Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
There was a study done a while back that proved the Toyota Prius actually puts out more emmisions over its lifetime when you consider the manufacturing of the batteries.
I would imagine though, that over time if electric cars would become the norm, the battery production would become more efficient as companies refined their manufacturing process, so that eventually electric cars would become (1) better for environment, and (2) cheaper for consumers to use, because they no longer have to pay for gas, just added electric costs (which will be cheaper than gas because you don't have to maintain gas stations, gas transport networks, ect, you just need powerlines).
plus, the internal combustion engine, as great as it is, is the reason the middle east has so much power internationally.
Only because our government won't allow us to drill for our own oil.
Once again we have our resident liar demostrating that he is either an ignoramous or a tool of the energy corporations.
Sure, we aren't drill enough, and don't have enough refinery capacity. That is why gasoline and diesel have become our biggest export. 500,000 wells in the US, versus under 40,000 in the Middle East.
plus, the internal combustion engine, as great as it is, is the reason the middle east has so much power internationally.
Only because our government won't allow us to drill for our own oil.
Once again we have our resident liar demostrating that he is either an ignoramous or a tool of the energy corporations.
Sure, we aren't drill enough, and don't have enough refinery capacity. That is why gasoline and diesel have become our biggest export. 500,000 wells in the US, versus under 40,000 in the Middle East.
Only because our government won't allow us to drill for our own oil.
Once again we have our resident liar demostrating that he is either an ignoramous or a tool of the energy corporations.
Sure, we aren't drill enough, and don't have enough refinery capacity. That is why gasoline and diesel have become our biggest export. 500,000 wells in the US, versus under 40,000 in the Middle East.
And yet, you can never point to a lie I've made. You neglect to point out that those 500,000 wells are old. So old in point of fact that most are capped.
There was a study done a while back that proved the Toyota Prius actually puts out more emmisions over its lifetime when you consider the manufacturing of the batteries.
I would imagine though, that over time if electric cars would become the norm, the battery production would become more efficient as companies refined their manufacturing process, so that eventually electric cars would become (1) better for environment, and (2) cheaper for consumers to use, because they no longer have to pay for gas, just added electric costs (which will be cheaper than gas because you don't have to maintain gas stations, gas transport networks, ect, you just need powerlines).
Actually the lithium used in the hybrids batteries is far more uncommon than oil will ever be. If the wet dream of the greenies was to come true the world would run out of Li in a very few years. Talk about a non renewable fuel...you're looking at it. And its name is lithium.
Who knew??!!!!
Leave it to the Chinese.................."more fine particle pollution]"........"more harmful to overall health".......... than gas powered cars.
Study shows impact of electric cars is worse than petrol-powered vehicles | Mail Online
The internal combustion engine RULES!!!
Report: Electric cars worse for environment | JunkScience.com
"Chris Cherry, assistant professor in civil and environmental engineering, and graduate student Shuguang Ji, analyzed the emissions and environmental health impacts of five vehicle technologies in 34 major Chinese cities, focusing on dangerous fine particles. What Cherry and his team found defies conventional logic: electric cars cause much more overall harmful particulate matter pollution than gasoline cars."
From the retarded 'junk science' site you linked to...
"It seems EVs are only cleaner if powered by a clean energy source."
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.......well - DUH!
How retarded do you have to be to not understand that fact in the first place.
Of course electricity coming from coal fired power plants is 'dirty'. Coal is the most polluting source of energy.
The anti-science douche-bag who spews 'junk science' (quite literally) tries to distort the scientific study by twisting the results to supposedly indicate that "electric cars cause much more overall harmful particulate matter pollution than gasoline cars" but that is a lie as it stands. To be correct, it should read: 'electric cars can cause much more overall harmful particulate matter pollution than gasoline cars if the electricity comes from coal fired power plants but electric cars can also cause almost zero harmful pollution if the electricity comes from non-polluting renewable sources like solar and wind energy'.
Absurd, ridiculous distortions of fact like this are the reason Malloy's site is truly 'junk' science.
I would imagine though, that over time if electric cars would become the norm, the battery production would become more efficient as companies refined their manufacturing process, so that eventually electric cars would become (1) better for environment, and (2) cheaper for consumers to use, because they no longer have to pay for gas, just added electric costs (which will be cheaper than gas because you don't have to maintain gas stations, gas transport networks, ect, you just need powerlines).
Actually the lithium used in the hybrids batteries is far more uncommon than oil will ever be. If the wet dream of the greenies was to come true the world would run out of Li in a very few years. Talk about a non renewable fuel...you're looking at it. And its name is lithium.
Real dumb, Walleyes. First, lithium is just one of the materials that the batteries of the future will be composed of. Secondly, once you burn a barrel of oil it is gone. Lithium does not disappear when the battery will no longer take an adaquete charge, it is there to be recycled and put into another battery.
Do you really think that everybody is as stupid as you seem to be?
Actually the lithium used in the hybrids batteries is far more uncommon than oil will ever be. If the wet dream of the greenies was to come true the world would run out of Li in a very few years. Talk about a non renewable fuel...you're looking at it. And its name is lithium.
Real dumb, Walleyes. First, lithium is just one of the materials that the batteries of the future will be composed of. Secondly, once you burn a barrel of oil it is gone. Lithium does not disappear when the battery will no longer take an adaquete charge, it is there to be recycled and put into another battery.
Do you really think that everybody is as stupid as you seem to be?
There is far less Li on this planet than there is oil. Li recycling is incredibly expensive. So far Li is the prefered element. I grant you that technology will change. Amazing how you ignore technology when it has to do with fossil fuels...which are STILL far more efficient at producing energy than ANY green system.
Until that situation changes green power will be a afterthought and only able to survive thanks to the largesse of the taxpayers of the world. In other words so long as the greenies can leech off of the producers things are fine. When they can't they fail. Just like we are seeing worldwide.
It's amazing you're not smart enough to realise that.
retard's usual clueless bullshit
.
Fucking astounding #'s there!!!
GOOD LUCK ASSHOLES!!!!!!!!
Electric cars create pollution stemming from the source of electrictity that powers them, plus whatever pollution is associated with their manfuacture and eventually salvage.
Electric cars can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution.
Now if we could develop a truly pollution free source of electricty THEN e;lectric cars would be pollution reducing policy.
FWIW, hydrogen cars are even WORSE overall pollutors, since the manufacture of hydrogen creates requires more energy than the hydrogen energy they store, and that creates still more pollution in the manufacture pof hydrogen.
If we want to reduce overall pollution, we have to either reduce energy use or find a pollution-free way to capture energy.
That's just silly. Electric cars can be very helpful in reducing both local and overall pollution if the electricity they're using is coming from solar, wind, ocean, hydro, or geothermal sources. The only really significant pollution associated with electric vehicles comes from burning fossil fuels to generate the electricity.Electric cars create pollution stemming from the source of electrictity that powers them, plus whatever pollution is associated with their manfuacture and eventually salvage.
Electric cars can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution.
What? Are you blind? We have developed a number of virtually pollution free sources of electricity. Hydroelectric power has been tapped for well over a century now and accounts for 16 percent of global electricity consumption. Geothermal electricity production began on a very limited scale about a century ago in Italy and is now producing power in 24 different countries. Iceland is planning to power their entire country on geothermal and hydroelectric power. Building any kind of power plant or system involves some kinds of 'pollution' during construction but once they are in place fossil fuel power plants continue to pollute at a very high rate whereas solar and wind power systems are virtually pollution free. We have developed these sources, we just haven't deployed them yet in sufficient quantities to supplant the older fossil fuel high pollution power plants. The process has begun though and is accelerating.Now if we could develop a truly pollution free source of electricty THEN e;lectric cars would be pollution reducing policy.
You're not keeping up with developments. Scientists have been working for some time on ways to produce hydrogen cheaply without using electricity to crack the molecular bonds. Two such ways are Photoelectrochemical Water Splitting (PEC) and Solar Thermal Water Splitting. PEC development was being hampered by the high cost of the catalysts that had been discovered that would do the job but just recently scientists developed a new and much cheaper catalyst that will almost certainly cause the cost of hydrogen to plummet in the fairly near future. One company, Hyper-Solar, using a bit different system that also purifies wastewater, claims to have a production unit already in operation. Several other somewhat similar systems are also under development. Not only will the cost of hydrogen as a fuel go down a lot soon but there will be virtually zero pollution and no carbon emissions associated with its production.FWIW, hydrogen cars are even WORSE overall pollutors, since the manufacture of hydrogen creates requires more energy than the hydrogen energy they store, and that creates still more pollution in the manufacture pof hydrogen.
If we want to reduce overall pollution, we have to either reduce energy use or find a pollution-free way to capture energy.
That's just silly. Electric cars can be very helpful in reducing both local and overall pollution if the electricity they're using is coming from solar, wind, ocean, hydro, or geothermal sources. The only really significant pollution associated with electric vehicles comes from burning fossil fuels to generate the electricity.Electric cars create pollution stemming from the source of electrictity that powers them, plus whatever pollution is associated with their manfuacture and eventually salvage.
Electric cars can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution.
What? Are you blind? We have developed a number of virtually pollution free sources of electricity. Hydroelectric power has been tapped for well over a century now and accounts for 16 percent of global electricity consumption. Geothermal electricity production began on a very limited scale about a century ago in Italy and is now producing power in 24 different countries. Iceland is planning to power their entire country on geothermal and hydroelectric power. Building any kind of power plant or system involves some kinds of 'pollution' during construction but once they are in place fossil fuel power plants continue to pollute at a very high rate whereas solar and wind power systems are virtually pollution free. We have developed these sources, we just haven't deployed them yet in sufficient quantities to supplant the older fossil fuel high pollution power plants. The process has begun though and is accelerating.Now if we could develop a truly pollution free source of electricty THEN e;lectric cars would be pollution reducing policy.
You're not keeping up with developments. Scientists have been working for some time on ways to produce hydrogen cheaply without using electricity to crack the molecular bonds. Two such ways are Photoelectrochemical Water Splitting (PEC) and Solar Thermal Water Splitting. PEC development was being hampered by the high cost of the catalysts that had been discovered that would do the job but just recently scientists developed a new and much cheaper catalyst that will almost certainly cause the cost of hydrogen to plummet in the fairly near future. One company, Hyper-Solar, using a bit different system that also purifies wastewater, claims to have a production unit already in operation. Several other somewhat similar systems are also under development. Not only will the cost of hydrogen as a fuel go down a lot soon but there will be virtually zero pollution and no carbon emissions associated with its production.FWIW, hydrogen cars are even WORSE overall pollutors, since the manufacture of hydrogen creates requires more energy than the hydrogen energy they store, and that creates still more pollution in the manufacture pof hydrogen.
If we want to reduce overall pollution, we have to either reduce energy use or find a pollution-free way to capture energy.
We already have found pollution free ways to capture energy. Now, in order to switch over to them from our current expensive high pollution energy sources, we just need to overcome the resistance and sabotage coming from those with a vested interest in continuing the profit stream from the sale of fossil fuels.
I just listed them, you poor blind retard.What are those "pollution free" methods of "capturing" energy?That's just silly. Electric cars can be very helpful in reducing both local and overall pollution if the electricity they're using is coming from solar, wind, ocean, hydro, or geothermal sources. The only really significant pollution associated with electric vehicles comes from burning fossil fuels to generate the electricity.Electric cars create pollution stemming from the source of electrictity that powers them, plus whatever pollution is associated with their manfuacture and eventually salvage.
Electric cars can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution.
What? Are you blind? We have developed a number of virtually pollution free sources of electricity. Hydroelectric power has been tapped for well over a century now and accounts for 16 percent of global electricity consumption. Geothermal electricity production began on a very limited scale about a century ago in Italy and is now producing power in 24 different countries. Iceland is planning to power their entire country on geothermal and hydroelectric power. Building any kind of power plant or system involves some kinds of 'pollution' during construction but once they are in place fossil fuel power plants continue to pollute at a very high rate whereas solar and wind power systems are virtually pollution free. We have developed these sources, we just haven't deployed them yet in sufficient quantities to supplant the older fossil fuel high pollution power plants. The process has begun though and is accelerating.
You're not keeping up with developments. Scientists have been working for some time on ways to produce hydrogen cheaply without using electricity to crack the molecular bonds. Two such ways are Photoelectrochemical Water Splitting (PEC) and Solar Thermal Water Splitting. PEC development was being hampered by the high cost of the catalysts that had been discovered that would do the job but just recently scientists developed a new and much cheaper catalyst that will almost certainly cause the cost of hydrogen to plummet in the fairly near future. One company, Hyper-Solar, using a bit different system that also purifies wastewater, claims to have a production unit already in operation. Several other somewhat similar systems are also under development. Not only will the cost of hydrogen as a fuel go down a lot soon but there will be virtually zero pollution and no carbon emissions associated with its production.
If we want to reduce overall pollution, we have to either reduce energy use or find a pollution-free way to capture energy.
We already have found pollution free ways to capture energy. Now, in order to switch over to them from our current expensive high pollution energy sources, we just need to overcome the resistance and sabotage coming from those with a vested interest in continuing the profit stream from the sale of fossil fuels.
I just listed them, you poor blind retard.What are those "pollution free" methods of "capturing" energy?That's just silly. Electric cars can be very helpful in reducing both local and overall pollution if the electricity they're using is coming from solar, wind, ocean, hydro, or geothermal sources. The only really significant pollution associated with electric vehicles comes from burning fossil fuels to generate the electricity.
What? Are you blind? We have developed a number of virtually pollution free sources of electricity. Hydroelectric power has been tapped for well over a century now and accounts for 16 percent of global electricity consumption. Geothermal electricity production began on a very limited scale about a century ago in Italy and is now producing power in 24 different countries. Iceland is planning to power their entire country on geothermal and hydroelectric power. Building any kind of power plant or system involves some kinds of 'pollution' during construction but once they are in place fossil fuel power plants continue to pollute at a very high rate whereas solar and wind power systems are virtually pollution free. We have developed these sources, we just haven't deployed them yet in sufficient quantities to supplant the older fossil fuel high pollution power plants. The process has begun though and is accelerating.
You're not keeping up with developments. Scientists have been working for some time on ways to produce hydrogen cheaply without using electricity to crack the molecular bonds. Two such ways are Photoelectrochemical Water Splitting (PEC) and Solar Thermal Water Splitting. PEC development was being hampered by the high cost of the catalysts that had been discovered that would do the job but just recently scientists developed a new and much cheaper catalyst that will almost certainly cause the cost of hydrogen to plummet in the fairly near future. One company, Hyper-Solar, using a bit different system that also purifies wastewater, claims to have a production unit already in operation. Several other somewhat similar systems are also under development. Not only will the cost of hydrogen as a fuel go down a lot soon but there will be virtually zero pollution and no carbon emissions associated with its production.
We already have found pollution free ways to capture energy. Now, in order to switch over to them from our current expensive high pollution energy sources, we just need to overcome the resistance and sabotage coming from those with a vested interest in continuing the profit stream from the sale of fossil fuels.
For someone who claims to be so smart you still havn't figured out that all of that has to be manufactured. Manufacturing causes pollution of some sort you poor delusional nincompoop!
For someone who claims to be so smart you still havn't figured out that all of that has to be manufactured. Manufacturing causes pollution of some sort you poor delusional nincompoop!I just listed them, you poor blind retard.What are those "pollution free" methods of "capturing" energy?
That was the fact that you felt blazing over your poor little pinhead. Twit!
What? Are you blind? We have developed a number of virtually pollution free sources of electricity. Hydroelectric power has been tapped for well over a century now and accounts for 16 percent of global electricity consumption. Geothermal electricity production began on a very limited scale about a century ago in Italy and is now producing power in 24 different countries. Iceland is planning to power their entire country on geothermal and hydroelectric power. Building any kind of power plant or system involves some kinds of 'pollution' during construction but once they are in place fossil fuel power plants continue to pollute at a very high rate whereas solar and wind power systems are virtually pollution free. We have developed these sources, we just haven't deployed them yet in sufficient quantities to supplant the older fossil fuel high pollution power plants. The process has begun though and is accelerating.Now if we could develop a truly pollution free source of electricty THEN e;lectric cars would be pollution reducing policy.
Electric cars create pollution stemming from the source of electrictity that powers them, plus whatever pollution is associated with their manfuacture and eventually salvage.
Electric cars can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution.
That's just silly. Electric cars can be very helpful in reducing both local and overall pollution if the electricity they're using is coming from solar, wind, ocean, hydro, or geothermal sources. The only really significant pollution associated with electric vehicles comes from burning fossil fuels to generate the electricity.
Sorry, but no I didn't. You claimed that electric vehicles "can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution" and that is just not true. Electric vehicles do reduce overall pollution almost everywhere on Earth that isn't using the very dirty, unscrubbed coal fired plants that the Chinese are using. In the USA and Europe, the electricity from modern coal fired power plants with pollution control equipment, while still 'dirty', is nevertheless cleaner than the cumulative output from all of the exhaust pipes on all of those IC engine cars. In some parts of the country, a significant part of the electricity already comes from non polluting sources. Hydroelectricity currently accounts for 16 percent of global electricity consumption and 15% of the electricity used in my home state of California. Solar and wind power systems are being deployed at increasing rates and will soon replace a significant part of the fossil fuel produced electricity. In some parts of the country, consumers can already choose to get all of their power from clean sources, for a slight premium on their bill. Perhaps even more importantly, people now have the ability in most places to utilize home solar and/or wind power systems to 'refuel' their electric vehicles, thus making them virtually 100% pollution free to run. The price of doing that is falling even as gas prices keep rising. With increased mass production, the prices on electric vehicles will also fall. New battery technology has been developed and will soon be in production and these new batteries will not only dramatically lower the cost of EV batteries, they will extend the range one can drive on a charge to 3 or 4 hundreds miles and last the lifetime of the vehicle. The new cheaper, high capacity batteries will also allow for the home storage of daytime solar power production for use at night or for charging the cars.Quote: Originally Posted by editec
Electric cars create pollution stemming from the source of electrictity that powers them, plus whatever pollution is associated with their manfuacture and eventually salvage.Electric cars can only be useful in preventing LOCAL pollution when and where they are being used, but they are not especially helpful in reducing overall pollution.
That's just silly. Electric cars can be very helpful in reducing both local and overall pollution if the electricity they're using is coming from solar, wind, ocean, hydro, or geothermal sources. The only really significant pollution associated with electric vehicles comes from burning fossil fuels to generate the electricity.
Silly?
You just supported my point exactly.
Wrong again. Electric cars are indeed net pollution reducers any time the electricity they use comes from any source that produces less overall pollution than the equivalent number of IC engine vehicles that the electric cars replaced. Since cars are very inefficient and waste something like 80% of the energy in the gasoline whereas fossil fuel fired power plants are much more efficient at turning the fuel into useful energy and considering the fact that electric cars are very efficient and convert almost all of the electricity they use into motion, electric vehicles can be net pollution reducers even when the electricity is coming from polluting sources.Electric cars are only net pollition reducersIF the electricity they use is coming from nonpolluting sources.
That is sad, considering how much better we could be doing by now in using clean energy sources if the fossil fuel industry hadn't used it's power to bribe Congress to block so many programs that would have helped us make the transition faster and sooner.Sadly very littel electricity being produced today is produced by non-polluting sources.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Electric vehicles are helping even now to reduce air pollution in our cities and, more importantly, overall CO2 emissions.When (if) our energy production is non-polluting THEN, electric cars make sense.
Until then?
Electric cars do NOT solve our energy OR pollution problems.
