[outcast]

Some will be coming from Japan soonish

Please erase your image of electric cars being like golf carts," a spokesman for Japan's fourth-biggest automaker said before taking a zero-emission vehicle out for a spin.

"It's fast, powerful and smooth," Mitsubishi Motors Corp. spokesman Kai Inada said of the iMiEV electric car, which is due to be launched next year.

Zero-emission vehicles may not be a novel concept for long. Japanese carmakers are racing to develop electric cars, and US and European manufacturers have also announced plans to roll them out within a few years.

The dream of an electric car, which has been around since the time of Thomas Edison, has so far failed to break into the mainstream because of limited battery life that makes such vehicles impractical for most purposes.

But after technological breakthroughs in the development of long-lasting lithium-ion batteries, soon it may not just be Hollywood stars who are zipping around in zero-emission automobiles.

Plus following BYD's introduction of their PHEV, I would not be suprised if we saw fully electric versions coming from them in the next few years.

[Hermes]

Zero emission? So the car doesn't fart out any carbon. What was USED TO MAKE THE ELECTRICITY? Gerbils on treamills??

Who cares what comes out of the car when the energy's lifecycle obviously DOES produce emissions?

[yesplease]

Who cares what comes out of the car when the energy's lifecycle obviously DOES produce emissions?

The fact that it does produce GHG emissions isn't as important as the relative emissions it puts out compared to a conventional vehicle over it's lifetime. Considering that ~40% of Japan's electricity comes from low Carbon sources, mostly nuclear and hydro power, as well as the difference in efficiency between even large and small scale thermal power generation, it looks like EVs could significantly cut Japan's GHG emissions.

[Hermes]

Is veal cruelty-free because no cattle were harmed between the kitchen and the dinner table?

Is it a zero-emission vehicle because no emissions come out of the vehicle's tail pipe?

I'm not talking about whether it's better than a normal car or not. I'm talking about whether it's RIGHT TO CALL IT A ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE.

Please look at my posting, then look at your response, and realize that you're not addressing my point.

Thank you.

[outcast]

I'm not talking about whether it's better than a normal car or not. I'm talking about whether it's RIGHT TO CALL IT A ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE.

The vehicle itself produces no emissions, hence the name. Dude, chill out.


In many cities like LA one of the biggest sources of air pollution is cars. If every car was electric or fuel cell based it would cause a huge improvement in air quality.

[Hermes]

In many cities like LA one of the biggest sources of air pollution is cars. If every car was electric or fuel cell based it would cause a huge improvement in air quality.

Right, because who cares if the pollution happens over by the power plant. Out of sight, out of mind, right buddy?

Isn't it fun talking about all this new fancy "green" technology? I just get all giddy about it, myself.

[yesplease]

Is it a zero-emission vehicle because no emissions come out of the vehicle's tail pipe?

Yes.

I'm not talking about whether it's better than a normal car or not. I'm talking about whether it's RIGHT TO CALL IT A ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE.

Please look at my posting, then look at your response, and realize that you're not addressing my point.

Thank you.

Whether it's right or not is an arbitrary value judgment and up to whoever is making it. It's certainly correct to call it a ZEV. Now, if you're looking a WTW and/or LCA emissions that's something else entirely, as indicated by it's name.

[yesplease]

In many cities like LA one of the biggest sources of air pollution is cars. If every car was electric or fuel cell based it would cause a huge improvement in air quality.

Right, because who cares if the pollution happens over by the power plant. Out of sight, out of mind, right buddy?

Isn't it fun talking about all this new fancy "green" technology? I just get all giddy about it, myself.

The most pollution would be from the 20% of CA's electricity from coal, but even then reducing the emissions of a large stationary source is way easier than doing the same to a bunch of small mobile sources. Furthermore, the rest of CA's energy production comes from nuclear, renewables, and nat gas, none of which are as polluting as coal, which isn't as polluting as conventional autos. Lastly, the weather and geography around CA's population centers make pollution much worse than it would be elsewhere, which exacerbates some of the problems from it.

[Hermes]

Emissions were caused due to the operation of the car. It is therefore not a zero emissions car.

[yesplease]

Emissions were caused due to the operation of the car. It is therefore not a zero emissions car.

Emissions are caused by the creation of anything, but emissions from forks generally aren't looked at when determining air quality because it's the factory making the forks that's producing emissions, not the forks themselves. Similarly, EVs are ZEVs for the same reason. Doing an LCA on something like an EV, or fork, or whatever ya like, would illustrate the emissions associated w/ it's lifecycle energy use, but that still doesn't mean an EV or a fork aren't zero emissions.

[Hermes]

Emissions were caused due to the operation of the car. It is therefore not a zero emissions car.

Emissions are caused by the creation of anything, but emissions from forks generally aren't looked at when determining air quality because it's the factory making the forks that's producing emissions, not the forks themselves. Similarly, EVs are ZEVs for the same reason. Doing an LCA on something like an EV, or fork, or whatever ya like, would illustrate the emissions associated w/ it's lifecycle energy use, but that still doesn't mean an EV or a fork aren't zero emissions.

Emissions are caused by the creation of anything

Wrong, and you know it.

Oh, oh wait. I know what you're going to say. Something like the creation of a loincloth gives off emissions because of the deer farting that the leather was taken from.

but emissions from forks generally aren't looked at when determining air quality because it's the factory making the forks that's producing emissions, not the forks themselves.

No. Emissions aren't looked at for forks BECAUSE FORKS DON'T NEED AN ENERGY SOURCE TO BE USED!!!!! You don't push a little button on the side of your fork to turn it on. But for electric vehicles... hrmm... let's see... do they use energy? Why blow me down! They do! Hrmm... let's see... do they use a WHOLE LOT of energy... why in fact yes, they do.

Are swimming pools in Southern California "Zero Water Shortage Causing"? No, because everyone in their right mind understands that the water comes from somewhere. Sure, the owners of the swimming pools will look the other way or choose to not hear it, but it's clear that having a swimming pools in Southern California is contributing to the drying up of Mono Lake (last time I checked).

How would you feel if your neighbor showed you his big new huge pool in LA and told you it's "Zero Water Shortage" because it only lets 70% of the normal amount of water evaporate vs. others which allow 100%?

The only people who believe that having a swimming pool in Southern California has no ecological repercussions are those who choose to turn their brains off. And of course it's easier to turn your brain off when the use of a "resource" appears to be completely clean - when the end-user is completely divorced from understanding where the water came from.

A "Zero Emission Vehicle" ... is an attempt to divorce the end-user from having to think about where the resources came from in order to make the thing go, particularly because transportation is so incredibly energy intensive. Divorcing the user from the energy needed to make the thing run coddles those who want the warm fuzzy glow of believing they're not having a negative impact on the Earth by their participation in all of this insanity around us.

Calling them "Electric Cars" is one thing, but "Zero Emission Vehicles"? It's flagrant.

[yesplease]

Emissions are caused by the creation of anything

Wrong, and you know it.

Oh, oh wait. I know what you're going to say. Something like the creation of a loincloth gives off emissions because of the deer farting that the leather was taken from.

Loincloth production isn't exactly at an all time high in case you didn't notice, and guess what, everything created in a society where energy is fossil fuel intensive is fossil fuel intensive. Be it a fork or a loincloth from a farmed deer.

but emissions from forks generally aren't looked at when determining air quality because it's the factory making the forks that's producing emissions, not the forks themselves.

No. Emissions aren't looked at for forks BECAUSE FORKS DON'T NEED AN ENERGY SOURCE TO BE USED!!!!!

No. Emissions aren't looked at because emissions are tabulated by source. A fork requiring how ever much in the way of SOx/NOx/etc for production does not emit that at it's point of use. The EPA/CARB aren't going to regulate emissions from the fork, but from the factory making the fork. Similarly, the EPA/CARB are not going regulate emissions from a vehicle producing no emissions, they are going to regulate emissions from the factory making the vehicle and energy generation facilities making energy for it's use. ZEV does not refer to emissions over a vehicle's life-cycle, that would be specified in a LCA (Life Cycle Analysis). They're called different things for a reason. If you wish to (seriously) discuss the emissions associated w/ EV operations over their lifetime you wouldn't embark on a semantic holy crusade about whether or not they should be called ZEVs, which is your opinion and fine, but you would (correctly) point out that even as a ZEV, given a LCA of them their emissions, plenty of crap cans still be generated at a power plant far away from the vehicle. This would also require you to do some research regarding the electricity generation profile of specific regions as well comparing the emissions of a bunch of small mobile sources compared to a few large stationary ones, so feel free to ignore the actual meaning of the term for what you're referring to and continue to rant on the information superhighway street corner in your deerskin loincloth.

A "Zero Emission Vehicle" ... is an attempt to divorce the end-user from having to think about where the resources came from in order to make the thing go, particularly because transportation is so incredibly energy intensive.

No. A "Zero Emission Vehicle" is simply a term stating that the vehicle does not emit emissions at it's point of use, nothing more.

Divorcing the user from the energy needed to make the thing run coddles those who want the warm fuzzy glow of believing they're not having a negative impact on the Earth by their participation in all of this insanity around us.

Calling them "Electric Cars" is one thing, but "Zero Emission Vehicles"? It's flagrant.

It's not flagrant, it's English. There is nothing about divorcing the user from anything wrt the term ZEV. All it means is that there aren't emissions at the point of use, nothing more, nothing less.

A zero-emissions vehicle, or ZEV is a vehicle itself that produces no emissions or pollution from the vehicle when stationary or operating.

Zero emissions only refers to emissions at the point of use from the vehicle, not anything else. What you're referring to is called a LCA. Learn it, live it, love it, post it!