Posted on 05/15/2016 10:45:38 AM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie
Daily Caller News Foundation Electric Vehicles Emit More Pollutants Than Fossil Fuel-Burning Cars, Says Study
A study from the University of Edinburgh shows that electric and hybrid vehicles emit as many, if not more, atmospheric toxins than fossil fuel-burning vehicles.
The study, conducted by Victor Timmers and Peter Achten at the University of Edinburgh, and published by the journal Atmospheric Environment, found that heavier electric vehicles produce as many pollutants as their lighter weight conventional vehicles.
Electric vehicles tend to produce more pollutants from tire and brake wear, due in large part to their batteries, as well as the other parts needed to propel them, making them heavier.
These pollutants are emitted when electric vehicle tires and brakes deteriorate as they accelerate or slow down while driving. Timmers and Achten’s research suggests exhaust from traditional vehicles is only about one-third of the total emissions.
Further, the particulate matters are worse than fuel emissions, because they cause more health problems.
“We found that non-exhaust emissions, from brakes, tires and the road, are far larger than exhaust emissions in all modern cars,” Achten wrote in the study.
He continued: “These are more toxic than emissions from modern engines so they are likely to be key factors in the extra heart attacks, strokes and asthma attacks seen when air pollution levels surge.”
The study does not include the production of energy needed for each vehicle, from coal or other fossil fuel sources. It only calculates the driving of the car. The increase in pollutants are generated from factors like tire wear dust and brake pad dust, and tend to increase as the electric vehicles and hybrids get heavier — due in part because of the added weight of the cars’ lithium batteries.
Adversely, the study shows the popularity of electric vehicles are unlikely to have much of an effect on the level of pollutants. In fact, electric vehicles actually emit 90 percent of particulate emissions, while traditional vehicles push out 85 percent of particulate emissions in traffic. These proportions will only increase as electric vehicles become more popular. The study’s authors concluded that future policies should focus more on the weight of electric and hybrid vehicles.
The Edinburgh study comes on the heels of research conducted in March by the investment firm Devonshire Research Group, a company that specializes in valuing and devaluing tech firms, showing that Tesla electric vehicles are “not as sustainable as they may seem.”
The study also shows that Tesla’s CEO, techno-wonder Elon Musk, could expose the company to “serious brand risk and an unknown legal exposure.” In fact, according to the research, everything about the Tesla — from its headlights, to its chassis, to the way it is produced — contributes to environmental degradation.
The electric vehicle and its development is merely a political conduit for providing taxpayer funds to politicians. Taxes go to Washington, Washington decrees an “environmentally sound” car, which then gets the funds and whose officers and directors then skim some money off the top which goes back to politicians.
I doubt it.
In the case of a conventional car’s charging/starting system, they claim it takes five miles of driving to pay back the battery for the juice it took to start. The same with a battery charger, the battery may be able to get charged in about an hour.
Back to your question...I believe the extra juice would be converted heat within the battery itself.
As a degreed mechanical engineer, I knew this the first time I heard about electric cars. For starters, the loss of power in transmission from generating station to your home or charging station in significant. Then there is efficiency loss during battery charging process, normal loss of battery power during periods of rest, and the efficiency loss in the electric motor in the car.
A statement I took issue with in my initial post, because it lacks reference (at the least - the old 'how long is a piece of string' conundrum). Conversely, electric cars tend to be smaller ('compact') cars and the battery weight is offset by the lack of a heavy combustion engine.
How about a list of the vehicle weights of existing electric cars and standard ICE cars? Then we could make some informed comparisons. (With all the creature comfort and 'safety' additions, all cars these days are bloated pigs, IMO - what comes even close to a 700 kg/1500 pound car of yesteryear these days? - just sayin'!)
Lumping in tire and brake wear with exhaust emissions 'just like that' sounds iffy as well.
How about citing tire life (corrected for cross-section - electric cars seems to have narrower tires) and cubic inches of brake pad material used per 100,000 miles? I don't see it in the article. Etc. etc.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no EV fan, never owned one and likely never will, but the article as I see it reads 'stupid'.
Just read yesterday that Tesla stock is selling at 75 times earnings.
Glad that’s where I have my millions parked.
Not.
That's the main thing that makes electric cars bogus...the batteries. They weigh a lot and they don't charge quickly.
Battery technology hasn't changed battery performance much since they first developed lead/acid automotive batteries...they are still in use.
I doubt I'm the first to think this, but if they were to assemble a "battery" from a proper combination of super-capacitors and lead/acid...ni/cad or some other conventional storage cells, they may have something.
The "caps" recharge instantly...you plug them in....they're charged. If their values and numbers were properly matched with the storage cells, and they could be made to slowly discharge into the batteries in order to charge them up...the "regenerative braking would work great"
Also, an instant charging station would be possible, or maybe even an on-board charger, that plugged-in with a regular extension cord to house current.
What made me think this, is a youtube video of a guy starting his Honda with super-caps....and totally eliminating his battery.
And they live and die, along with tons and tons of dead plankton daily, fall to the ocean floor and turn into the black ooze, smashed down by tons of pressure in the ocean depths, and turn back into petroleum.
I basically agree with you.
On the other hand, note that in rainy states like Oregon where much of the electric power is generated hydroelectrically, it can be argued that electric cars are partly solar-powered since the sun’s energy moves water from the ocean to land in the form of rain clouds, rain water turning the turbines of generators. “Solar” states like Oregon ironically have a reputation for being overcast.
Based on the article referenced by this thread, however, we must now question if the latest electric car technology still falls short of the hype about electric cars being pushed by misguided environmentalists.
“Based on the article referenced by this thread, however, we must now question if the latest electric car technology still falls short of the hype about electric cars being pushed by misguided environmentalists.”
Let me start off by saying, I doubt this article is accurate regarding pure electric cars, versus hybrids.
The second issue is the source of generated power. Natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind and hydro are all cleaner sources of power than burning gasoline. As the mix moves further in that direction, as it should, electric cars will look better and better.
We just need to get folks over their completely irrational fear of nuclear power.
More efficient at a particular moment in time. There is a lot of other baggage in the background, such as manufacturing, and wear and tear. The motor in most cars these days are good for 200k miles. What last’s 200k miles on a hybrid? Certainly not the battery.
The only thing I envision that will change the equation will be a coating or other product that will turn heat directly into electricity. That, will be the game changer, not storage.
Fun reading, but I don’t believe it’s meaningful. It mostly sounds like BS to me. Electric vehicles are dirty because they use coal-based electricity for power. They’re welcome to do so, but stop lying about being clean cars. It’s giving people stupid ideas.
Well, that's not exactly true. The Super-caps are super because of their energy density. They pack a lot of capacitance into a much smaller package than previously possible.
However, charging of these capacitors is limited by their internal resistance (very small) and the source resistance of the charger. In the limit, sure, they'll charge "instantly", but only if the charger can deliver almost infinite current. That means big diameter wires, and breakers that don't trip. The governing relationship is I= C*dv/dt. If you want to charge a large capacitor (Big C) rapidly, dv/dt will also be large. So, the two large numbers multiplying each other mean you need a huge short-term charging current availability.
I won't reveal too much of my background, but I have stayed at Holiday Inns in the past.
Well, that's not exactly true. The Super-caps are super because of their energy density. They pack a lot of capacitance into a much smaller package than previously possible.
However, charging of these capacitors is limited by their internal resistance (very small) and the source resistance of the charger. In the limit, sure, they'll charge "instantly", but only if the charger can deliver almost infinite current. That means big diameter wires, and breakers that don't trip. The governing relationship is I= C*dv/dt. If you want to charge a large capacitor (Big C) rapidly, dv/dt will also be large. So, the two large numbers multiplying each other mean you need a huge short-term charging current availability.
I won't reveal too much of my background, but I have stayed at Holiday Inns in the past.
We actually have 2 Prius’ Our first one (2007 with 245,000 miles) just had the major battery go bad and for $800 we just had a rebuilt battery with 1 yr warranty put in. It is a fantastic car. We are not smug just smart. I have had everything from Mercedes to BMWs and I will take a Prius every day. My husband was driving over 1000 miles per week when gas was in the $3 plus range. The savings in gas alone paid for the car. Oh we also have a Charger and a BMW convertible at the moment be I choose the Prius every time
Well, if exhaust emissions are only 1/3 of the pollution emitted by auto’s then there is something else in play.
Investors tend to do the math and be pretty rational. There is no law against building more nuclear power, just no investors willing to get nuked again.
Thanks - without a relevant frame of reference the article doesn’t prove anything.
I used to drive a sports car and went through a set of /245 tires every 4k miles...don’t see any of the Tonka toy battery cars I know of doing that...at least the ones produced in high enough numbers to even figure in the 0.1% market share of all cars sold...(A Tesla might, but it’s too exotic on the scale to matter - and AFAIK there is no Tesla ICE equivalent to make a comparison to.)
Well, do they charge a lot faster than a lead acid battery?
In the limit, sure, they'll charge "instantly", but only if the charger can deliver almost infinite current. That means big diameter wires, and breakers that don't trip.
And that would be something like 2.0 gauge cable coming back from the vehicle's motor/alternator?
And what about the concept of using some combination of storage cell, super caps and probably some big-@$$ diodes?
Wouldn’t that perform better than a conventional deep-discharge battery?
38% of the energy targeted towards propelling an electric vehicle, beginning with the generating plant connection to a transmission line, is lost due to various energy conversions:
Transmission line loss
AC to DC conversion
Battery charging loss DC to chemical process
Battery discharge loss chemical process to DC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.