Studies Find that PHEVs May Increase Air Pollution
Two studies say that while plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) will cut U.S. gasoline use, mass-production of the autos will increase air pollution, according to USA Today.
The reasoning behind the study is that while the emissions coming from the tailpipe will be near nil, the utility generating plants that produce the electricity used to power the cars’ batteries will be working overtime. Thus, emitting more air pollution.
Nearly 49 percent of U.S. electricity is generated by burning coal. Burning coal increases the amount of mercury in the air, which is toxic. So, in a roundabout way, the PHEVs are actually coal-burners? Ok, that’s a stretch. But, the fact is, while individually cutting emissions, as a whole, PHEVs are not as environmentally-friendly as they may seem.
Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center, a Chicago-based advocacy group, said, “Plug-in hybrids are perhaps not good for all areas. States that are heavily coal, that equation doesn't work out very well for the environment.
Comments
Paul In Jersey
Finally, the mainstream media gets a clue. The false ecology of the plug-in may finally get some play. Of course, if the disposal of used-nuclear power pellets weren't considered a hot NIMBY topic, then yes, plug-in electric cars really would be totally clean.
seeker
has anyone considered that the electricity usage will likely take place at night, when the car is parked in a drive-way. When, coincidentally very little electricity is being used, because we all might be sleeping. I'm sure we have all heard the phrase "think outside the box" before. I think that we might also have to change the shape of the box. Perhaps, this box has more than four sides (not to mention the top and bottom)
Naturally, we should be looking at generating electricity from cleaner sources such as wind, nuclear. I hope we're not just pinning our hopes to the damn car to save us all from ourselves.
Bob
If they stopped focusing on Cars causing all the pollution in the world they may start replacing some of these old plants with newer cleaner technology, then it wouldn't matter.
jim
We will soon be shivering in the dark
FLASHPOINT
Well, duh. People tend to confuse alternate fuels with high efficiency and lower operating costs. E-85 may be cheaper to buy, but it's less efficient. And you're substituting one waste product for another. But it does reduce dino juice consumption for the motorist, if not the farmer raising the crop.
Electric cars will do the same thing. No tailpipe emmisions, but fire up the nuke plant to generate the electricity to charge the batteries. Or load another shovel of coal in the hopper.
No such thing as a free lunch, folks.
Auto News » Studies Find that PHEVs May Increase Air Polluti
[...] John Bisnar wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt Two studies say that while plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) will cut U.S. gasoline use, mass-production of the autos will increase air pollution, according to USA Today. The reasoning behind the study is that while the emissions coming from the tailpipe of a will be near nil, the utility generating plants that produce the electricity used to power the cars’ batteries will be working overtime. Thus, emitting more air pollution. Near 49 percent of U.S. electricity is generated by burning coal. Burning coal increases the amount of mercury in the air, which is toxic. So, in a roundabout way, the PHEVs are actually coal-burners? Ok, that’s a stretch. But, the fact is, while individually cutting emissions, as a whole, PHEVs are not as environmentally-friendly as they may seem. (More details after the jump) [...]
golfslave
Would be nice if the drive-by media would also address the environmental impact of the production of the vehicle itself, namely the battery and lightweight materials such as aluminum and plastics...
Also, what's going to happen to that highly toxic battery when it's replaced at a cost comparable to a new motor in a normal car? Hmmm.
Want to be less dependent on foreign oil? Drill in ANWAR, and buy the rest from the Canadians and Mexico. Problem solved.
Next...
Garfield134
Yeah, NIMBY is similar to NOMTP (Not Out My Tail Pipe). Manufacturers pushing PHEV's are just passing the buck for emissions requirements to the electric utilities, making the car manufacturers look green. Unfortunately, I do not have the data to back it up, but I would be willing to bet that the cleanest-burning coal- or oil- fired generating plant is dirtier that most of the worst running cars on the road.
Josh
I haven't seen any comparison of efficiencies. Your typical automotive gasoline engine is around 13% efficient, where the typical coal plant is around 30% efficient. I would like to see a study of the amount of CO2 produced per mile for the various powertrain schemes (plug-in hybrid vs. standard gasoline powertrain). This should also take into account the amount of energy expended to produce the cars of various configuration.
Until a complete life cycle analysis is done taking all these factors into account, discussions like this are of little value.
John
As I remember, don't have the link or anything, but I did read at one point that in terms of consumption and polution, the automobile is only responsible for a number around 10%. Seems to me that we are worried about the wrong problem right now. Besides, why start with the smallest package? Computers were once building filling machines, then rooms, then desk, now you have Black Berry's that are more powerful than the best computer from 10 years ago. So why aren't we starting with power plants and working down? Less space restraing AND one of the biggest sources of polution. Damn logic.
Aaron
Another nice benefit of PHEVs (and any hydrogen vehicle, really) is that they reduce smog even if it is debatable if they reduce overall CO2. Think of the air quality benefits in urban and suburban areas with fewer gas and diesel burners around. Sure, there's still polution from the energy manufacturing, but most of it's being generated outside the city. This means healthier air, less acidic rain, etc.
One thing I hope is hot on the heals of this new gen of elctric vehicles is a good, solid battery recycling program. This may already be in place, i really don't know.
dieselhead
John: "Transportation" is generally quoted as contributing 15% of greenhouse gases. It would be interesting to measure the automotive share of media blame for global warming. Intuitively, I think it is far more than 15%.
Josh above mentions efficiencies, but we also have to take into account the efficiency of the PHEV itself. Not 100% for sure.
Nuclear cannot continue to be treated as non-PC and therefore off limits. Generally speaking it has vastly lower pollution levels and much lower empirical risk. Not only could nuclear help with CO2 for PHEVs, but it could be the lowest cost/pollution method for hydrogen production if that becomes the energy storage mechanism of choice in some applications.
seeker
So, maybe as we're communicating amongst each other, perhaps, businesses should start to re-think commuting in general. Instead of forcing manufacterers of automobiles to make more efficient automobiles, we should look at the entire workforce and see who really needs to be driving to work. There might be a huge number of people that only need to travel in their cars two or three times a week as opposed to five days a week. This would mean less harmfull gases in the atmosphere as we ween ourselves off gas powered cars and move on up to electrified cars. As you find yourself working more and more at home, maybe we won't need as much electricity to run those damn electric cars after all. This is a different "box". We need to change alot more than what we chose to drive.
secret asian man
This is bogus for many reasons:
1: Coal plants have significantly superior efficiency. A large, slow engine running at slowly varying speed. can be optimized in ways that a small, fast-turning engine running at variable speed cannot. Coal-fired turbines suck out two or three times the energy per gram of carbon dioxide emitted.
2: They are using the figures of coal turbines running at mid-day peak. It costs plenty of energy to spin it faster during the day, but at night when the turbine is running underspeed, each additional watt actually improves the efficiency of the generator.
3: PHEVs can be charged off of intermittent sources. You can't run a server farm off a wind turbine, but you can easily drop a wind turbine on your roof and charge your PHEV off it.
X3 SoB
@secret asian man
Excellent points.
And I love your screen name!
I believe that this is a "smoke screen" for the fact that the powerplant industry has not been hassled as much as the auto industry, so they are trying to take up the slack. In fact, the powerplants have been making steady progress toward increased efficiency, so most of the arguement is mute.
howard
the current gas engine power source sort of happened by chance and invention. it seems like the future will be more directed by government regulation and interaction with the auto industry.
my biggest joy is thinking that regardless of the solution(s) which come out of that (above) the source of both transportation and the fuels to operate them will be domestic.
think what this might mean to jobs, the economy, and the security of our country and citizens. i have no problems with a reasonable march towards greater efficiency and green-ness as long as 'we' benefit from them both.
by the way, my next vehicle is on order now. Mercury Mariner hybrid due late March 2008. the dealer had -1- of them on allocation for the first quarter and despite it's less than hot rod performance, i will enjoy driving without the engine running. that's a nice change.
Brad
This is article pure ignorance and the U.S. needs to stop burning coal if it is such a problem. Electric cars NOW!!!
Post new comment