OPINION

Eco Friendly Vehicles: A Case of Misplaced Emphasis?

May 11, 2008
Krips

In this year's budget, the Government reduced the excise duty on electric cars from 8 per cent to nil. Recently the Government repeated the same with 2 and 3 wheel electric vehicles. (Full article here) Why? Well, if one were to believe the advertisements, this is because the Government wants to promote these "eco friendly", "zero pollution" vehicles. Just open any electric vehicle manufacturer's website and you will see these words laced all over the site.

Well, that might be true if one were to compare electric vehicles with carbon dioxide emitting vehicles. However, I seem to have been bitten by the recent bug of measuring everything by its carbon footprint. Considering that most of the power produced in India is from hydro carbon fuels I fail to see how these vehicles are eco friendly. Just because you choose to be blind to the technology that brings the electricity right to your doorstep it does not cease to exist. Add to that the fact that we are an energy deficient nation, I fail to see the rationale in promoting electric vehicles.

I see a lot of similarities between ethanol blended fuel and these electric vehicles. Ethanol blended fuel was supposed to be environmentally friendly since it used natural component that could be regenerated. However, this has a hand in the spiraling food prices as food crops like corn were diverted to produce ethanol. Similarly agricultural land meant for food crops began to grow crops that were in demand to produce this "bio-fuel".

As and energy deficient nation and one that meets its electricity needs primarily through fossil fuels can we really afford to promote electric vehicles?

eXTReMe Tracker
Keep reading for comments on this article and add some feedback of your own!

Eco Friendly Vehicles: A Case of Misplaced Emphasis?

Article

Author: Krips

 

Comments! Feedback! Speak and be heard!

Comment on this article or leave feedback for the author

#1
Susan
URL
May 12, 2008
11:10 PM

Biofuel is just a bad idea.... :(

#2
Ayan Roy
May 13, 2008
05:58 AM

Hmm, good point, BUT, the pollution caused due to generation of electricity (in a thermal power plant, say) needed to CHARGE the electric car battery, per km, is FAR LESSER that the pollution caused due to burning fuel in a fossil fuel driven car, per km. This has been proved mathematically.

Electric cars are far efficient compared to fuel driven cars, and their carbon footprint is lesser too. Check out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car

for the mathematical proofs, which is a bit involving.

Love and peace to all,
Ayan

#3
FF
May 13, 2008
06:27 AM

I too have thought of it for long time.

In fact going by the law of entropy, the free energy available(delta G) should definitely decreases if it is converted from one form to other.

In this case

Heat -> Mechanical -> Electricity
-> less (loss in transmission + loss in storage in battries) -> mechanical energy

as compared to Heat -> Mechanical. Even if each stage is 80% efficent in conversion we still have loss of about 30% in case of electric route. Or am I missing something?

#4
Krips
May 13, 2008
03:05 PM

The mathematical proof as mentioned in Wiki is based on calculations for USA where a major part of the energy comes from renewable sources. In India, while I don't have the exact numbers, the power plants are mainly hydrocarbon based. We have yet to move on to wind, solar, nuclear sources of energy.

Also while the article does have citations, not all the figures have citations. "at $1.25/gal a gasoline vehicle will go 18 miles (29 km)" Doesn't hold good in our case either as American preference for SUV's is legendary while Indians are more mileage conscious

Then we have the issue of transmission losses in India are one of the highest in the world. Conversion losses as pointed out by FF also need to be taken into consideration

But more importantly we are a energy deficient country. When people don't have power for domestic purposes due to load shedding can we afford to take on the burden of electric vehicles? Load shedding of upto 12 hours a day are not uncommon during summer months. There are villages in India where power has still not reached after 60 years of independence.

Also people refuse to pay more for electricity to private operators providing electricity as witnessed by the agitations against pricing policy in Bombay / Delhi.

It would then fall upon the govt to subsidize power from tax payers money and what not. In such a case, have we really examined all the likely side effects of promoting electric vehicles or are we getting carried away by marketing hype?

#5
Brajesh
May 14, 2008
10:59 AM

Another classic case of our government looking through a microscope where a helicopter view is required - this is true of most development projects - while one can not completely eliminate the harmful effects of "development" growing economies like ours shouldn't repeat the mistake of a US or closer on the development scale - China. we all know the struggle on pollution there ... I think the facts can be debated - but i think all will agree that our government seems to be too caught up with the GDP growth number rather than quality of growth ... and that is worrying ...

#6
Kim
URL
May 14, 2008
01:10 PM

You have posed some interesting questions. I hope the powers that be can come up with the answers soon. Else the only people who will be able to use the electricity powered cars would be those who have the benefit of free electricity in India - politicians and their slum/rural vote banks

#7
Mark
URL
May 14, 2008
01:11 PM

Yes, "eco-car" manufacturers like to talk of tail-pipe emissions as though they represented the entire ecological burden of powering the vehicles. Your analysis is spot-on.

The more important and interesting question, though, is whether cars (as we currently conceive and create them) make any sense at all in a developing Twenty-First Century society. I have argued, on purely non-environmental grounds, that India's current automobile fetish is emblematic of the retrograde thinking that will leave it mired in mediocrity, notwithstanding its awesome opportunity and astounding potential to develop into a world-leading economy. But, more in line with this discussion, consider the following rough analysis (based on 2004 U.S. data).

With an average passenger vehicle weight of 1844 kg, and average total passenger weight of 110 kg (conservative estimate, since most vehicles are single occupancy most of the time), less than six percent of the petrol we consume to move us from place-to-place actually moves us. Move than 94 percent of the fuel is needed to move the car. In what other commercial realm would we tolerate a solution with this astonishing inefficiency?

India doesn't need more cars; it needs fewer cars. India already has one of the world's most efficient last-mile transportation solutions in the autorickshaw. With faster, safer, cleaner, more convenient, more efficient public transportation -- coupled with non-privately owned personal transportation, like the autorickshaw or other efficient point-to-point solutions -- India could show the world how a sustainable paradigm for intra-urban transportation, which produces a much higher quality of life for all, is already within our technological capability. The only problem: India will never do that. Sad.

Add your comment

(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/7693)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.






Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!