EV's: They're Only as Green as Your Grid's Fuel

I think most people will interpret that as "an EV makes just as much pollution as my hummer since it is coming from a coal plant anyways".

 

But are they not missing the point. Even if you obtain the electricity from a dirty coal power plant, you're using coal mined locally and not using imported oil from a country who wants to destroy you and your (and my) way of life!

 

Hill, do you really think you're bringing up a new or novel point? This has been discussed ad nauseum before.

Pros:
* Easier/cheaper to control pollution at a single power plant than on individual cars
* Many areas have hydroelectric (like your area in Montana), natural gas or nuclear. Even the smaller amounts of geothermal, wind and solar are increasing their percentage
* most recharging is done overnight, when electric plants have surplus power anyway (can't just shut down a coal plant or a nuclear plant on a couple hours notice)
* Coal is American. Unless terrorists have infiltrated our coal mines, we're not supporting terrorism by buying coal, or using hydroelectric, natural gas, etc.
* people can buy their own solar panels to charge their own car if they want

Middle:
* CO2 output of coal per mile driven compared to gas/diesel is a wash, depending on how you run the numbers and what kind of car you're comparing it to

Cons
* Coal is very dirty beyond CO2 (mercury, sulfur, acid rain). Despite ads to the contrary, there is no such thing as "clean coal" today.
* Mining coal often involves things like mountain-top removal and destroying creeks
* Shifting energy sources from one fossil fuel to another is not forward motion
* can overtax the electric grid if done in large scale or if people tend to charge during the day
* need to change the vehicles people drive, which takes time and expense (but this gives our grids time to be updated)
* need to add charging facilities, improve batteries, etc.


So once again, you'll have people talking these same points, depending on which side of the fence they're on.

 

Unfortunately, If we decide to stop discussion on all topics that have been discussed before, might as well put PC on life support. (Even I still peek at the latest oil threads, certainly a subject that has been wrung to death.....and the posts still keep coming.)

One of the real shockers of late is the hard connection made between EVs and coal plants. I cannot think of a better car power source than electricity to seperate us from fossil fuel, and yet EVs/coal plants are lumped together. Wth? Great leadership by hill, darrell, and many others that live the future now and still want to take more steps. Given some real world feedback, let's reexamine the cons below:

Spot On - Also should include ash residue becoming a real toxic waste problem. What is unusual is that somehow this is connected to EVs. I'm going to be bold and state that most EV users for the first decade will be much better at overall home electric conservation than your average ICE car owner by a big factor => EV's reduce coal plant load, not raise it.

This is only true if we decide to stop working on the grid altogether for all loads. It's going to be decades before the increased load of electric cars overtakes the increased loads from new houses, industry, and air conditioning. It's a specious arguement to claim EV's will cause problems when they will be only a miniscule load compared to the total amount of power needed for home heating, cooling, and lighting for quite some time.

Is this really a con? It take time and expense for any and all vehicles. Right now the biggest consumer problem is lack of availablility.

So how long will it take to install "for profit" charging facilities? A whole month....or am I being too pesimistic? Electricity has got to be one of the easiest energy forms to distribute and charge, if not the easiest. No new technology needed for that, only buyers.

Watch the battery industry take off like crazy once EVs enter the marketplace. In the meantime, the EVs that are for sale don't seem to be lacking buyers.


Last note. I enjoy your posts, so keep them coming.

 

Fair point. But what makes more sense: subsidy of EV, or subsidy of HV ? Two typical US cars replaced with Prius equivalent HV will equal an EV replacement in oil consumption decrease. The HV is proven tech, has no range limitations, much longer battery life, and more versatility ergonomics wise. Oh, and is US $7k cheaper, if that matters.

 

of course, coal accounts for only 52% of the national energy mix, so this is a worst case scenario. Worst case, and EV emits the same amount of C02/mi as an HV. It's not like EVs HAVE to be powered by coal fired electricity. Sort of a straw man, it seems to me. We can decarbonize the grid, we can't decarbonize hydrocarbon fuels. Not to flog a dead horse or anything.

 

HI Tripp,
I have been arguing this in another thread. Clean energy is less than total demand, so adding more demand just spreads the clean energy perhaps differently, but does not increase it. The differential increase is made up by fossil+coal.

I think the point is that *until* we decarbonize the grid, EV is all fossil fuel, and to an undetermined extent, coal. The EV advocates are having a hard time hearing this ;-)

I will personally be delighted to run around in an EV, and will after I put PV at my home. But I think it fair to be honest and realize that addition of my EV will remove that fraction of my clean PV from the grid that someone had been using, and they will be supplied with fossil/coal generated energy instead.

 

CO2 free grid is not far away fantasy. In northern Europe it’s have been everyday choice for many years. Example my electricity comes from grid and it is ear tagged coming from only water and wind energy.

It is up to you guys, if you want CO2 free energy you can make decisions to get it. Buy electricity from power company that cares about how it is made.

 

^^ The US has similar choices and programs; in fact my utility PNM of New Mexico encourages me to buy wind energy. They omit to mention of course that the wind energy is *already* part of the grid mix, bought to satisfy regulatory requirements. So my 'purchase' does not increase clean energy one bit, it just puts more money in the company coffer.

My daughters college offers something similar:

I decline both, and instead will put the money into producing clean energy and fossil fuel conservation.

 

None the less, EVs are cleaner than HV and at least in the short term and assuming that most of the time they will be charged at night, won't really increase demand much. The decarbonization of the grid is really a seperate issue, and one that is steadily occurring regardless of whether or not there are EVs running around consuming some of that electricity. Another thing to consider is the type of coal plant producing the electricity. If you swap out an aging, inefficient coal plant with an IGCC plant, you're EV just got cleaner (and all of the other EVs served by that power plant), because an IGCC plant is simply more efficient at turn BTUs into electricity than the dinosaur plant. Not the end all be all, but you get an instant emissions upgrade to all EVs if you improve the power plant that serves them.

 

Ha. A tesla would only be as clean as a prius. Think about how much cleaner it is than the porsche which is equivalent.

So instead of a porsche you can get a tesla, the same green house gas of a prius, but much lower cost of fuel, no addition to the trade deficit, no paying off of officials in saudi or iran. It sounds like a pretty big win for me.

Add that carbon capture technology should be commercially viable in 10 years, and when that with scrubbers are added to a coal plant C02 drops 90% and SO2 drops 90%. The price of electricity is still much cheaper than gas after sequestration. The grid in many places have levels of wind, nuclear, hydro that is excess capacity in which case green house gases are 0. Putting up panels at your house sounds nice, but really its adding power to the grid. You can do the same thing by getting your utility to add green power. These are all regulated, wind is much cheaper than gasoline, but more than coal. You do have a choice.

There are technical and price hurdles with phev and ev cars. The pollution argument is an old one, and has been debunked many times. I know some people just love using it. You need to be able to use the same mental gymnastics that makes a hummer more environmental than a prius.

 

in the minds of zealots, anyway.

Quite right, for once. Do you know any straightforward ways to push the utility to add clean energy to the grid ?

 

In CO we had a ballot measure to mandate 10% renewable by 2015. The legislature then doubled it to 20% by 2015 or 2020, forget which. So voting for and supporting that sort of thing is one way. Not really all that straight-forward though.

 

Are you saying that sometimes ev's are worse for the environment than gasoline cars?

Just from the article, in california they are 3 times cleaner in greenhouse gas. It picks the worst state for generation then says a ev sportscar is as clean as your beloved prius. Adding a bigger battery and a plug to hybrids seems like a no brainer to most americans now. Since your from new mexico I'll add this from one of your environmental organizations.

Plug in Cars: Powering America Towards a Cleaner Future - Environment New Mexico

Now if you would rather send lots of money out of the country and keep us vulnerable to energy blackmail, you can read the reports and say the gain isn't huge enough.

In New Mexico I think the law is 20% clean energy by 2020. In some places local efforts can change power plant regulation. In new Mexico, it may be more difficult. There only seems to be one new coal power plant in your state that is being proposed and it is currently blocked by the EPA. That plant won't supply you even if built is proposed for the reservation and customers out of state. Since your power is deregulated individuals can create clean power and put it on the grid, or band together to build more capacity. I am fortunate, we just need the city council to vote on it. More than half the power will be air pollution free by 2020, but that is from a city deciding to pay more for green power.

 

Anyone considering an EV needs to find out what powers their electricity supply: if it's more than about 50% coal, then, concerning greenhouse gas reductions, the added cost of an EV will be wasted. That person's first step should be to secure a 100% non-fossil electricity supply, either by contracting with their electric utility or by installing their own Solar or wind system. Then they will indeed be doing the world a world of good.

 

As well as cutting consumption where applicable/if able. Choosing more energy efficient appliances when replacing existing ones, fitting suitable (not just legal minimum) amounts of insulation etc.

My untility company over here in the UK had a special offer to install home insulation up and above the latest legal minimums. I took them up on their offer for my 30 year old house and you could tell immediately the difference in warmth. Just over a year has gone by and my heating bill has been cut by about 30-40% - the savings paying for the insulation in the first year!

So I'm now £400 ($627) a year better off for my home heating and a tad over £3000 a year better off with my Prius (be aware of my mileage!). By being 'green' I'm £3,500 ($5,489) a year better off!

With that saving each and every year I can take a little bit of ribbing from my friends and colleagues calling me an old hippie!

 

Spot on, GrumpyCabbie!

AG, go read the other thread again. An electric car will cause 13% less emissions of GHG than a Prius if the fuel source is NG at the plant compared to petrol in the Prius; if the powerplant fuel is coal, GHG is worse and 'tailpipe' emissions are awful.

As my local enviro group points out in the snippet you copied, what matters is cleaning up the grid. Dirty electricity use is not a solution, it is just pollution shifting from one place to another, or one device to another, or one powerplant to another.

 

Wow. Really? Should every Prius driver be aware of where the oil comes from that is made into the gasoline that the car uses? And if it turns out that the oil is NOT 100% non-fossil oil, than the "added cost" of the Prius is "wasted?" Before buying a gas car, the first step should be securing a non-fossil source of gasoline?

Why are EVs held to a different standard than the polluting status quo?

 

Thats why we should drive EVs.