By Bjorn Lomborg
Electric cars are promoted as the chic harbinger
of an environmentally benign future. Ads assure us of "zero
emissions," and President Obama has promised a million on the road by
2015. With sales for 2012 coming in at about 50,000, that million-car figure is
a pipe dream. Consumers remain wary of the cars' limited range, higher price and
the logistics of battery-charging. But for those who do own an electric car, at
least there is the consolation that it's truly green, right? Not really.
For proponents such as the actor and activist Leonardo DiCaprio, the main
argument is that their electric cars—whether it's a $100,000 Fisker Karma (Mr.
DiCaprio's ride) or a $28,000 Nissan Leaf—don't contribute to global warming.
And, sure, electric cars don't emit carbon-dioxide on the road. But the energy
used for their manufacture and continual battery charges certainly does—far
more than most people realize.
A 2012 comprehensive life-cycle analysis in
Journal of Industrial Ecology shows that almost half the lifetime
carbon-dioxide emissions from an electric car come from the energy used to
produce the car, especially the battery. The mining of lithium, for instance,
is a less than green activity. By contrast, the manufacture of a gas-powered
car accounts for 17% of its lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions. When an electric
car rolls off the production line, it has already been responsible for 30,000
pounds of carbon-dioxide emission. The amount for making a conventional car:
14,000 pounds.
While electric-car owners may cruise around
feeling virtuous, they still recharge using electricity overwhelmingly produced
with fossil fuels. Thus, the life-cycle analysis shows that for every mile
driven, the average electric car indirectly emits about six ounces of
carbon-dioxide. This is still a lot better than a similar-size conventional
car, which emits about 12 ounces per mile. But remember, the production of the
electric car has already resulted in sizeable emissions—the equivalent of
80,000 miles of travel in the vehicle.
So unless the electric car is driven a
lot, it will never get ahead environmentally. And that turns out to be a
challenge. Consider the Nissan Leaf. It has only a 73-mile range per charge.
Drivers attempting long road trips, as in one BBC test drive, have reported
that recharging takes so long that the average speed is close to six miles per
hour—a bit faster than your average jogger.
To make matters worse, the batteries in electric cars fade with time, just
as they do in a cellphone. Nissan estimates that after five years, the less
effective batteries in a typical Leaf bring the range down to 55 miles. As the
MIT Technology Review cautioned last year: "Don't Drive Your Nissan Leaf
Too Much."
If a typical electric car is driven 50,000 miles
over its lifetime, the huge initial emissions from its manufacture means the
car will actually have put more carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere than a similar-size
gasoline-powered car driven the same number of miles. Similarly, if the energy
used to recharge the electric car comes mostly from coal-fired power plants, it
will be responsible for the emission of almost 15 ounces of carbon-dioxide for
every one of the 50,000 miles it is driven—three ounces more than a similar
gas-powered car.
Even if the electric car is driven for 90,000 miles and the owner stays
away from coal-powered electricity, the car will cause just 24% less
carbon-dioxide emission than its gas-powered cousin. This is a far cry from
"zero emissions." Over its entire lifetime, the electric car will be
responsible for 8.7 tons of carbon dioxide less than the average conventional
car.
Those 8.7 tons may sound like a considerable
amount, but it's not. The current best estimate of the global warming damage of
an extra ton of carbon-dioxide is about $5. This means an optimistic assessment
of the avoided carbon-dioxide associated with an electric car will allow the
owner to spare the world about $44 in climate damage. On the European emissions
market, credit for 8.7 tons of carbon-dioxide costs $48.
Yet the U.S. federal government essentially
subsidizes electric-car buyers with up to $7,500. In addition, more than $5.5
billion in federal grants and loans go directly to battery and electric-car
manufacturers like California-based Fisker Automotive and Tesla Motors . This is a very poor deal for taxpayers.
The electric car might be great in a couple of
decades but as a way to tackle global warming now it does virtually nothing.
The real challenge is to get green energy that is cheaper than fossil fuels.
That requires heavy investment in green research and development. Spending
instead on subsidizing electric cars is putting the cart before the horse, and
an inconvenient and expensive cart at that.
No comments:
Post a Comment