Leap of faith
Share
Arguably the biggest stumbling block to low emissions motoring is the fear of the unknown: the consumer’s fear of investing in the automotive equivalent of the Betamax, and more pertinently, industry’s fear that it could waste vast resources on something no-one wants.
In recent months, the rising prices at the pumps have added a renewed urgency to the debate, and as the cost of running a combustion engine continues to bite, suggestions that consumers might embrace electric cars are growing in volume.
A survey published last week by motor insurance company esure, indicates that almost 75 per cent of motorists would consider driving an electric car. People surveyed at the
Admittedly, such surveys are pretty low-scale, they are also just surveys, affording participants the luxury of dreaming whilst freed from the financial pressures of a real-life decision. There’s little chance, for instance, that many consumers would countenance spending 30 per cent more for an electric car.
But it while it might not be much to go on, these little snapshots of consumer confidence in a fledgling market are really all the auto industry has to go on. And ultimately it will be the car industry and not the consumer that has to take the first big leap into the unknown to develop the vehicles and infrastructure that will bring zero-emissions motoring to the masses.
Jon Excell, features editor
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (11)
Paul Seamons - Leap of faith | 6 Aug 2008 2:11 pm
This is a typical 'sound-byte' survey of the British public.
An electric car is zero emission in use, but NOT during the generation of the electricity to power the car! Unless there is a massive investment in renewable energy generation to generate the power that would be required to 'fuel' these cars, it is not a solution to carbon emissions. The problem would just be pushed down the line. Out of sight, out of mind.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andrew Porter - Leap of faith | 6 Aug 2008 2:12 pm
There are two conflicting elements that confuse the issue regarding electric cars. Firstly, in the UK, the bulk of electricity is generated by power stations using fossil fuels. As gas and oil prices increase, so does the price of generating electricity. In other words, the problem is shifted, not resolved.
The second issue is recharging the car. Where does the car get its charging current? Not from a domestic power source, but a dedicated three phase charging supply.
You have a viable solution by installing charging stations analogous to fuel stations, and building new green power generating stations that do not use fossil fuels.
There is a long way to go before this is a reality, and until then, the pursuit of biofuels will continue.
The second issue is recharging the car. As already shown in Japan and the USA, where viable electric cars, albeit in small production volumes are becoming available, with a performance comparable to petrol cars are becoming available, reveals the problem of recharging. Yes, 0 to 60mph in 5 seconds, yes, 150mph top speed, and yes 330 miles per charge. Even the problem of fast charging has been solved, that is 70% of full charge in four minutes. So where does the car gets its charging current? Certainly not from a domestic power soucre, but a dedicated three phase charging supply with considerably more power available. In other words, install charging stations analagous to fuel stations, build new green power generating stations that do not fossil fuels, and then you have a viable solution.
There is a long way to go before this is a reality, and until then, the pursuit of biofuels will continue.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Steven Jeavons - Leap of faith | 6 Aug 2008 2:55 pm
It seems as if the electric car is the future with regards to zero emissions and this may well be the case at point of use. However, until there is a massive change in the way that electricity is generated then all that is being achieved by the electric car is the transfer of emissions from the vehicle to the still predominantly fossil fuelled electrical power station.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
barry mallett - Leap of faith | 6 Aug 2008 3:16 pm
Stating what I have said previous, we must concentrate on the big picture, not get drawn into parts which look like they can be done in isolation. Think about town councils and their recycling centers, they probably meet targets set by governments but do nothing for the environment as a whole.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Gregory Shea - Leap of faith | 6 Aug 2008 3:33 pm
I agree that consumers worldwide will embrace any technology that will reduce emissions from fossil fuels. I am not sure that consumers are willing to pay a 30 per cent premium. Let me restate that. I would be willing to do so, as would my peers. My son and daughter, both in their twenties, may not purely by virtue of the cost of living today. They will opt for a 'fuel efficient' auto that is affordable. They are the wave of the future and shall dictate our technological advances over the next forty years. This is who the automakers should survey. Also per Paul Seamons’ comment: In the United States 90 per cent of our electricity is produced without diesel generation, (hydro, wind, nuclear, and coal). It is 'transportation' in developed countries that has the largest impact on greenhouse gases, which will be reduced with the use of alternate fuels for automobiles.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John Lander - Leap of faith | 7 Aug 2008 8:45 am
What is an electric car? Battery, fuel cell, hybrid powered? They all produce CO2, either locally or at a power station, unless of course it is a nuclear plant. Unless the power source is green nobody wins.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tim Perry - Leap of faith | 7 Aug 2008 11:12 am
What? There have to be more changes to the way we live before we can save the planet? I thought giving up using plastic bags at Tescos was going to do that!!
Deck chairs, doomed ocean liners and an iceberg spring to mind.....
Tim Perry
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert Handley - Leap of faith | 12 Aug 2008 5:34 pm
Sounds great to the man in the street, what with electric cars performing similar to petrol cars etc. But what do they cost to run? How could anyone make an informed judgement? What does 40 miles charge of electricity cost?
If the buying public starts to change over in numbers where does the government then get its huge petrol tax income from? They would have to stick 70% tax on your electricity or their sums wouldn't add up. This problem goes for all cleaner fuels.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Derek Robinson - Leap of faith | 14 Aug 2008 3:22 pm
It takes the small steps to push the big steps. We should develop the electric car because it is the only form of energy that can be created from clean sources. Get the small stages going and the larger bit (i.e. the generation of the electricity) will come along. Some of the comments are typical of the, "why bother", mind set in the UK nowadays. Get a grip and get things done instead of whinging about it.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Phil Yates - Leap of faith | 18 Aug 2008 12:27 pm
There is more to being 'green' than the source of motive power. What is the cost to the environment during the making of the power storage devices?
The chemicals in the batteries have to be extracted from the earth and refined. Some of these mines create huge toxic spoils that devastate local wildlife.
Then there is the cost (fiscal and CO2) of the extraction, refinement, manufacture, shipping and installation of the batteries. This is often ignored in 'green' statistics.
Finally, what is the life of a set of batteries? i.e. how many Kg CO2 are used just in creating and transporting batteries as well as the energy cost for each 'green mile' actually travelled?
Flippant activists don't look at the cost to the environment over the whole lifecycle of a vehicle. A V8 Landrover which has clocked up low mileage over 20+ years on a farm is actually greener overall than first appears.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment