Home › Forums › StateFans Non Sports Talk › NC State study: Electric Cars won't help with emissions
Tagged: environment, politics
- This topic has 8 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 11 months ago by VaWolf82.
-
AuthorPosts
-
01/25/2014 at 11:47 AM #38276StateFansKeymaster
Note how the University waited until AFTER Obama came and gave us a bunch of money to ruin his positions and policies with facts and studies.
If you think buying a hybrid, plug-in hybrid or battery electric vehicle will save the planet, think again.
Researchers at N.C. State University conducted a study that shows even a sharp increase in the use of electric drive vehicles (EDVs) would not significantly reduce emissions by 2050.
The researchers studied 108 different scenarios in a model to determine the impact EDVs would have on emissions between now and 2050 and found that, even if EDVs made up 42 percent of such vehicles in the U.S., there would be little or no reduction in the emission of key air pollutants.
01/25/2014 at 2:27 PM #38283tjfoose1ParticipantI would say that timing is not coincidental.
If you think buying a hybrid, plug-in hybrid or battery electric vehicle will save the planet, think again.
Duh.
Anyone who thought it would was either lazy or naive. If you bothered to do 15 minutes of research, you’d already know this. Throw in the cost and impacts of manufacturing hybrid car components, running, service, and maintenance, and the disposing of waste and old components, the ‘green’ footprint of hybrids is actually greater than that the standard ‘evil’ petrol powered automobile.
The real power in the Green movement isn’t about the environment. Van Jones wasn’t made the… hold on, got to look this up… Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality through happenstance.
Just like the ACA, just like the EPA, just like the DHS, just like the NSA… the real power in the Green movement is about just that.. power and control.
01/26/2014 at 5:59 AM #38313Alpha WolfKeymasterI’ve always thought the real positive effect of EVT was reducing our reliance of imported petroleum since nuclear, coal and domestic natural gas can provide the base electricity used in them. As for reducing emissions, well, that’s a pipe dream right now. The only way to really do that would be a hydrogen infrastructure with the bulk of the H2 coming from electrolysis powered by nuclear.
Of course, we don’t want to pursue nuclear because nincompoops like NC WARN will make the people who moved near Harris plant after the facility was built get all up in arms. Just look at the way they concern-trolled the evening news after there was a generator fire on the non-nuclear side last week. You would have thought Harris was minutes away from “The China Syndrome.”
01/27/2014 at 7:24 AM #38712howlieParticipantWe don’t have a Prius to “save the world,” but, rather, because it puts money in our pocket. Buy them used (as we did), & the prices are very similar. Then get 50 miles a gallon around town across years (65 on long trips)… that’s bucks in my back pocket for fun when we arrive. And when you want to ‘zip,’ it accelerates faster than our other petrol-based car. The only thing I don’t like about the Prius is that the seats are not quite as comfortable…
Somehow (well actually, we know how) the prevailing attitude is that an electric/hybrid purchasers are “stupid” for “those who don’t d research.” Rather, it is a viable choice for some, as we don’t have careers where we can hope or expect a ‘cash cow’ or ‘huge commission’ to fall into our laps to be able to splurge on a vehicle. We need to maximize meager wages every day. For folks like us, it is a very good choice to have an electric/hybrid.01/27/2014 at 9:42 AM #38719TexpackParticipantAgreed Alpha. I always thought hybrids were about the extension of the world’s oil supply until hydrogen technology was viable. In other words it’s a bridge technology. The longer we hold onto our current vehicles, the more likely we are to buy a hybrid the next time we buy.
01/27/2014 at 12:01 PM #38727FergusWolfParticipant^^ I’m with howlie here.
As a proud owner of both a Prius and a Leaf, I can tell you a couple of things.
1. The price difference between a prius and the equivalent non-hybrid is very small. Here in raleigh you can get baseline prius’ for well less than $20K
2. The price I paid for my leaf after the tax credit was, again, similar to what I would have paid for an equivalently equipped non-electric car.My prius averages 47 MPG (for 9 years now), and with gas prices in the $3.25 range, the leaf gets an eMPG of ~110 (mpg).
You can spend all day and tell me all the issues with Prius’ and Leaf’s, but these decision are based on the workings of your personal life (how much your drive daily, number of passengers needed, etc…), so Please stop explaining to me how foolish I am, and I’ll do the same.
01/27/2014 at 1:07 PM #38732MPParticipantAll of you experienced owners are ruining SFN’s positions and policies with facts and studies.
01/27/2014 at 2:44 PM #38740Deacon BluesParticipant^ That’s funny.
And this comes down to two things.
1. Where does the electricity generation come from? If it is a solar cell, then it might not be so dirty. If it is coal, then it is pretty nasty.
2. Scale? Batteries will be dirty and hard to dispose of until there are a lot, then someone will figure it out….Metal is elemental and can be recycled.Current use for the US is less than 0.5%, but in Ca it is 2.5%. 2.5% is critical mass. It is through 8 of the 14 doubles it takes to go from zero to 100% (7 doubles, or 1% adoption is considered the crux). Because of the critical mass (and two large population centers, without very rural areas surrounding) they are able to put the infrastructure in place which will only speed adoption. (Tesla board member is also on our board….)
Money in your pocket is always a key driver and the higher gas prices get (ie Ca prices) the more adoption there will be of hybrid and plug in cars.
01/27/2014 at 3:28 PM #38748VaWolf82KeymasterFor me, it simply comes down to money out of my pocket. I’ve run the numbers several times over the years and never found an example that had a decent ROI. But here’s a study that concludes that over 5 years, 13 of 33 hybrid models had a lower cost of ownership than the equivalent gasoline model.
http://vincentric.com/Home/IndustryReports/HybridAnalysis.aspx
I keep my cars longer than 5 years, so this analysis appears to be incomplete. It doesn’t look like differences in maintenance costs (if there are any significant differences) or the cost of battery replacement is included. For those that trade within the 5 year period, it would be good to know if there is any difference in resale value.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.