Study defends green credentials of EV's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
23,728
Location
NH
Ward's

Quote:
Claims that electric vehicles won’t help reduce harmful emissions are flawed, and instead evidence suggests EVs can have a major impact on reducing the pollution traced to vehicles used in everyday life, a University of Michigan study finds.


I dug around, and found the study itself: link to study

Back to Ward's:

Quote:

“Based on the average mix of renewable and nonrenewable electric power sources in the U.S., the average well-to-wheels (greenhouse-gas) emissions for battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) is the lowest, at 214 grams per mile,” the researchers say. “The corresponding values for two different plug-in electric vehicle implementations, PHEV10 and PHEV40, range from 253 to 278 gpm, respectively.

“Gasoline-powered vehicles produce the most GHGs per mile, ranging from 356 to 409 gpm, depending on the specific type of ICE (direct-fuel-injection versus conventional port-fuel injection, respectively), Sivak and Schoettle say.


Quote:
EVs are not only cleaner but also are substantially more efficient than ICE-powered vehicles, the Michigan researchers find.

“BEVs use the least amount of petroleum at 54 Btu/mile, with a typical PHEV40 vehicle model ranking the second-lowest in usage at 1,588 Btu/mile and a typical PHEV10 vehicle model using the third-lowest amount at 2,588 Btu/mile,” Sivak and Schoettle write.

“Predictably, gasoline-powered vehicles use considerably more petroleum per mile, with direct-fuel-injection ICEs averaging 3,791 Btu/mile and traditional fuel-injection ICEs averaging 4,359 Btu/mile. While the PHEV40 consumes 29 times the amount of petroleum a typical BEV consumes, a typical fuel-injected ICE still consumes nearly three times the amount of petroleum as a PHEV40 and around 80 times as much as a BEV,” the UMTRI researchers say.


Quote:
But skepticism toward EVs’ potential environmental benefits remains widespread.

“Cars and trucks are responsible for roughly 24% of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution – nearly 1.7 billion metric tons per year,” an article in Scientific American noted last year. “Because those emissions come from hundreds of millions of tailpipes, this source of pollution seems difficult to control. Shifting it to hundreds of smokestacks at power plants that supply electricity to charge electric cars, therefore, seems like a more effective way to clean up the fleet.”

The UMTRI study estimates electricity currently accounts for just 0.1% of all transportation-related energy consumption in the U.S., while 92% of transportation-related energy consumption still is derived from petroleum.

But modern BEVs’ average fuel economy always has been substantially better than comparable conventional ICE vehicles. Compared to the average fuel economy of 22.8 mpg (10.3 L/100 km) for current ICE vehicles, the average available fuel economy of BEVs is more than 4.5 times higher, averaging the equivalent of 103.0 mpg (2.3 L/100 km).


I did not check the study to see if the GHG per mile took into account renewable energy or not.
 
Most studies I have seen claiming hybrid/ev vehicles are no better in lifetime carbon output tend to be biased against ev's and assume the worst-case scenario as far as production methods and recharging from a plug connected to a coal-fired plant. The better designed studies all show an advantage for ev's that is only widening as the power grid shifts more and more to renewables
 
A comprehensive study should analyze the complete system of variables such as:

Production (cost of raw materials, capital, replacement and upgrades of equipment, efficiencies of each component, etc),

Distribution System,

Cost of EV production including all carbon activities associated with the raw materials for production of each EV component.

Without an efficient production and distribution system, there is no charging of any kind of electric vehicle.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
A comprehensive study should analyze the complete system of variables such as:

Production (cost of raw materials, capital, replacement and upgrades of equipment, efficiencies of each component, etc),

Distribution System,

Cost of EV production including all carbon activities associated with the raw materials for production of each EV component.

Without an efficient production and distribution system, there is no charging of any kind of electric vehicle.


That works both ways, how many terawatts of energy used in steel production is used in the petroleum industry infrastructure each year?
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
A comprehensive study should analyze the complete system of variables such as:

Production (cost of raw materials, capital, replacement and upgrades of equipment, efficiencies of each component, etc),

Distribution System,

Cost of EV production including all carbon activities associated with the raw materials for production of each EV component.

Without an efficient production and distribution system, there is no charging of any kind of electric vehicle.



Same could have been said of gasoline a century ago. I won't disagree, I think it'll be quite the fight, to update our aging electric infrastructure. Then again: perhaps the auto makers will be the ones to pump money into it, instead of the gov. Think about it: they're under the gun to hit emissions targets. They have plenty of clout and money, and incentive I think. Perhaps the US can kill two birds with one stone. Push EV's hard, and it'll be the transportation sector that "fixes" our electric grid in the process.

To that effect, it looks like the UK is looking into mandating electric charging stations: Ward's

Quote:
The U.K. government introduces legislation requiring that every gas station and motorway service center install electric charging points.

The Queen’s Speech, marking the start of the post-election Parliamentary session, included the introduction of the Automated and Electric Vehicles Bill.

Government briefing papers say the legislation will ensure the U.K. remains at the forefront of developing new technology in electric and automated vehicles.
 
I'll take Devil's Advocate:

Quote:
The following well-to-wheels calculations use the GREET model (2015 release)for model year 2015 passenger cars to calculate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and petroleum usage during vehicle operation (ANL, 2015). (Results do not include GHG emissions or petroleum usage during the vehicle manufacturing process.)


I wonder why that is? Could it be because the mining for the rare-Earth magnets, battery metals, etc, and shipping them is pretty GHG heavy?
 
Last edited:
The results of studies always reflect those who paid for the study. Where does/Will the electricity come from. Electric cars have their purposes. The pollution is generated elsewhere so the people that think they are saving the earth are just fooling themselves.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
A comprehensive study should analyze the complete system of variables such as:

Production (cost of raw materials, capital, replacement and upgrades of equipment, efficiencies of each component, etc),

Distribution System,

Cost of EV production including all carbon activities associated with the raw materials for production of each EV component.

Without an efficient production and distribution system, there is no charging of any kind of electric vehicle.



In addition, I'd like a study that also compares buying a used car/truck. Especially compared to the total cost of production for a new vehicle of either type ... Recycling existing stock and keeping them on the road longer lowers the mining, refining, and other production costs, and the final disposal cost.
 
Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
A comprehensive study should analyze the complete system of variables such as:

Production (cost of raw materials, capital, replacement and upgrades of equipment, efficiencies of each component, etc),

Distribution System,

Cost of EV production including all carbon activities associated with the raw materials for production of each EV component.

Without an efficient production and distribution system, there is no charging of any kind of electric vehicle.



In addition, I'd like a study that also compares buying a used car/truck. Especially compared to the total cost of production for a new vehicle of either type ... Recycling existing stock and keeping them on the road longer lowers the mining, refining, and other production costs, and the final disposal cost.


Agree. I saved my 2000 Mustang from the junkyard due to the crash damage. Total environmental damage was the manufacture of 2 fenders and paint. Of course, it's not the best example of saving the environment as it only gets 19-26 mpg.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
The results of studies always reflect those who paid for the study. Where does/Will the electricity come from. Electric cars have their purposes. The pollution is generated elsewhere so the people that think they are saving the earth are just fooling themselves.


Not unlike, the posts of BITOG users tend to reflect their own personal bias.

Fully 10% of US grid power in March came from renewables. Petroleum will never go above 0%.
 
It depends on where you live. Some states barely emit any carbon in the atmosphere per watt of electricity you put in your electric car, while other states still use a high percentage of coal (high carbon) powerplants.
Emissions.jpg


That map was from 4 years ago, and now there are even more natural gas powerplants, but its still about the same.
In some of the worst carbon (coal-fired) states, its actually better to drive a decent hybrid car, non-plugin, or something like a 1.0L Ecoboost car, for high fuel economy. In half of states, its better to charge up an electric car, which got its electricity from wind, solar, natural gas, nuclear, hydro, maybe a small percent from coal.

Of course the problem with electric cars is range and recharge availability/time. Few people can take long trips in them!

Conclusion: Hybrids are usually the "greenest" lowest carbon which are still practical for everyday use & long road trips too.
 
The PNW has a high proportion of their electricity from hydroelectric sources. (Dams). That is most likely the reason that corner of the country scored well.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7046-hydroelectric-powers-dirty-secret-revealed/
Interesting analysis. Still, a tree's leaves are seasonal anyway, and trees die normally too. Maybe they took all that into account.

"This is because large amounts of carbon tied up in trees and other plants are released when the reservoir is initially flooded and the plants rot. Then after this first pulse of decay, plant matter settling on the reservoir’s bottom decomposes without oxygen, resulting in a build-up of dissolved methane. This is released into the atmosphere when water passes through the dam’s turbines."


It would be good to capture the methane from the water before it gets into the turbines, pipe the nat gas off, and burn it to gen electricity and/or pipe it to a town's water heaters...... Might be a way to do that. Burning natural methane gas is low-ish carbon, like half a coal burning plant does.
 
I agree CT8. When a certain individual starts flying commercial instead of their private jet, sells a ten thousand square foot home and lives in a 1200 square foot living space then I will believe what that person promotes.
It would be like PTL preachers telling everyone else how to live while having fun with escorts and drinking a case of beer a day... Live out what you say you believe. Be real and serious about it.
 
I'll have to read that link later. The internet at my location is acting up today. Probably the cyber attacks.

One thing to consider, many of the major hydroelectric dams on the Columbia river are located in the semi-arid regions of WA state, hence very few trees. The Grand Coulee dam for example as well as the Bonneville and several in between. Besides hydropower, they also supply irrigation to the region which transformed it into the major agricultural resource it is today. Many greenies want these dams removed not considering the total impact that would have on the entire region. The Bonneville Power Admin also sells electricity to California which would impact that state as well since they don't build power plants in CA but rely on sources from other states.
 
Originally Posted By: PimTac
The PNW has a high proportion of their electricity from hydroelectric sources. (Dams). That is most likely the reason that corner of the country scored well.


Which has its own consequences.. The wild fish population for instance.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
The results of studies always reflect those who paid for the study. Where does/Will the electricity come from. Electric cars have their purposes. The pollution is generated elsewhere so the people that think they are saving the earth are just fooling themselves.


It is easier to control the emissions of 4 smokestacks than 4 million exhaust pipes.
 
I am confused by this statement(0% petroleum). Natural gas is produced by the petroleum industry, so the quote is limited to the actual definition of petroleum and not the industry and limited to the USA?. I didn't read the report, is that quote from there?

Originally Posted By: Brons2
Originally Posted By: CT8
The results of studies always reflect those who paid for the study. Where does/Will the electricity come from. Electric cars have their purposes. The pollution is generated elsewhere so the people that think they are saving the earth are just fooling themselves.


Not unlike, the posts of BITOG users tend to reflect their own personal bias.

Fully 10% of US grid power in March came from renewables. Petroleum will never go above 0%.
 
Nailed it on the head guys. An electric car is a worse polluter sitting on the showroom floor than a gasoline powered vehicle after years on the road.

Every pro-EV article you will ever read will talk tailpipe. If you expand the scope further, the total picture is disgusting.

Just look at how Tesla goes on about the magic of the electric motor. I see more of Tesla's Ford F350s running around than their electric cars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top