Battery Powered Cars Are Environmentally Friendly And Energy Efficient
Oh Yeah
Side Score: 14
|
 |
Not Really
Side Score: 14
|
|
|
|
|
While sitting in our favourite bistro just just off Boulevarde Montparnasse in Paris we just loved watching people drive up to a parking space and plug their car in. A great start and hopefully only the beginning of a whole new change in the way we look at personal transport and then.....industry.... agriculture.....?. Side: Oh Yeah
Where, do you imagine that the power in that charging station comes from? I'll help you there: In france its 77% from nuclear plants. Using nuclear fission to boil water, to create steam, to drive a generator. In this process more than 65% of the energy used to boil the water is lost in the conversion. France's electrical transmission and distribution system looses another 5% of the original energy. The final power lose involves the battery and electric motor. Together these account for another 20% lose of energy. We are left with only 10% percent of the nuclear power generated, actually being used to move the car. Add in the environmental impact of nuclear plants, with the impact of battery manufacture and eventual disposal, and you are left with a cute little energy pig. Side: Not Really
2
points
You aren't really suggesting that the total environmental impact of the 'share' of nuclear plant energy used by electric vehicles is greater than the total environmental impact of the 'share' of petroleum used by gasoline vehicles, now, do you? Are you aware that the MOST efficient gasoline engines are only ~35% efficient, losing ~65% of the energy potential in the gasoline? Are you ignoring the environmental damage caused by operating a gasoline engine? And recall that this is using the end product 'gasoline,' which as a finished product already encompasses significant energy loss and environmental damage from its original form. I'm not arguing that nuclear power is perfect and clean by a long shot- just saying that you need to compare like to like here. If you're taking into account the environmental impact and other costs of producing the nuclear power for the electric car, than you must also take into account the environmental impact and other costs of producing gasoline. I'm not supplying sources as you did not yourself- I highly suggest that you do thorough homework on both sides of the issue before you dismiss one altogether. Your reasoning and conclusion is equivalent to a choice between two breeds of dog, wherein you opt for the second because your best friend has one of the first and it sheds a lot; unfortunately, the breed you choose ends up shedding more, and if you'd bothered to look into BOTH breeds you'd have known this. Side: Oh Yeah
1
point
nuclear power is actually relatively clean. aside from the risks of a meltdown and the slight increase in overall radiation, it really is a godsend compared to gas and oil. will also last about 20-40 times longer and has a few alternative fuels that would require little or no modifications to existing plants, such as thorium, which would further extend our supply for another 60,000 years on current demand. waste is relatively tiny, composed of water and some transuranic elements, which are quite easy to dispose of provided a safe place is found to do so. also, although not very efficient economically or chemically, you can even extract uranium from the sea, which contains an estimated 4.5 billion tons. Side: Oh Yeah
1
point
Far from being revolutionary, electric cars are just a slightly less harmful reiteration of the same problem: the car. Personal vehicles are fundamentally antithetical to energy efficiency and environmental sustainability, not just because the "friendly" alternatives still leave much to be desired but more importantly because of the infrastructure they support: low density sprawl. A more efficient car is not the solution. No car can be. High-density orientated mass transit, bikeability, and walkability are. That is were the real change is happening. Electric cars are behind the curve. Side: Not Really
1
point
1
point
|
2
points
Electrical Cars are essentially at the moment not much more environmentally friendly than any other car as the energy that is supplied into the battery is about as clean as the sources of that power: gas, coal, nuclear, and the proportionally small group of green power sources. so only a small percentage of the energy used by that car is actually environmentally friendly. this may change over time as more green sources are further discovered or more heavily invested in but at the moment it is probably better to just produce your power in your engine like the conventional cars, considering the energy lost transferring it into a battery would likely be similar to that saved by the small percentage of green sources. this will obviously be different from country to country and will also change in the future as we are forced to more renewable energy sources. Side: Not Really
1
point
the energy that is supplied into the battery is about as clean as the sources of that power: gas, coal, nuclear, and the proportionally small group of green power sources. so only a small percentage of the energy used by that car is actually environmentally friendly. The obvious omission here is efficiency. A typical modern gasoline engine only operates with a maximum efficiency of around 30%. Power plants generate power much more efficiently - e.g. hydroelectric power can be generated with about 90% efficiency and the car's electric motor similarly operates at around 90% efficiency. People should keep in mind the impact of manufacturing etc., but there is a significant difference in environmental impact between running an electric car and running a car with a combustion engine. Side: Oh Yeah
Cars are not environmentally friendly or energy efficient, regardless of where they get their energy from. Even if a battery powered car were sourced and sustained from an entirely sustainable network, the car is the primary cause and sustaining element of sprawl which is fundamentally inefficient and less environmentally friendly than density. I understand the push for the "sustainable car", but I think it is relatively misguided and that energy and finances would be better spent in redirecting our transportation infrastructure toward high-density, non-commuter development that renders the car obsolete. Side: Not Really
The notion of the car's emission of harmful fumes being nonexistent could be the main goal for the push of electric cars. I'm not to informed on how battery energy has just as many harmful ramifications as car fumes but, please, do let me know if that is the case(?). Side: Oh Yeah
I appreciate the rationale behind developing an alternative option to the traditional gasoline based car. I could even accept that such an alternative may be a necessary intermediary step, but I contest that it can ever be truly energy efficient and environmentally friendly. That current electric cars still rely largely upon dirty energy sources (e.g. coal) and use environmentally toxic batteries is somewhat beside the point. The point being that any car is inherently inefficient and environmentally antagonistic because of the infrastructure it promotes: sprawl. Even if the car were 100% sustainable and had no negative environmental footprint, the infrastructure it fosters is one fundamentally harmful to the environment and inherently less efficient than higher-density models. Lower density renders the delivery of other resources more inefficient and less environmentally friendly and sustainable: water, gas, internet, roads, human waste byproducts, energy loss over distance, etc. Higher density - supported by mass transit, bikeability, walkability, etc. - minimizes that waste, inefficiency, and environmental impact. Side: Not Really
1
point
The question is not a comparative proposition, but an absolute statement that battery powered cars are energy efficient and environmentally friendly. The common line of rationale has been to affirm these attributes on the basis of comparison to the more prevalent gasoline based car. However, this comparison actually only demonstrates that the battery powered car may be less inefficient and environmentally unfriendly than the gasoline based alternative. The false assumption is that reducing inefficiency is the same as accomplishing efficiency. My point is that there is no such thing as an efficient, environmentally friendly car regardless of how less inefficient it might be. Side: Oh Yeah
|
