UoCS Study: How Green are Electric Cars?

[Norbert]

Methane can be dangerous in some short-term scenarios, but in general it is not nearly as bad as CO2 since it is short-lived (something like 10 years), whereas CO2 accumulates as it stays in the atmosphere for a very long time.

 

[vfx]

Also the mechanical condition of the ICE car will deteriorate with time and cause additional pollution. While the electric car's mechanical condition may also deteriorate, the deterioration is not likely to cause the same amount of extra pollution. And in many areas the "pollution check" is kind of a joke.

ICE get dirtier from the day you buy it. Why not do the study on a 4 year old EV and a 5 year old ICE.

 

[vfx]

Also, at a minimum, you shift the pollution from your car to the power plant and farther away from a population center (most likely).

That's always bugged me about the long tailpipe argument. Yes I WANT the pollution moved to somewhere else!

 

[Dave EV]

ICE get dirtier from the day you buy it. Why not do the study on a 4 year old EV and a 5 year old ICE.

Modern cars with all emissions controls intact work just as well when used as when new. My last ICE got the same smog test scores at 8 years/100k miles as new. I fully expect my Prius to do the same. CARB regulations pretty much dictate that ICE vehicles perform like new for 10-years 150k miles under warranty.

 

[JRP3]

Methane can be dangerous in some short-term scenarios, but in general it is not nearly as bad as CO2 since it is short-lived (something like 10 years), whereas CO2 accumulates as it stays in the atmosphere for a very long time.

However methane is 20 times more effective in trapping heat. Methane | Climate Change | U.S. EPA

 

[JRP3]

That's always bugged me about the long tailpipe argument. Yes I WANT the pollution moved to somewhere else!

Indeed. I often ask people if they would rather be surrounded by ICE's or EV's in a traffic jam, or why we don't have exhaust pipes inside our vehicles.

 

[dsm363]

That's always bugged me about the long tailpipe argument. Yes I WANT the pollution moved to somewhere else!

I agree. The same people who knock EVs for shifting the pollution are also probably not petitioning for coal power or nuclear power plants to be built next to their house. Shifting the pollution from one million cars to one power plant also makes it much easier to upgrade or regulate the emissions from that one power plant even years after it is built.

 

[DuncanWatson]

Modern cars with all emissions controls intact work just as well when used as when new. My last ICE got the same smog test scores at 8 years/100k miles as new. I fully expect my Prius to do the same. CARB regulations pretty much dictate that ICE vehicles perform like new for 10-years 150k miles under warranty.

But they do get less mpg as they age. The ghg/mile therefor increases as well.

Indeed. I often ask people if they would rather be surrounded by ICE's or EV's in a traffic jam, or why we don't have exhaust pipes inside our vehicles.

An excellent point that I completely agree with, especially as I am a cyclist as well as a driver.

I agree. The same people who knock EVs for shutting the pollution are also probably not petitioning for coal power or nuclear power plants to be built next to their house. Shifting the pollution from one million cars to one power plant also makes it much easier to upgrade or regulate the emissions from that one power plant even years after it is built.

the part I bolded is very true. It is also easier to put heavy scrubbers or other emission controls on a power plant that doesn't move than a car.

 

[Norbert]

However methane is 20 times more effective in trapping heat. Methane | Climate Change | U.S. EPA

Still, climate scientists are much less concerned about methane, and its role is exaggerated by those who try to derail discussions about reducing CO2.

EDIT: adding some info:

RealClimate: Much ado about methane

Could methane be a point of no return?

Actually, releasing CO2 is a point of no return if anything is. The only way back to a natural climate in anything like our lifetimes would be to anthropogenically extract CO2 from the atmosphere. The CO2 that has been absorbed into the oceans would degas back to the atmosphere to some extent, so we’d have to clean that up too. And if hydrates or peats contributed some extra carbon into the mix, that would also have to be part of the bargain, like paying interest on a loan.

Conclusion

It’s the CO2, friend.

 

[Dave EV]

But they do get less mpg as they age. The ghg/mile therefor increases as well.

In my last 3 ICE vehicles I have not been able to discern any change in MPG past 100k miles (and yes, I kept fuel logs).

Sure, if the thing starts burning oil due to leaky rings or valve seals things are going to go downhill, but in general with a fuel injected car which has been maintained well you will not see any significant change MPG or emissions.

 

[JRP3]

I think for the most part cars maintain similar mileage and emissions for a good part of their life, but the ones that don't probably put out significant emissions. We've all seen older vehicles that spew out some nasty stuff, and even vehicles with no visible emissions but bad sensors and emissions controls can have increased emissions in between yearly smog checks.

 

[jerry33]

Modern cars with all emissions controls intact work just as well when used as when new. My last ICE got the same smog test scores at 8 years/100k miles as new. I fully expect my Prius to do the same. CARB regulations pretty much dictate that ICE vehicles perform like new for 10-years 150k miles under warranty.

Problem is most cars last far longer than 10 years/150k miles. And by the time they get to the third or fourth owner, maintenance isn't likely to be kept up as well as when the first couple of owners had it.

 

[jerry33]

But they do get less mpg as they age.

Hmmm. (not that I don't agree with you for the most part :smile:

2004 Prius MPG from the logbook. (Complete years only):
2003-2004 -- 50.8 mpg 17,628 miles
2005 -- 52.6 mpg 14,688 miles
2006 -- 56.3 mpg 16,174 miles
2007 -- 57.3 mpg 18,384 miles
2008 -- 59.9 mpg 21,755 miles
2009 -- 61.4 mpg 16,177 miles
2010 -- 65.2 mpg 12,134 miles
2011 -- 66.9 mpg 11,272 miles

 

[Robert.Boston]

Jerry, you're just learning to drive smarter!

 

[DuncanWatson]

Hmmm. (not that I don't agree with you for the most part :smile:

2004 Prius MPG from the logbook. (Complete years only):
2003-2004 -- 50.8 mpg 17,628 miles
2005 -- 52.6 mpg 14,688 miles
2006 -- 56.3 mpg 16,174 miles
2007 -- 57.3 mpg 18,384 miles
2008 -- 59.9 mpg 21,755 miles
2009 -- 61.4 mpg 16,177 miles
2010 -- 65.2 mpg 12,134 miles
2011 -- 66.9 mpg 11,272 miles

I can't disagree, but a Prius is not the normal car and anyone keeping a detailed logbook is not the normal driver and maintainer of a car.

In any case it doesn't make much difference as an EV does get better over time as more and more power generation moves away from coal. I also agree with you that the lifetime of a car isn't 100k miles and 10 years. The average age of cars on the road today is 11.1 years.*1. Cars last a very long time on the used market, EVs (and Prii) both do better than normal ICE vehicles on maintenance and upkeep. Their cost of ownership is lower and so will stay on the road longer. Obviously crashes and poor maintenance of some will take their toll, though to be honest, crashes will probably provide a good source of battery packs in the future. They already do for Prii (my preferred plural form ignoring Toyota's preference).



*1- source time.com

 

[jerry33]

Jerry, you're just learning to drive smarter!

Some of it's that, certainly, but there are a couple of other factors:

- Some in the beginning is new car break-in.

- Some is that the commute hasn't changed so I get a lot of practice (the commute did change in Dec 2011).

- And some of it is that tires have gotten better over the period I've owned the car. I'm rather particular about tires, so the Prius is on it's fifth set:

1. OE tires Ohtsu tires branded Goodyear. (Removed after 20,500 miles when I couldn't stand them anymore).

2. Nokian NRHi (Removed after 27,000 miles. These tires were ruined by a dealer alignment, otherwise they would have gone much further)

3. Michelin MXV4 Plus (Removed after 35,800 miles. Michelin discontinued these in the Prius' size. They have been the quietest tires at the end of the life.)

4. Nokian WR-g2 (Removed after 31,300 miles. Although they were very low rolling resistance, perhaps running a severe-service all-season in Texas isn't the best way to get the longest tire life).

5. Nokian eNTYRE (Currently installed with 18,500 miles on them so far. These have produced the highest mpg so far 74.0 mpg over 668 miles). Had the eNTRYE not come out I was going to go for the Yokohama dB e-spec even though it was a summer only tire.

 

[jerry33]

I can't disagree, but a Prius is not the normal car and anyone keeping a detailed logbook is not the normal driver and maintainer of a car.

And here I thought it would be hard to find a more average person than myself :biggrin:

In any case it doesn't make much difference as an EV does get better over time as more and more power generation moves away from coal.

+1

Obviously crashes and poor maintenance of some will take their toll, though to be honest, crashes will probably provide a good source of battery packs in the future. They already do for Prii (my preferred plural form ignoring Toyota's preference).

I voted for Prii too. It looks better in print although it's more difficult to say. I'd think that Prius being the plural form of Prius has more to do with Japanese not having any plural forms of nouns rather than any [individual's] particular preference.

 

[Larry Chanin]

Still, climate scientists are much less concerned about methane, and its role is exaggerated by those who try to derail discussions about reducing CO2.

EDIT: adding some info:

RealClimate: Much ado about methane

Hi Norbert,

Without going into detail, Elon makes a similar point at about 7:41 minutes into this video.

http://online.wsj.com/video/elon-mu...tor/77D5C708-640B-4F73-9123-54B5E4C65CDC.html

For context, he was responding to a comment made by Dean Kamen at about 5:30 minutes regarding methane.

Larry

 

[neroden]

Hi Norbert,

Without going into detail, Elon makes a similar point at about 7:41 minutes into this video.

http://online.wsj.com/video/elon-mu...tor/77D5C708-640B-4F73-9123-54B5E4C65CDC.html

For context, he was responding to a comment made by Dean Kamen at about 5:30 minutes regarding methane.

Larry

I wouldn't say climate scientists are per se less concerned about methane, but the only sources of methane which seem to be massive enough to worry them a lot are (a) the methane clathrates, which we can do very little about unless we cut CO2 emissions, and (b) methane released from underground by large-scale hydrofracking, which we need to stop anyway because the fracking is designed to generate CO2 emissions... there might be some more, but in each case "stop burning fossil fuels" is the way to stop the methane releases.

 

[neroden]

It's important to note that in the near term coal will be replaced with NG, which may end up with similar green house emissions when methane release is taken into account.

Well, if you get the gas from hydrofracking, which frequently dumps formerly-trapped methane directly into the atmosphere through newly created "accidental" fissures, it may be as bad. If you don't get your gas from that source, it certainly isn't as bad.

Still, I don't think natural gas is the main reason coal is declining. Renewables installation keeps increasing and people aren't taking renewables out of service. Meanwhile, a large amount of electrical load is being released by switching to more efficient light bulbs. Here in the Ithaca area, the price trends on gas and electricity are such that people -- including people who don't actually know best practices -- are switching from gas-based heating to electrical heating (when they don't switch to solar), which does indicate that it's not gas which is holding the price of electricity down here.