The Chevy "Volt": more "Brown" than "Green"?

Like so many things that claim to be "green", when you look at the facts, it can actually be the opposite:

Why the Volt?

[...] They (the ubiquitous “they”) tell us it’s green. Look no tailpipe! No gasoline! Is good, right?

No, Brainiac, is not good. Is bad! I’ll explain why.

First of all, the natural base price of a product is a fair guide as to how many resources went into manufacturing that product. So to make a $41,000 car consumed about 3 times the resources of making a $14,000 car. If you want true green, you should first and foremost consume less. Right out of the gate, this monster consumes more. A lot more. To say the Volt is green, you’d have to argue that, over its lifetime, it used enough less energy to make up for the disparity. Even if it ran for free, I doubt it could close the gap.

The foregoing argument could be invalidated if eventual economies of scale will bring down the price of a Dolt. But that doesn’t seem to be in the cards.

Another argument in favor of the Dolt would be that, as a plug-in device, its fuel is whatever they use at the local power station. In other words, a Dolt might be coal-powered or hydroelectric or nuclear. A conventional car is limited to gasoline. Yes, it would indeed be good to shift away from our inflexible dependence upon gasoline, which is in domestic short supply (and will continue to be, whether we drill in Alaska or not). However, we can’t afford to buy enough $41,000 cars to escape this dependency, with or without subsidies.

Let me repeat that I’m very enthusiastic about true green projects, and I’m also deeply concerned about America’s dangerous dependence upon foreign oil. But what passes for “green” is all too often wasteful and “brown”. This subsidized boondoggle will prove to be just another payoff to cronies and special interests. There will be no benefit for the taxpayers’ dollars other than a photo op for Obama and new toys for cash-laden yuppies, who will then cruise around town proclaiming how virtuous they are. [...]

If the power plant is using coal or oil to generate the electricity to charge the Volt, then it's still responsible for creating pollution, just not doing it in the immediate vicinity of the car. And how MUCH pollution is created making electricity each time the Volt is charged up, when compared to the pollution of gasoline for the same mileage? It's an important question.

I did a post previously, about the Chevy Volt. The technology is interesting, but how green is it really, for all the reasons mentioned above? Are our tax dollars are being wasted to subsidize another "feel good" project? Does it cost so much because it's being subsidized, removing the motive to make it less expensive?

I ask the last question, because the Ford Motor company is going to release an electric Ford Focus model in 2011, and it's expected to be considerable cheaper ($25,000 to $30,000). Ford didn't get a bailout. It's solvent, and it's making a less expensive electric car, but has to compete with a government subsidized competitor.

Rewarding failure and punishing achievement. How fair is that?


Also see:

Electric Ford Focus car due late next year
     

Electric Ford Focus car due late next year

Ford, Microsoft plan system to recharge electric cars at least cost

Ford and Microsoft say they are going to roll out a system that will tell electric car owners the optimal time to recharge their vehicles. The system was announced at the New York Auto Show.

The "Microsoft Hohm" system would start with the all-electric Ford Focus compact car, which goes on sale late next year, says Ford CEO Alan Mulally and via a remote presentation, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. [...]

The rest is about the recharging system, but this is the first I've heard about the Electric Focus. The focus is a good car, we have one. I was hoping they might make a hybrid Focus, but this one seems to be entirely electric.

More here:

Electric Ford Focus in 2011: What it Means

As we reported yesterday, we now know that Ford has made official its plans to build an electric Ford Focus in 2011. Perhaps most notable is that Ford could be the first automaker in the U.S. to mass-market a pure battery-electric passenger car — and a "real" one, meaning a compact car rather than the type of small commuter cars Toyota has planned for 2012 and Mitsubishi is investigating for compliance with U.S. regulations. Nor is it a $100,000 limited-run sports car like the one being sold by Tesla. [...]

Test Driving the Electric Ford Focus

[...] The Focus will hit the market in 2011 followed the next year by a plug-in electric Escape sport-utility vehicle, which Ford also showed off in San Francisco. Ms. Gioia said she expects electric and plug-in hybrids will account for 10 to 25 percent of the market by 2020.

[...]

As I drove a blue prototype around the streets of San Francisco, I was hard-pressed to distinguish the car from one I recently rented at an airport. It was quiet, of course, but that burst of acceleration you get from punching the accelerator of an electric car has been moderated.

The Ford executive sitting shotgun told me that software limits the amount of power instantaneously transferred to the wheels so that the car will perform more like its gasoline-powered cousin.

The production electric Focus, which will be powered by lithium ion battery packs, will be based on the more stylish European version of the car. The Focus will have a range of about 100 miles and a top speed of around 90 miles an hour.

Ford has not announced a price for the car.

It sounds great. But I have to wonder, how "green" is it? I mean, how much electricity does it take to charge it up, and how long does it last, compared to an equal amount of power from a gasoline engine providing the same power? The electric car may not pollute as it operates, but the power plant supplying the power is creating pollution to create that electricity. If they amount of pollution created to charge the car is greater than the amount a gas powered engine would produce, then it should be worse, from a green standpoint.

I've heard conflicting opinions about this, about it being worse or better. I would be nice to see some solid, unbiased data on the topic. If it's worse or the same pollution as gas, then this is all just "feel-good" nonsense. I'd like to know the truth about it.

No doubt if the power source providing the electricity is a "green" source, that would change things. But such sources are not common yet. If it's a nuclear source, then you have to consider the definition of "pollution". It's not air pollution, and 80% of nuclear waste is treatable, but what about the other 20%, and what's the ratio of waste to energy production? And can that 20% waste be rendered harmless with future technology?

I'm sure people will be arguing about these things for years to come. Welcome to our Brave New World.
     

Ford Motor Company changes production plans

From CNNMoney.com:

UPDATE: Ford Unveils Details Of Overhaul Plan As Losses Grow

DETROIT -(Dow Jones)- Ford Motor Co. (F) on Thursday unveiled details of its plan to radically alter its North American product portfolio, as losses continue to mount and expectations for a U.S. auto market recovery are pushed back to 2010.

The second-largest U.S.-based auto maker plans to convert three North American truck and SUV plants to small-car production and introduce six of its European models in the U.S. The company is also accelerating the introduction of more fuel-efficient engines and plans to double production of gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles in 2009.

The moves represent a strategic shift for an auto maker that, like its Detroit rivals, has relied on sales of trucks and SUVs for the bulk of its North America revenue for more than a decade. Auto makers are scrambling to adjust to shifting consumer preferences as U.S. gasoline prices are above $4 a gallon and economic conditions remain weak.

[...]

Ford said it expects the U.S. economic recovery to begin by early 2010, with U.S. auto industry sales returning to trend levels as the economy returns to health. U.S. auto sales are currently at their lowest levels in about 15 years.

Ford Chief Financial Officer Don Leclair said Thursday that the performance of the U.S. auto industry in 2009 will likely "mirror" that of 2008.

He said the auto maker has enough cash to carry out its plans to convert the truck and SUV plants and wait out an upswing in the U.S. economy. He said Ford, which raised about $23 billion in late 2006 by offering up nearly all its assets as collateral, won't need to seek additional funding. [...]

For years Ford has been talking about making it's diesel version of the Ford Focus available here in the USA, but they have as yet to follow through on that. It was an appealing option to me... until recently, when I last looked, diesel prices here had gone higher than regular gas.

We will be looking at their hybrid options.