
 ............................................................................
 ......::::..|...###.....###...###...###.....#######.....###......;;;;.......
 .....::::..-*-...###.....###..%##....###.....##..%##.....###....;;;;;;......
 ....::::....|...##.##....#####%##...##.##....##...%##...##.##..;;;;;;;;.....
 .....::::......#######...##.#####..#######...##...%##..#######..;;;;;;......
 ......::::....###...###..##...###.###...###..##..%##..###...###..;;####.....
 .............###.....######...%#####.....###############.....###..###.##....
 *****###****###***********************************************###**#**##****
     ## ##  ###    I S S U E   # 0 9 5        0 7 - 0 8 - 0 0   ###  ####   
    ###  # ###                                                   #######    
    ####  ###           "Jason on Electric Cars Again"             ###       
     #######                       by Jason                          
      ####                                                                  

        A little while ago I pointed out a fatal flaw in the logic of
 proponents of electric vehicles, so-called "Zero Emissions" vehicles,
 claiming, among other things, that they saved the world from the horrors of
 the greenhouse effect.  "Well golly," said I, "how do they get the
 electricity to fuel those vehicles?  Why, they burn fossil fuels!"
 Therefore, I jabbed a big hole in the zero emission fallacy.  I did suspect
 though, that they were still better in terms of emissions than regular cars.
 I didn't have the numbers to nail down a solution at the time, though.
 Through extensive research, largely on environmentalist websites that
 conveniently extolled disparate causes and were therefore not interested in
 concealing information that was damaging to other causes, I have finally
 nailed down those numbers.  Frankly, I was shocked at the results.

        First, a gallon of gasoline has roughly 2 kilograms (that's 2.2
 pounds) of carbon in it.  Assuming TOTAL combustion, it will release about
 17 lbs. of carbon dioxide (that's carbon plus two oxygen), but we'll say 20
 lbs. for the sake of easy measurement.  I have the math to prove it, but I
 don't feel like putting it all here.  Just take my word for it that it's
 true.

        According to Econet (http://econet.org/awea/faq/co2trees.html), the
 average kilowatt hour (kWh) consumed creates 1.4 lbs. of carbon dioxide in
 burned fossil fuels.  According to http://drivingthefuture.com/97pct.html,
 the writer's car uses about 4 miles per kWh.  What's that add up to?  Over
 one and a half pounds of carbon dioxide per mile!  My old internal
 combustion engine gets about 30 mpg, and therefore drops less than a pound
 of CO2 per mile!  Egad!  My evil old gas engine releases half the greenhouse
 gas than an electric car!  Furthermore, I travel about 15 miles to work.
 That means that I'll use 8 kWh in a day, which adds up to EIGHT TIMES my
 normal daily usage of electricity in my apartment, and that's with an
 electric stove, a computer, and a TV!  At 55 cents per kWh, that'll be
 pretty friggin' expensive, too.  EV cars apparently do reduce other
 emissions like carbon monoxide, particulates, etc., probably due to the
 economy of scale and ease of filtering these things at large electric
 plants, but is it really worth the doubling CO2 emissions? 

        So I've already established that electric vehicles are grossly energy
 inefficient, but they're also worthless from a commercial standpoint.  My
 mother, whom I shall reiterate is cool for an old broad but who still
 suffers from spasms of paranoid hippyism, parrots the commonly held belief
 that oil companies and/or car companies were actively suppressing that
 technology.  Well for whatever reason, they've now decided to stop
 suppressing that technology and are making a few electric cars.  The cream
 of the automotive crop can be seen on http://evaa.org.  Go ahead and check
 it out.  I'll wait.

        So if you looked, you'll see what I'm talking about.  If you didn't,
 I'll tell you anyway.  Only a complete moron would buy an electric car!  The
 BEST they have to offer is the GM EV1, which can handle only 2 passengers
 (but hey, how often do you need a backseat?).  It takes 9 seconds to get to
 60 mph, which isn't too bad, but it can only go 130 miles MAX.  So what
 happens when you run out of juice?  YOU HAVE TO CHARGE THE DAMN THING FOR 8
 HOURS!!  I don't know about you, but if I ever intend to, say, visit my
 parents who live on the other end of the state, I'd rather NOT have to take
 3 days to get there.

        Given the incredible inconvenience, the increased traveling cost and
 time, and the fact that the cars themselves will probably be pricier, why
 would ANYONE want one of those frigging things?  One thing they're trying is
 to market them as city cars, but if the city's got any kind of half-decent
 mass transit system, they're already useless.  I just LOVE the
 environmentalists ranting that the government should force carmakers to
 produce electric cars, ignoring the fact that no one (except possibly them)
 would be dumb enough to buy one.  Now hybrid engines are cool, since they
 allow a car to use a smaller engine to get the same power with the help of
 an electric motor, thus greatly increasing fuel efficiency.
 Environmentalists don't like them, though, because they still use gas.

        I have too much free time at work. 

 ****************************************************************************
 # (c)2000 aNAda e'zine                              aNAda095 .*.  by Jason #
 ............................................................................
