Diesels greener than battery cars, says Swiss gov report

[Arragonis]

From The Register

Swiss boffins have mounted an investigation into the largely unknown environmental burdens of electric cars using lithium-ion batteries, and say that the manufacturing and disposal of batteries presents no insurmountable barriers to electric motoring. However, their analysis reveals that modern diesel cars are actually better for the environment than battery ones.

The revelations come in a new report issued by Swiss government research lab EMPA, titled Contribution of Li-Ion Batteries to the Environmental Impact of Electric Vehicles. The Swiss boffins, having done some major research into the environmental burdens of making and disposing of li-ion batteries - to add to the established bodies of work on existing cars - say that battery manufacture and disposal aren't that big a deal. However, in today's world, with electricity often made by burning coal or gas, a battery car is still a noticeable eco burden:

The main finding of this study is that the impact of a Li-ion battery used in [a battery-powered car] for transport service is relatively small. In contrast, it is the operation phase that remains the dominant contributor to the environmental burden caused by transport service as long as the electricity for the [battery car] is not produced by renewable hydropower ...

A break even analysis shows that an [internal combustion engined vehicle] would need to consume less than 3.9 L/100km to cause lower [environmental impacts] than a [battery car] ... Consumptions in this range are achieved by some small and very efficient diesel [cars], for example, from Ford and Volkswagen.

Actually quite a lot of the new diesels are in the better-than-battery ballpark, according to UK government figures. The notional battery car considered by the EMPA analysts was a Volkswagen Golf with its normal drivetrain replaced by a battery one: but it seems that you would be doing slightly better for the environment to buy an ordinary new Golf with a 1.6 litre "BlueMotion" injected turbodiesel - which would be a lot cheaper. That would consume 3.8 l/100km, not 3.9.

So would a new Mini Cooper D hatchback or a new Ford Focus, actually. And if you could bear to go for something a little smaller - VW Polo rather than Golf - you'd be streets ahead on the environmental front, down as low as 3.4 l/100km with more than 15 per cent of the car's in-service emissions clipped off compared to the 3.9 l/100km battery-car baseline. As the Swiss boffins tell us, it's the in-service energy use and emissions which count most.

You could even treat yourself to a small estate car - the Skoda Fabia - and beat a battery Golf by a large margin in terms of eco-credentials, according to the EMPA analysis.

Of course, battery car lovers will argue that's not the point. Swiss electricity is already largely generated by carbon-free nuclear and hydropower plants (carbon-free provided you don't count all the concrete used to build them, that is). These and other technologies not yet much used (solar, wind, tidal etc) may one day put the battery car far ahead of internal-combustion ones in terms of carbon emissions.

And if nobody buys battery cars now, they'll stay expensive and scarce forever, so it's still possible to view the act of buying one as green even today when they actually do more damage to the environment than the right internal-combustion model.

But if you just want to emit less carbon right away, it seems you should buy a modern eco-diesel rather than an electric vehicle.

[vtec-e]

carbon-free nuclear

Theres a statement i keep meaning to figure out. How carbon free is nuclear power?
Ok, the power generation is relatively carbon free i guess, but what about mining the stuff? And shipping it? And disposing it? That alone will take thousands of years with all its looking after.

So how carbon free is it?

[Piwoslaw]

So I'm still doing worse than an eclectric, with my 90-day average of 4.1 l/100km. Or am I? Over 90% of Poland's electricity is from coal, a large part of that from lignite. If I had an EV, I'd increase the demand on the grid and it would be easier for the gov't to force the construction of the world's two largest lignite strip mines. So for now, I'll keep hypermiling, then maybe start home brewing biodiesel...

Originally Posted by vtec-e

Theres a statement i keep meaning to figure out. How carbon free is nuclear power?

Haven't you ever heard of clean coal? Both have a lot in common with Orange4boy's unicorn... But that's another thread.

[euromodder]

Oh well, no matter what gets invented, it'll always have some negative effects.

I'd rather see the best available technology being pushed, with the worse technologies (like the 2 stroke ICE) being phased out fairly quickly.

[NachtRitter]

I can see the U.S. news stories now... headlines say "Diesels greener than battery cars, says Swiss gov report" and there'll be a pic of a Diesel Hummer or F350 next to the Nissan Leaf... ugh

[tumnasgt]

Originally Posted by NachtRitter

I can see the U.S. news stories now... headlines say "Diesels greener than battery cars, says Swiss gov report" and there'll be a pic of a Diesel Hummer or F350 next to the Nissan Leaf... ugh

Not only the US reports will be doing that, sensational news items are a nuisance available almost everywhere these days.


The one problem I see with this is how many people actually get under 3.9l/100km in their diesel. Lots of people on here struggle to match the EU numbers, so most people must be doing about 20-30% worse than that. So that means the VW Polo will actually be using 4.6-4.9l/100km, which is way over the cut off.

[RobertSmalls]

The Register's URL is "Battery cars destroy the world". Not really. They're about on par with the more efficient hybrids and diesels. "Battery cars fail to save the world" is more like it.

Also, Switzerland has found that "an electric car" pollutes like a car getting 3.8L/100km or 60mpg. But The Register didn't mention on what cycle or which electric car it was.

If the cycle is NEDC, then the most efficient cars on both sides of the ocean pollute less on that cycle. On a hypermiler drive cycle, I bet we can squeeze out a better % over NEDC with an ICE. Piwo, I bet you're ahead of where you'd be in an electric large station wagon.

In any case, if you have tens of thousands to spend on reducing your carbon footprint, an EV should be near the bottom of your list of priorities.

[trikkonceptz]

While this story does relevant research on enviromental impact, I feel there is a greater impact on supporting local or national economies via extra grid demand vs. import oil.

I haven't seen to many stories on how these improvements in tech reduce our need for foreign oil. We all know that is where all the pressure comes from...

[Patrick]

Since solar is now cheaper than nuclear power, just run your EV on that. :-)

http://www.ncwarn.org/wp-content/upl...ort_final1.pdf

[redyaris]

Let me see, not counting concrete in the carbon footprint of nuclear plants, do I detect deceit or is it insanity? The cement plant I see burns naturel gas, coal, used tires... lets not look at the quorrieing, trucking, train transport, dust... using this logic my car is carbon zero if you don't include the fuel I use!