Green Cars Have a Dirty Little Secret

Producing and charging electric cars means heavy carbon-dioxide emissions.

By: Bjorn Lomborg

Electric cars are promoted as the chic harbinger of an environmentally benign future. Ads assure us of “zero emissions,” and President Obama has promised a million on the road by 2015. With sales for 2012 coming in at about 50,000, that million-car figure is a pipe dream. Consumers remain wary of the cars’ limited range, higher price and the logistics of battery-charging. But for those who do own an electric car, at least there is the consolation that it’s truly green, right? Not really.

For proponents such as the actor and activist Leonardo DiCaprio, the main argument is that their electric cars—whether it’s a $100,000 Fisker Karma (Mr. DiCaprio’s ride) or a $28,000 Nissan Leaf—don’t contribute to global warming. And, sure, electric cars don’t emit carbon-dioxide on the road. But the energy used for their manufacture and continual battery charges certainly does—far more than most people realize.

Read the rest at: The Wall St. Journal

6 Responses to Green Cars Have a Dirty Little Secret

  1. Rob N. Hood March 15, 2013 at 10:29 am #

    Obama has delivered new auto pollution standards that can guide us as we tackle the next climate challenges: slashing power plant emissions and oil use.

    Those clean-car rules will cut gasoline use in half, create 500,000 jobs, and boost energy independence. The safeguards will deliver new cars in 2025 that average an impressive 54.5 mpg. Most important, compared with 2010 models, these cars will halve their emissions of carbon dioxide, the major heat-trapping pollutant.

    The program represents the biggest single step of any nation against global warming. The take-away from the president’s action is unmistakable: We can cut fossil fuel emissions with or without electric vehicles.

    • NEILIO March 15, 2013 at 5:08 pm #

      I’ll believe that when I see it. Right now what is seen is exactly what is in the story I posted. What is important is it was said that these cars were supposed to be closer to zero emissions, and they’re not. Not even close. So I am dubious to the voracity of the claims in your cut-and-paste (without acknowledgment of the author), because it is probably written by the same people who made the former claims about EV’s that have not materialized.

    • Darren Potter March 20, 2013 at 3:58 pm #

      Rob N. Hood says – “Obama has delivered new auto pollution standards …”

      Are you really that gullible?
      How many times will you turn a blind eye, a deaf ear to Obama’s habitual lying, BSing, and Spinning?

    • Dan May 24, 2013 at 3:13 pm #

      What you deluded “greenies” fail to realize is it takes resources to produce the cars and it takes producers to produce for them and so on.
      Even if you made a 0 emmisions vehicle it would still be polluting because it takes x gallons oil to produce each tires, it takes fuel and resources to run the factories that produce the cars. Why dont you look past your little pipe dreams and use some common sense. Friggin liberal marxist tree huggers who thinks we can solve humanities problems if everyone would just hold hands. Use some logic for once, you government indoctrinatex Sheep!

      • Neilio May 24, 2013 at 5:41 pm #

        Oh I think they know. They don’t care! The only thing that is important to them is that they dictate what kind of car the rest of us should drive.

  2. Rob N. Hood April 1, 2013 at 8:33 am #

    Without fanfare, China passed the United States in December to become the world’s leading importer of oil – the first time in nearly 40 years that the U.S. didn’t own that dubious distinction. That same month, North Dakota, Ohio and Pennsylvania together produced 1.5 million barrels of oil a day — more than Iran exported.

    What about Obama being anti- fossil fuel/business?

    And Darren- are you trying to adjust reality to fit your mind-set?

Leave a Reply

A project of Minnesota Majority