Posted on 07/08/2009 6:11:46 PM PDT by Kaslin
Alternative Energy: A government report says reliance on electric cars will do little to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and may merely shift our dependence on foreign sources from one set of dictators to another.
"If you are using coal-fired power plants, and half the country's electricity comes from coal-powered plants, are you just trading one greenhouse gas emitter for another?" asks Mark Gaffigan, co-author of the GAO report. The report itself notes: "Reductions in CO2 emissions depend on generating electricity used to charge the vehicles from lower-emission sources of energy."
The GAO report says a plug-in compact car, if recharged at an outlet drawing its power from coal, provides a carbon dioxide savings of only 4% to 5%. If the feeling of saving the environment from driving an electric car causes people to drive more, that small amount of savings vanishes entirely.
It's much the same effect we saw when the Corporate Fuel Economy Standards were passed in the '70s. Aside from forcing us into less-safe downsized vehicles that increased highway fatalities, the promise of more miles per gallon caused people to drive more miles. The promised energy independence never materialized as we imported more foreign oil than ever before.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
A Captain Obvious moment of clarity.
...uh ... Has the author heard of nuclear energy? Couple it with electric cars, problem solved.
Plug into your garage over nite.... I dont have a garage, and would need a 100 foot cord, made out of oil bi products, to run to my car, and hope nobody steals the cord over night..and some people live in 100 story hi rises, that will be handy.. run an extension cord down in front over every ones scenic view...
Even with coal, it’s still a good idea...provided they come up with some decent batteries. I don’t see that happening for at least 25 more years though.
I’m all for nuke plants.
And the bonus is, if we go nuke for domestic electricity, we won’t need electric cars.
Give me a good old fashioned V8.
Read the whole article; he’s calling for nuclear power development.
They need to sprinkle pixie dust on this problem, that will solve it. Oh I forgot, they also need to use that magic wand.
did you look at the car in the editorial? I would rather walk before I would get into something like that
It will hopefully cause people to drive gas guzzlers more if they can afford it.
Gimme a break. It wouldn’t be too hard to run power in an underground conduit to a recharging station at every parking spot. Parking meters with electrical outlets.
Don’t give them any ideas.
They are JUST NOW realizing this basic fact?
God, the cost of smug sure is high!
You’d change your mind after the first few days. Unless you are incredibly dense.
There are a multitude of reasons that electric cars are no solution as the technology exists right now.
But the “greenhouse gas” argument is complete and utter hogwash.
As I have pointed out many times over the last 30 years, most of the pie in the sky so called greener solutions are in the big picture, dirtier than coal and oil. And the GG portion of the argument is a hoax.
Problem is that electric cars are not rechargeable in the same timeframe that gasoline cars are. That, and they are more expensive.
Gas fillup = 5 minutes
Electric fillup = ???
If the alternative is less capable and more expensive, people will not switch.
I so love that sentence. What more needs to be said?
I wonder how the heater works on those electric cars when it’s twenty below zero on a “go to work” morning?
Very poorly. In cold climates, you’ll need a kerosene heater in your car to survive the winter.
lol
“And the bonus is, if we go nuke for domestic electricity, we won’t need electric cars.”
Huh? Why would that change the equation? Just askin’.
I’m not a big advocate of electric cars either. Doesn’t make sense from an efficiency standpoint. You still have to produce the electricity, and generating, transmission and charging inefficiencies tend to eat up the theoretical benefits (which I don’t think are there anyway). Even nuke power is going to cost money (if the greens ever approve it). So, yes you can generate electricity and charge your car, but there is always a price to be paid (regulatory,pollution, risk of radiation leak, political cold feet scotching the whole project after bazillions has been invested in it). Hydrogen power is in the same category, for the same reasons.
Use your power resources efficiently. Unfortunately, most folks don’t have a clue as to what the potential true costs are for any of our electrical sources, let alone something esoteric like converting a significant proportion of the vehicles to rechargeable batteries or worse.
Wow, I’m truly amazed! The GAO actually understands that there is more to electricity than that outlet in a wall. Too bad the majority our elected representatives are so dense that they don’t get it.
If nothing else worthwhile over the last 50 years, the French have proven the benefits of nuclear power.
I'm all for nuke plants. But, as you said, we have the enemy within to conquer first.
Absolutely not. It's just expensive compared to coal, the way the political class has constrained its development in the US. As it stands, nukes are gonna’ be more expensive per kwh than coal. That could change with the proper adjustments to regulatory impediments in DC, but with the decerebrate Dems in control on the hill I don't think there is going to be a financial benefit in nukes. Of course, Obama is doing his best to make coal so hideously expensive that perhaps nukes will be cheap by comparison. I just don't think the political class is bright enough to appreciate the technical issues they profess to have mastered.
The source of energy that is the most efficient, and least polluting, is so constrained in availability that it's really not a viable option (hydroelectric). Wind and solar ain't gonna’ do it, we're left with nukes or coal. Either are fine, as long as the Luddites don't get there hands on the decision process (which they assuredly will).
Yeah but CO2 made from American coal smells like freedom.
As we transit from oil the cost of electricity is going to increase. With that increase it will cost more, and more for the electricity. We either pay high gas rates, or high electric rates. For the consumer, it is a lose lose sum game.
Who was it that said, "The price of electricity will necessarily skyrocket?"
If the4 public were smarter, less mis-educated, and/or less indifferent, we wouldn't have such dense and dishonest representatives.
Wasn’t anyone I voted for that is for sure!
nah, then you have to worry about nuclear waste for 200,000 years.
Besides, the truly big driver for climate is the sun. It is hard to imagine how much bigger the sun is than the earth. A tiny change in the sun will wash out anything we can do.
electricity from coal is cheaper than electricity from oil.
Coupla these oughta do it...
E=MC2.
It’s the old shell game of hide the cost of energy (propelling a vehicle) behind slick advertising. What it boils down to is how much energy has to go into the product we use to produce energy. I personally think clean diesel is the future, not some batteries that are going to smoke you or the vehicle when they get hot, leave you stranded or cause undue financial costs upon replacement. And hydrogen tanks? Might as well have a hundred sticks of dynamite in the back seat. Invest in clean diesel technology- its cheap and the fuel can can be made from pretty much anything, including grass and algae. And another thing- it’s a hell of a lot easier to judge distance-to-empty from gallons of fuel remaining, than some obscure calculation based on a manufacturers’ inflated claims about their batteries (not taking into account differing temperatures, humidity, grades, body weights, speeds, etc.) By the way, how’re those cordless drill batteries holding up? That’s what I thought.
Yep. Agree completely with your last post. Clean coal is being attacked by Leftists because it is efficient, clean, and enables us to become far less dependent on people who hate us. Predictably, the Left opposes clean coal because they prefer we dependent on people who hate us.
I know it is the oil is for gasoline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.