koolbreez
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:42 am

Re: Even the Tesla Model S....

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:50 am

I would just like to ask a couple of questions. One, I know that there is discussion about electric vehicles and charging them. If your electricity is generated from a coal fired plant, it will put more pollution in the air by charging your vehicle. Do you know where your electricity comes from?
Two, since electric vehicles don't use gasoline or diesel and therefore aren't paying taxes on fuel, does California add extra tax to an electric vehicle to compensate?

koolbreez
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:42 am

Re: Even the Tesla Model S....

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:02 am

koolbreez wrote:I would just like to ask a couple of questions. One, I know that there is discussion about electric vehicles and charging them. If your electricity is generated from a coal fired plant, it will put more pollution in the air by charging your vehicle. Do you know where your electricity comes from?
Two, since electric vehicles don't use gasoline or diesel and therefore aren't paying taxes on fuel, does California add extra tax to an electric vehicle to compensate?


Sorry, meant to write that when charging your vehicle, it will add more pollution to the air than running a gasoline engine, if your electricity is generated by a coal fired plant.

RobbW
Posts: 418
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Elgin, IL

Environmental Question

Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:29 am

koolbreez wrote:I would just like to ask a couple of questions. One, I know that there is discussion about electric vehicles and charging them. If your electricity is generated from a coal fired plant, it will put more pollution in the air by charging your vehicle. Do you know where your electricity comes from?
Two, since electric vehicles don't use gasoline or diesel and therefore aren't paying taxes on fuel, does California add extra tax to an electric vehicle to compensate?

Koolbreez, this argument has been tried before and the problem is that people using this argument are mixing apples and oranges. If you want to compare the emissions of an EV to an ICE, you have to start at the point where each vehicle actually receives its "fuel" and go forward from their. For an ICE, it's once you pump the gasoline into the fuel tank. For an EV, it's once you charge your batteries. From that point forward, there is no comparison. EV wins hands-down every time!

Now, if, like you are trying to do, you want to argue that EVs are more polluting because of the pollutants emitted during the generation of the electricity that it uses to charge its batteries, then you also have to consider the production of the gasoline the ICE uses.

In 2012, 37% of electricity generation was from coal power plants, 30% was from natural gas, 19% nuclear, 7% hydro, and 5% other renewables. Yes, coal is dirty. But newer, cleaner coal burning technologies are being developed and implemented. Also, nearly one-third of the country's power was from natural gas, which is even cleaner burning than coal. About one-fifth of the power was from nuclear, which has no greenhouse emissions at all. Cleaner and greener ways to produce electricity are being researched and developed every day. The use of wind, solar, geothermal, etc. are increasing all the time and are renewable and non-polluting. Eventually, the EV car COULD be powered 100% by renewable, non-polluting energy. In fact, they are many EV owners whose EVs are TRULY zero-emissions as they have installed solar chargers at their homes! The sun produces the energy in their cases. Absolutely NO pollution at all!

The same cannot be said for ICE vehicles. ICE cars burn fossil fuels and always will. No way around that. Of course, you could make an argument for bio-diesel fuels, but you still have to burn them, which emits pollution of one kind or another. Now, for the comparison of the energy generation for ICE vehicles. ICE cars burn gasoline. That gas has to come from somewhere. Oil companies extract oil from within the Earth's crust. That requires massive amounts of energy to tap into and extract the oil. That oil then has to be transported to a refinery via either ships, pipes, or trucks. All transportation methods to the refineries require huge amounts of energy to get it there. In the case of ships and trucks, you are burning fossil fuels in order to get the freshly-extracted dino gunk to the refineries. Then the refineries use multiple processes (requiring lots of energy) to refine the dino gunk into several different types and grades of fuel products. The gasoline then has to be transported to distribution centers, again via trains or trucks that are burning more fossil fuels. Then fuel trucks fill up at the distribution centers and transport the gasoline, once again burning fossil fuels along the way, to the gas stations. The gas stations use power to stay open, turn on their lights, and pump fuel into ICE vehicles. And of course, those ICE vehicles had to burn even more fossil fuels to get to the gas stations so they could refuel.

Soooooooo... after all that, which mode of transportation (ICE vs. EV) truly creates MORE pollution overall? In THAT contest, ICE definitely wins hands-down!!!

People who are, for some unknown reason, against EVs or developing alternative forms of energy really need to stop making silly arguments such as this. And you have to take into consideration the total chain of energy production on BOTH sides. You can't just simply say that the coal burned to produce electricity that my EV uses is waaaaaay more polluting than the little bit of greenhouse emissions expelled by your ICE. You aren't taking in the whole picture and comparing apples to apples!
Clear Skies,
Robb

EV: 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV SE, Raspberry Metallic, Premium Package - Purchased 07/11/13
PHEV: 2017 Chrysler Pacifica eHybrid, Bright White, Platinum Package - Purchased 05/01/17

JoeS
Site Moderator
Posts: 3894
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:47 am
Location: Silicon Valley, California

Re: Environmental Question

Wed Oct 02, 2013 12:44 pm

RobbW, you fell for it. My impression is that koolbreez (who just joined this forum) was just egging us on with his completely off-topic post in the Tesla S thread. Since you responded so verbosely, I created a new title and moved both his and your posts into it, into the Off-Topic subforum.

IMO, not worth wasting our time on this subject on this iMiEV forum.
EVs: 2 Wht/Blu SE Prem., '13 Tesla MS85, 3 156v CorbinSparrows (2 Li-ion), 24v EcoScoot(LiFePO4)
EV Conv: 156v '86 Ram PU, 144v '65 Saab 96
Hybrids: 48v1kW bike
ICE: '88 Isuzu Trooper. Mothballed: '67 Saab (orig.owner), '76 MBZ L206D RHD RV

RobbW
Posts: 418
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Elgin, IL

Re: Environmental Question

Wed Oct 02, 2013 12:53 pm

S'pose you're right, Joe. It's just that I get that argument ALL the time! Low-information people who just follow the talking points.
Clear Skies,
Robb

EV: 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV SE, Raspberry Metallic, Premium Package - Purchased 07/11/13
PHEV: 2017 Chrysler Pacifica eHybrid, Bright White, Platinum Package - Purchased 05/01/17

Don
Site Moderator
Posts: 2982
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 3:55 pm
Location: Biloxi MS

Re: Environmental Question

Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:19 pm

Anyone who would argue that continuing to power personal vehicles with oil and all of the negatives that entails is preferable to ANY more modern technology is just living with their head in the sand

When we compare the negative footprint of ICE powered cars with any other means, lets look at the total picture for oil. Count in the lives lost due to religious radicals in the middle east, the damage caused by oil spills in drilling for the oil and also in transporting the oil around the world and the spills we see here at home from pipeline leaks

Everyone knows there are better ways to produce electricity than by burning coal and the country is rather quickly moving away from coal, thanks in large part to environmental laws passed during Nixon's presidency which are finally coming on line. One day soon electricity will be much cleaner - About all that can be done to clean up gasoline and diesel vehicles has already been done and one day they will be phased out too and the world will be all the better for it. Can you imagine a day when Saudi Arabia and Iran can find no buyers for their oil? THAT will be something to celebrate!

Don
2012 iMiEV SE Premium, White
2012 iMiEV SE Premium, Raspberry Metallic
2012 iMiEV SE, White
2017 Chevy Volt Premier
2014 Ford Transit Connect XLT SWB wagon
2006 Itasca Navion Sprinter Motor Home

siai47
Posts: 363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 5:54 pm

Re: Environmental Question

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:38 pm

How come it seems that everytime this question is brought up your power must be coming from a "coal" plant----and not just any plant, the oldest, out of date, no scrubbers or contorls of any kind, etc. burning some kind of waste slurry from shale oil production. There is very little coal in the mix where I live but I don't care if there is or isn't. YOUR COAL ISN'T COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO IS TRY TO KILL US ! That's the bottom line for me. Also people seem to forget the cycle efficiency of a BEV is much higher then a ICE and the point source emissions from the power plant (whatever kind it is and however much it is producing per KWH) isn't directly coming from the bumper in front of you and into your car while sitting in a mega ICE traffic jam. BTW--how much electricity is used in gasoline refining and what kind of emissions come from the refinery?

NeilBlanchard
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:26 am
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Contact: Website

Re: Environmental Question

Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:08 pm

Ah, the long tailpipe argument...

Even at 100% coal generated electricity, that puts an EV on par with an ~80MPG gasoline car.

Also, gasoline does not appear out of thin air, either. A lot of energy goes into finding oil fields, test drilling (the BP oil spew was a test drill), extraction takes a lot of energy including a lot of electricity, and transportation, and refining, and more transportation, and even pumping into your car's tank. And that doesn't include tar sands bitumen, which is takes about 1 barrel worth of energy to get 2 barrels of "oil".

For conventional oil, it probably takes about 7.5-8.5kWh of electricity PER GALLON of gasoline - so if you count the overhead for an EV, you have to add it to gasoline as well. Tar sands bitumen may take as much as 13kWh per gallon of gasoline.

So, just use that electricity directly in an EV - and skip all the carbon in the gasoline altogether! It takes as much, or more electricity to run a gasoline car as it does to run an EV.

We are paying over $1 BILLION dollars PER DAY for foreign oil. If we drove EV's then we'd have plenty of money to repair our roads and infrastructure. And have plenty left over to improve our grid and railroad systems.
Last edited by NeilBlanchard on Thu Oct 03, 2013 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/

peterdambier
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:26 am
Location: Bergstrasse, Germany

Re: Environmental Question

Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:02 am

Dont forget, that half a gallon of electricity used for making a gallon of gas is made of carbon mostly, because that is cheapest. Worst case: Keep that oil down in the earth and give me the electricity saved to drive my car. Im am still better than those gassers.

Cheers
Peter and Karin
Peter and Karin Dambier, DL2FBA, www.piraten-fraktion-bergstrasse.de

siai47
Posts: 363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 5:54 pm

Re: Environmental Question

Thu Oct 03, 2013 5:40 am

In my rant about "coal" and EV's I forgot about the OP's question about taxes. Sure, there are taxes collected but in my case not road taxes. Like everyone else, I pay a tax to license my car---I assume the money spent isn't just to pay for the plate. Also, although they aren't as high, my taxes on the electricity I use to charge the car are about 8.6% per KWH. I feel my road taxes are being offset by my emissions credit. Until recently my CNG powered car was assessed road tax via a annual calculated tax sticker in lieu of a tax paid at the "pump". This tax was far higher then a normal ICE vehicle would have paid (and has now been dropped here in Florida). Don't worry about taxes as I am sure creative legislators are spending nights awake figuring out how to seperate us from our money. I really ticks them off when their cost per mile to drive is higher then ours--heck they are even upset about fuel efficient ICE's not paying enough :evil: !

Return to “Off Topic”