Please welcome back Katie Brenneman who in her tenth contribution to this blog site is talking about the automotive vehicle revolution currently underway globally as alternatives to internal combustion engine technology take hold. This site has published hundreds of articles about a number of nascent technologies designed to replace vehicles that produce tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions. There are two technologies that are getting traction. The first is the lithium-ion battery-powered electric vehicle, and the second is the hydrogen fuel-cell-powered one. Katie talks about each.
We’ve been using gasoline and diesel to power cars and trucks for more than a century. It was Henry Ford who popularized the gasoline-powered internal combustion engine (ICE) early in the 20th century. And Rudolf Diesel in the late 19th century gave us the engine named after him. Before these two, steam-power moved trains and steam-powered cars persisted all the way to the mid-1920s before this form of transportation was quashed by ICE technology and mass production.
ICE technology burns fossil fuels which we know add greenhouse gasses (GHG) to the atmosphere. In small numbers, using ICE for transportation would never have been an environmental problem. But gas-powered cars cover the planet to the tune of 1.4 billion in 2022. Environmental regulation of emissions has produced innovations. Catalytic converters, unleaded gasoline, and biofuels have reduced emissions per vehicle. But the explosion in the number of cars on the planet has offset those technological improvements.
Today, the impact of gas-powered cars is profound with between 80% and 90% of the total environmental impact coming from burning fuel each time you step on the gas. And particulate matter from partially-burned gasoline and diesel is responsible for 30,000 deaths per year from respiratory complications.
Climate change from adding GHGs to the atmosphere is pointing a finger, not just at fossil fuel producers, but also at transportation with the environmental impact of driving seen as an area where technological innovation can help reduce global warming. Hence the move to electric vehicles (EVs) and alternatives to gasoline and diesel fuels to move us around.
EVs Currently Have the Lead in Replacing ICE Cars
Car manufacturers like Tesla, Ford, Nissan and a bevy of Chinese companies have been cashing in on public interest to go green and slash personal carbon emissions. In the past, many false starts plagued EV development. General Motors launched the EV1 in 1996 and Honda in 1997. Neither of these survived in the marketplace. It took a new manufacturer, Tesla, to put the EV front and centre with automobile purchasers.
Now EVs appear to be the natural successors to ICE cars. Even accounting for charging, EVs deliver a lower carbon cost than gasoline-powered vehicle alternatives. The carbon efficiency of EVs is improving over time as well. And as we move towards a power grid featuring more renewable energy sources, the carbon produced to charge EVs will diminish.Â
EVs are technically complex-looking and laden vehicles, and despite all the onboard gadgets and goodies produce fewer GHGs over their full lifetime when compared to ICE cars. Their manufacturing may be more carbon intensive, but their operations quickly offset this when drivers forgo the gasoline and diesel pump.Â
Detractors of EVs point out that disposing of batteries can be ecologically harmful. However, as many of the current EVs on the road reach their end of life, the electric car battery recycling industry is ramping up. Older batteries are even getting an extended life when used in battery storage packs used in homes to provide electricity when there are power grid interruptions. And as more EVs are on the road, there is a growing demand for the recycling and reusing of EV parts and the materials that can be extracted from old batteries.
Then there are two outstanding concerns: range anxiety which appears to be coming to an end, and the lack of an adequate charging infrastructure which through the programs being funded in the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act should soon be addressed.Â
Businesses are demonstrating they are fully behind the EV transition. Fleets are switching to EVs. Corporate sustainability and ESG credentials are becoming entrenched in business operations. Impact measurement and management (IMM) software is helping track sustainability improvements.
Can Hydrogen Give EVs a Run for the Money?
In recent years, Japanese automakers Honda and Toyota have invested in hydrogen-powered fuel cell cars. Hydrogen fuel cell EVs have a driving range of up to 500 kilometres (310 miles). Refilling a fuel cell car takes no more time than putting gas or diesel into an ICE vehicle. That too is a big plus when compared to battery-powered EVs that can take much longer to fully recharge.Â
Detractors of hydrogen point to the volatility of the fuel. They are mistaken as Toyota’s Mirai hydrogen fuel-cell model has demonstrated. Hydrogen fuel cells use compressed hydrogen which is converted to electricity. There are no GHG emissions other than water vapour. A hydrogen fuel-cell car is as carbon efficient in production as other EVs. And its operational footprint is zero carbon.
There are two remaining challenges for hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles becoming a major competitor to EVs. The first is sourcing hydrogen which currently gets produced from natural gas, a GHG. But this is changing as electrolyzers become more common and use water and even saltwater to source hydrogen. And the second challenge is the lack of a hydrogen fueling infrastructure. Only Iceland today has a significant number of hydrogen stations which fuel its growing fleet of fuel-cell vehicles.
A Final Word
Because of Tesla EVs have gained popularity in the last decade. And because people are becoming more knowledgeable about climate-related issues, they are looking at EVs in greater numbers. So EVs have caught on and with recent price wars fueled by more manufacturers getting into the business, we should see significant growth in their use.
For hydrogen, the uphill climb to reach numbers that will make fuel-cell-powered EVs viable is steeper. But late into the race doesn’t mean the fuel cell EV will succumb to the same market dynamics that ended the Stanley Steamer.  Â
Related Posts
Updated: Imagine an EV Battery With a Range of 3,000 Kilometres Between Charges
Pandemics, Holocausts And The Altering of Human DNA
Canada Celebrates The End Of War Each November 11th
A Climate Change Prehistory Event That Could Repeat Itself
The Present And Future Internet of Things For Sustainable Construction
A National Day of Truth and Reconciliation Brings Back Memories
In 2021 Misinformation Spread in Canada Had 2 Million Avoid COVID-19 Vaccines
Texas to Rollout Faster and Safer Autonomous Trucking Solution
There is no way any current or near future vehicle could have a zero carbon foot print. One way or another it will leave a trail, even if only from the tires it rubs off onto the road. Then there are the carbons (or worse) created by the manufacture and delivery of the fuel for the vehicle to refill at a fuel point. What is the impact of making a battery from ground dirt to the local car dealership ?
Gasoline vehicles could run more efficient and much cleaner but, nobody is interested in that because it eats corporate profits. EV’s have a hidden political agenda that nobody is talking about, it will cause yet more wars and intentional geopolitical destabilization as lithium becomes the new oil to take from other nations by force or corruption. Did we learn nothing from oil politics since it started somewhere around the mid late 1800’s ?
How many wars, genocides and international robberies, does it take ?
I’m not so sure that just plain old safe water will be the EV emission due to it going through a transformation in a chemical reaction.
The pollution of mining, refining, manufacturing of parts, vehicles and logistics will have a huge impact on the environment so that changes nothing for the environment. You would need a huge increase in power production to fuel the EV’s = even more pollution, including radioactive waste and ionization pollution etc.
How will these vehicles preform in cold climates given that cold temperatures kill batteries very efficiently ?
Hot environments that easily overheat electronics ?
Granted, it is a very tricky problem. The corporates thrive on monopolizing energy and fuel to the point of forcing undemocratic bills through governments. They will always stand in the way of actual progress if there is easy money to be exploited from the public, no matter what the cost. The war machine is laughing like a mad hatter all the way to the bank too. Stiff competition for actual progress.
More public transport is a better solution, reduce the need for one person per vehicle going to the same destination wherever possible. That will greatly reduce unnecessary congestion and pollution etc. Working from home wherever possible would also have a huge positive impact for a cleaner environment (corporates won’t like the dent in their fuel profits or vehicles sales tax free bank accounts that way).
American vehicles in particular have horrendous emissions and mpg (mile per gallon) because everybody is sold a wasteful inefficient fuel burning V type engine rather than say a 1.5 or 2 litre inline type. (Even a simple 125cc engine motorbike is fast enough to get you a speeding ticket globally, Germany not included.)
Europeans pay much more for fuel per gallon (US gallon = 3.75 Ltr, EU gallon = 4.5 Ltr, almost 1 litre difference per gallon!) but the EU get way more mpg than US vehicles. Puzzlingly, European cars are heavier due to metal side-door impact bars etc. (that American vehicles don’t have !) so, EU vehicles should have a worse mpg than US vehicles by weight. I’m not sure who is getting the worse deal there but it is probably America (fake low gas prices in a V type gas guzzler). It’s a scam either way.
You won’t smell raw fuel from European cars due to legal emission regulations, nor will you see vehicles spewing out black smoke from the tail pipe without being stopped by law enforcement patrols. I saw many a horror in the Midwest. The crops in the field must be well marinated in that toxic pitch black oily soot.
Electric won’t end the pollution problem, it will just change it’s flavor. The electric companies and mining corporations will stand to profit, as will their war machine thugs to help take the resources needed.
Will we ever wake up and learn to be civilised adults ?