is, if you yourself use solar, wind or geothermal

 

Sorry to those in Delaware that I didn't call them out in my last post to clean up there act. I didn't notice it was red. Apologies. What is up with them still burning petroleum to produce electricity? Add it to the list, and IMHO environmentalists do not need to worry about them putting in large numbers of EVs to increase polution. I don't think anyone thinks a large proportion of the subsidized EVs will end up in Delaware. I am not picking just on the red states, shouldn't they be grey. My home state of Texas needs to reduce polution too, but I am actually doing something about that.

I think the author's point was if you are criticizing the current subsidies does not make you a patriot. The tax credit is there to reduce dependance on foreign oil, by promoting a competing technology. It is patriotic, that is like paine, to throw off the shackles of OPEC. It should be viewed in that context. So arguing against EVs simply because it may not make us greener is like being against the United States of America. If you don't get greener why not write a bigger check each year to OPEC. Then the terrorist win. OK those last parts were my exaggeration of the point, not the articles authors. But that is the POV he was trying to get across. My own opinion is a little different. You can be against the subsidies, but if you are not a hypocrit you need to be against all of them oil, ethanol, tarp, etc. On balance a one time credit to encourage EV manufacture in the united states, is much less than what we spend on oil and ethanol subsidies every year. Remember for those prius haters the prius was subsidized in the exact same way for the same reason to reduce dependance on oil, its time to give a helping hand to the next generation of technology.. There are state and local subsidies that may be based on some greenness idea but that is a different issue.

Let's go back to the author's comment which I agree with. The Gen2 prius is a fine choice to decrease pollution and reduce oil dependance. I don't want to rehash all the other arguments about co2, I think in the light green to pink states its all too close to call. You would be wrong on the dangerous pollutants increasing based on ev and phev usage though, these are on a negative slope and mainly affected by the cap, and removing grandfathered plants. More electricity use will not change the numbers, but the congress and/or epa can reduce these pollutants faster. I encourage your reading of common sense, though I haven't read it since high school, it is a good look at the historical reasons for the revolution

 

By 2016 PHEVs will be a practical replacement for cars, we just need to improve them on current batteries. There are a lot of kinks. BEVs can satisfy a large percentage of drivers today. These technologies can definitely satisfy pratical environmentalists. We just need to get the car companies to build the cars we need and prices we can afford. The leaf and volt are just the first baby steps.

 

It's a big debate in the USA right now. Lots of folks feel the green economy will create jobs and save the environment and economy. On the "pro-green" side you have the "strange bed-fellows" that the Motor Trend author alluded to, but did not name. Basically the enviros, many politicians, and Electrification Coalition (eg; FexEx CEO) pushing very hard for the green jobs, EV option. Some skeptics include Robert Bryce (recent book Power Hungry). Also saw a fun and lively debate on Youtube by Lou Dobbs this week.

 

Huh?

 

Yes, but has nothing to do with what the topic was, and I rarely lane split on the Bay Bridge -- rarely. Maybe once every 2 or 3 years.