Shocker: dirty electric cars

From the University of Tennessee at Knoxville  comes this surprising bit of research. Taken in entirety, and electric vehicle has a greater impact on pollution than a comparable gasoline vehicle. Full disclosure – I own an electric car myself. I’m actually on my third one, shown below, made in China:

UT researchers find China’s pollution related to E-cars may be more harmful than gasoline cars

Electric cars have been heralded as environmentally friendly, but findings from University of Tennessee, Knoxville, researchers show that electric cars in China have an overall impact on pollution that could be more harmful to health than gasoline vehicles.

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.

“An implicit assumption has been that air quality and health impacts are lower for electric vehicles than for conventional vehicles,” Cherry said. “Our findings challenge that by comparing what is emitted by vehicle use to what people are actually exposed to. Prior studies have only examined environmental impacts by comparing emission factors or greenhouse gas emissions.”

Particulate matter includes acids, organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles. It is also generated through the combustion of fossil fuels.

For electric vehicles, combustion emissions occur where electricity is generated rather than where the vehicle is used. In China, 85 percent of electricity production is from fossil fuels, about 90 percent of that is from coal. The authors discovered that the power generated in China to operate electric vehicles emit fine particles at a much higher rate than gasoline vehicles. However, because the emissions related to the electric vehicles often come from power plants located away from population centers, people breathe in the emissions a lower rate than they do emissions from conventional vehicles.

Still, the rate isn’t low enough to level the playing field between the vehicles. In terms of air pollution impacts, electric cars are more harmful to public health per kilometer traveled in China than conventional vehicles.

“The study emphasizes that electric vehicles are attractive if they are powered by a clean energy source,” Cherry said.”In China and elsewhere, it is important to focus on deploying electric vehicles in cities with cleaner electricity generation and focusing on improving emissions controls in higher polluting power sectors.”

The researchers estimated health impacts in China using overall emission data and emission rates from literature for five vehicle types—gasoline and diesel cars, diesel buses, e-bikes and e-cars—and then calculated the proportion of emissions inhaled by the population.

E-cars’ impact was lower than diesel cars but equal to diesel buses. E-bikes yielded the lowest environmental health impacts per passenger per kilometer.

“Our calculations show that an increase in electric bike usage improves air quality and environmental health by displacing the use of other more polluting modes of transportation,” Cherry said. “E-bikes, which are battery-powered, continue to be an environmentally friendly and efficient mode of transportation.”

The findings also highlight the importance of considering exposures and the proximity of emissions to people when evaluating environmental health impacts for electric vehicles. They also illuminate the distributional impact of moving pollution out of cities. For electric vehicles, about half of the urban emissions are inhaled by rural populations, who generally have lower incomes.

The findings are published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology.

Cherry worked with Matthew Bechle and Julian Marshall from the University of Minnesota and Ye Wu from Tsinghua University in Beijing. The scientists conducted their study in China because of the popularity of e-bikes and e-cars and the country’s rapid growth. Electric vehicles in China outnumber conventional vehicles 2:1. E-bikes in China are the single largest adoption of alternative fuel vehicles in history, with over 100 million vehicles purchased in the past decade, more than all other countries combined.

###

This study is funded by the National Science Foundation’s Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) award. The prestigious CAREER award supports junior faculty who exemplify the role of teacher-scholars through outstanding research, excellent education, and the integration of education and research within the context of the mission of their organizations. Cherry received his award in 2011.

5 2 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

155 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
aaron
February 19, 2012 10:04 am

Hook that baby up to a solar array on your roof however and it is 100% clean and free power. Just takes a big capital investment to start with, thats the hard part.

Engineer
February 26, 2012 8:12 pm

The reasons why smart people do not buy Electric or Hybrid cars are: Batteries are expensive, short lived, efficiency isn’t 100 % and the electricity is not free. Going electric you won’t decrease Air Pollution because, 50 % of the electricity is produced by burning COAL. By the way a Jetta Diesel, TDI for $23000 makes 40MPG. With a full tank of Chevy Volt, driving non-stop, you make 37MPG, plus $3 or more, the price of electricity you charged 16.0-kW-hr lithium-ion, the hefty $10000 of the 750-pound battery pack.
Using Chevy Volt, in the Electric Mode Only, Charging and Discharging the battery pack every day, is going to cost you $1000 in electricity, plus $3000 in the battery amortization, with a TOTAL of $4000 per year. Because the battery life will be shorten 2.5 times, from 8 years in pure hybrid mode to 3.3 years in pure electric mode.

DMarshall
February 26, 2012 10:39 pm

@Engineer Battery tech will keep on improving and I’m quite confident that we’ll see amazing improvements in capacity, weight and cost in the near future.
Reducing the emissions from power plants will decrease air pollution without having to change the vehicle tech and with no impact to its performance.
As I mentioned in a previous post, even if current EV emissions would be higher due to coal plants, which is arguable, those occur away from population centers and it’s probably easier to filter emissions from a few thousand plants than over 100 million tailpipes.
You’re way off on the weight of the Volt’s battery pack – it’s slightly over 400 lbs. And even if it’s has to be replaced in 3-4 years, why should the buyer care when GM’s warranty is 8 years / 100,000 miles?
And, by the time significant numbers of Volt’s will be needing battery replacements, the cost will be way down, probably around $2500.
Some very recent findings about gasoline engines may worsen their pollution profile versus BEVs
http://cen.acs.org/articles/90/web/2012/02/Black-Carbon-Belchers.html
However, this has yet to be corroborated.

February 28, 2012 2:56 am

Engineer;
for an actual analysis of the TCO (total cost of ownership) of Tesla’s BEVs, have a look at TeslaRumors.com . And yes, it does take depreciation into account.

Mark
March 12, 2012 8:27 pm

I guess you missed the fine print about “well to wheel” CO2 emissions in the report you quote. It takes 5 – 7kwh of energy (electricity, coal, and other hydro carbons) to take a gallon of gas from the well head to your tank. That means the GM volt can go further on that same 7 kwh than your average car can on the gallon of GAS!!
So, even if you have a magical gas engine that emits no CO2 ( which is impossible) and is 100% efficient ( the best is currently 25%) there is no way you can beat even the worst case scenario for an electric drive vehicle in either efficiency or CO2 emissions.
That said, if the gallon of gas is produced using a clean source of energy ( such as the purposed use of nuclear energy in the Alberta Tar sands) or is produced 500 miles away from any place you care about (like your home town) you might have an argument.. but not much of one. Better to focus on getting that same Clean energy directly to the wheel of your car instead of using it to produce gas.

1 5 6 7