oakvilleblake
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 45
Seems to be some recent controversy about how green EVs are, with the release of Ozzie Zehner's new book Green Illusions (www.greenillusions.org) and the National Academy of Sciences report (chapter on transportation - see http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12794) and recent national radio coverage of both here in Canada.
I was aware of the earlier Union of Concerned Scientists report that suggests that the environmental benefits of EVs depend on where you live (up to 90% of electricity coming from coal in some states, vs 45% national US average, versus 5% in my home province of Ontario), such that full-electric cars are not much better than hybrids in some areas. But the NAS study is more damning, claiming that EVs are worse than ICEs fuelled entirely with corn-based ethanol. I find that hard to believe, but the authors are a very reputable bunch. Still, this has put the brakes on our plans to buy the i-Miev until I can get some more clarity. So far all I've been able to deduce is that both detractors and EV proponents are armed with impressive amounts of data and much depends on starting assumptions, what's included and what isn't in terms of full cradle-to-grave impacts, etc. The NAS study claims that the ecological footprint of the bigger batteries puts EVs at a 20% disadvantage off the bat compared to ICEs, a disadvantage they somehow don't overcome during their service life due to the climate change impacts of electricity production (despite using that energy more efficiently and the impacts associated with fossil fuel extraction and delivery). What they seem to miss is that many greenhouse gasses like NOx are much worse than CO2, and that EVs have no disposal of transmission fluid and oil changes etc to contend with...
Have any of you done really extensive homework on this issue?
I would love to get an iMiev, but really can't justify it if it's of no benefit ecologically. Expecially since we're comparing a new iMiev to keeping our current 07 Matrix wagon (a less favourable ecological comparison than iMiev vs other new ICE car).
Thoughts?
I was aware of the earlier Union of Concerned Scientists report that suggests that the environmental benefits of EVs depend on where you live (up to 90% of electricity coming from coal in some states, vs 45% national US average, versus 5% in my home province of Ontario), such that full-electric cars are not much better than hybrids in some areas. But the NAS study is more damning, claiming that EVs are worse than ICEs fuelled entirely with corn-based ethanol. I find that hard to believe, but the authors are a very reputable bunch. Still, this has put the brakes on our plans to buy the i-Miev until I can get some more clarity. So far all I've been able to deduce is that both detractors and EV proponents are armed with impressive amounts of data and much depends on starting assumptions, what's included and what isn't in terms of full cradle-to-grave impacts, etc. The NAS study claims that the ecological footprint of the bigger batteries puts EVs at a 20% disadvantage off the bat compared to ICEs, a disadvantage they somehow don't overcome during their service life due to the climate change impacts of electricity production (despite using that energy more efficiently and the impacts associated with fossil fuel extraction and delivery). What they seem to miss is that many greenhouse gasses like NOx are much worse than CO2, and that EVs have no disposal of transmission fluid and oil changes etc to contend with...
Have any of you done really extensive homework on this issue?
I would love to get an iMiev, but really can't justify it if it's of no benefit ecologically. Expecially since we're comparing a new iMiev to keeping our current 07 Matrix wagon (a less favourable ecological comparison than iMiev vs other new ICE car).
Thoughts?