Coal-Fired Cars, revisited.

Well, I've come across some research that backs up my claims that, in order to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, we should switch to coal-fired cars.

If you read my previous post, We Work The Black Seam, you'll know what I mean by that statement. I mean that we should move from gasoline to electric cars, because, even with electricity generated by coal-fired plants, electric cars generate less CO2 than gas-powered cars.

These links were found in the Wikipedia entry for Hybrid Car.

Some notes:

The ILEA ('Electric vs. Gasolene') article claims that hybrids are significantly better than pure electric vehicles that are run on a coal grid. Electric cars in a hydro grid, on the other hand, have almost no post-production CO2 footprint.

The "Debunking the Myth" article says:

Many EV critics point out that charging thousands of EVs from aging coal plants will increase greenhouse gases such as CO2 significantly. Although half the country uses coalfired plants, EVs recharging from these facilities are predicted to produce less CO2 than ICE vehicles. According to the World Resources Institute [a 1994 publication], EVs recharging from coal-fired plants will reduce CO2 emissions in this country from 17 to 22 percent....

...Countries such as the U.S. and the U.K. use a mix of coal and oil-fired facilities that produce an elevated level of SO2 and particulates. However, levels of HC, CO and NOx would decrease significantly.

Here are the articles:

Plug-In Hybrids Are Cleaner (Even on a Coal Grid)
Debunking the Myth of EVs and Smokestacks (PDF doc)
Automobiles: Electric vs. Gasoline (2001)

SUV Nation

Just read the (British) story, "Big, Not Clever", about the controversy over SUVs in the US. What caught my eye was this:

"There is not a left/right divide," says Keith Bradsher, author of High and Mighty, a telling investigation into the rise of the SUV. "Democrats have been as supportive as Republicans. Nor is there a religious divide."

Evangelist Jerry Falwell, who believes that global warming does not exist because "God would not let that happen", is for them. The Evangelical environmental network, which last year launched a campaign asking, "What would Jesus drive?" is against them.

I wish I could think of a comment to add to this, but I am unable to top "global warming does not exist because 'God would not let that happen.'"

I mean.... It's just... I really can't comment further.

I can at least point you to a very appropriate picture for this particular controversy:


"HummerGod" on Flickr, by Michael Casey