Electric vehicles (EVs) promise less greenhouse gas, reduced carcinogenic pollution and a severed dependence from America’s oil dependance. But can these promises be guaranteed?
In a large part, the “greenness” of EVs depends on the source from which their electric charge is derived. The electric grid is powered by gargantuan generators. Due to the immense power required, and the necessary fluidity and versatility of that power demand, these generators are nearly always powered by fossil fuels.
EVs can, however promise a reduction, if not an elimination, in the resultant pollution. One study by M. Kintner-Meyer, K. Schneider, R. Pratt, and the PNNL, found that in oil-dependent regions, greenhouse gases could be reduced by up to 40% through the use of EVs. In coal-dependent regions, however, similar benefits were zilch. A comprehensive study by the EPRI and NRDC found that the higher the PHEV (plug-in hybrid-electric vehicle) penetration, the less greenhouse gas and pollution would be produced.
EVs save more oil than the gasoline not expended at the pump. It reduces the energy expended in the associated exploration, drilling, extracting, refining and transportation, most of which comes by oil and fossil fuels.
EVs are touted as cheap wallet-stuffers; $3 to “fill up” sounds phantasmagoric. By a cost-per-mile basis, EVs claim 50% of the costs of gasoline, and according to the University of Missouri, after seven years, initial battery costs would be paid in full.
Nickel-cadmium and lead-acid batteries are renowned for their toxicity, leading some to fear a systematic switch to battery-powered EVs. However, batteries are now nickel metal hydride (NiMH) or lithium ion (Li-Ion), which cause substantially less harm to the environment, and are among the most recycled commodities in the nation.
Helpful or hurtful? Potentially both. But with a dash of clever smarts and a dollop of common sense, EVs may be the clean energy we need.
Comments on this entry are closed.