Why are electric vehicles considered green ?

The internal combustion engine (ICE) has a thermodynamic energy conversion efficiency of 17%. This means that 83% of the energy present in the fuel is wasted as heat, with only 17% being converted to useful mechanical energy.

An electric vehicle's motor has an energy conversion efficiency of 88%. A power plant with regenerative turbines has an energy conversion efficiency of 55%. Therefore, the net electric vehicle's energy conversion efficiency is 48%.

Presuming both are powered by fossil fuel (directly, or via an electric utility burning fossil fuel), the electric vehicle is 2.8 times more efficient turning fossil fuel energy into useful mechanical energy. This is why it is considered green. Perhaps the relative phrase, "Greener by a factor of three", would be a better description, as few things, if any, are completely green.

Regarding batteries, lithium magnesium oxide (including graphite electrode) contains no toxic elements. Lithium is the lightest metal of the elements (vs. heavy toxic metals such as cadmium, mercury and lead). Magnesium bonded to a carbonate is commonly ingested as an antacid, we breath oxygen, and graphite is used in pencils.

Contrastingly, consider the population of millions upon millions of inexpensive low-tech lead-acid batteries found in standard vehicles for ICE starting, and the lead introduced into the environment therefrom.

Electric vehicles may be controversial as it's very easy to point to the electric utility's massive generation facilities and steaming cooling towers and say "look!" However, with the scale of electrical generation being in the tens to hundreds of megawatts, the utility can well afford the regenerative turbines to capture otherwise lost heat left over from the primary turbine cycle, converting it into electrical energy, hence their 55% efficiency. Such heat capture on a conventional vehicle's ICE would be impractically expensive and complex.

No industrial product can be entirely green; however, electric vehicles are far greener than gasoline powered vehicles.

*

We know this must be true because gasoline needs electricity, too, for the refining process. About six kilowatt-hours of energy is wasted for each gallon of gasoline refined. That same six KWH of electricity in an electric car can power it about 24 miles.

*

Since both gasoline cars and electric cars use similar amounts of electricity, the cleaner car is the one that doesn't also burn polluting petroleum.

*

As to the batteries, modern EV batteries do not contain heavy metals, and are not environmentally dangerous either in manufacturing or use. Plus, lithium batteries are highly recyclable. See study below.

Electric vehicles are considered green because they don't create carbon dioxide waste products. They don't add to global warming. When batteries end their useful life, they are recycled rather than thrown away. I am unsure of the amount of pollution or the type of pollution created by battery production. I have found a government study that concludes that batteries have no real significant risks.

http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/B/239.pdf

electricity could be powered with the aid of any source of gasoline so it may be the main achievable. you may charge it in any way, as a result, because of the fact that we don't understand what source we could prefer to apply for next gen automobiles, we'd besides use electricity considering that's powered with the aid of something!!! Make a hydrogen gasoline cellular capability plant, or a bio diesel plant, or another cool new form of capability plant that no person even knows of roughly yet, and capability your electric powered motor vehicle from that! electricity is freakin amazing like that. until we discover a achievable "eco-friendly" capability source electricity make a great option because of the fact the refueling device is already set up (in the experience that your place has lively electric powered retailers that's a means refueling station), as a result there is not any might desire to create an completely new refueling infrastructure. to no longer point out that's lots greater cost-effective.

You're absolutely right. The same applies to compact fluorescent light-bulbs, which are far more hazardous waste than conventional light-bulbs.

There's also the issue of how much pollution occurs during the production of the electricity used to charge the electric vehicles.

In Ontario, Canada where I live, the power utility is called Ontario Hydro, in order to give people the false impression that the majority of our power comes from hydro-electric facilities. In fact, the two main sources of our electricity are coal and our rickety, end-of-life nuclear power plants.

It's all "lipstick on a pig"/political "spin".

If an electric car gets its power from a coal-burning power plant, is it still considered 'green'?

The same psychology is at work here as in eating meat; as long as people don't have to see the cattle slaughtered, they don't think about meat as anything but something in a grocery store. If you don't have to see where the power is generated, you don't have to think of the car as using electricity made from burning coal or oil.

Because Big Green has conned the consumer and the government into investing money into green and then they go bankrupt and run off with the money. Basically stealing from the taxpayer.

Eco wise, Don't use gasoline, so impct on polution is minimal.