to think that electric cars, electric radiators, hydrogen fuel cell cars are not zero emission?

[chomalungma]

First things first - I am totally for reducing a carbon footprint. I do things myself that are bad for the environment. Even starting this thread is using some energy that doesn't need to be used. I also think that electric cars, hydrogen power etc are a really good idea.

BUT

I was looking last night at getting electric radiators in the house. Inspired by the Government Green Grant. Even though this doesn't cover them.

There was a bit about a good reason to replace the traditional hot water radiators with electric radiators is that they have zero emissions of CO2 and so are 'infinitely' better for the environment.

Well - yes, in the house, there would be zero emissions. You aren't burning gas. And they are much more efficient than other radiators. But the electricity still has to be generated and we still have a lot of our electricity generated by gas turbines. We are getting better though

gridwatch.co.uk/

The same applies to electric vehicles - with the added issue that the energy costs in producing them - especially in mining the metals used for the batteries is high. And takes place in countries where they haven't got as much renewable energy sources.

Hydrogen - it's the future. Boris was in Teesside talking about the hydrogen economy. Hydrogen fuel cells. Great. Non polluting in cars - and that's a great thing for the local environment.

But you need to get hydrogen.

Most hydrogen is made by reacting methane with steam. This makes hydrogen and also leads to making CO2.

You can also make hydrogen by electrolysis of water. Which needs energy from electricity.

It's all so complicated. It's such a great idea to reduce pollution in cities. So important.

But at the moment, it seems that the CO2 is being made elsewhere - unless we move to more renewables to produce electricity (and even moving to more renewables has energy costs in that)

Really, we want to be finding ways to reduce our energy use, make things more energy efficient, reuse things that have cost energy to make.

And to be aware of all the energy costs and the ultimate life cycle in energy costs, CO2 production of everything we do.

I wonder how much energy this thread used?

I've read that the CO2 emissions of building a car are approximately equivalent to driving it 100,000 miles. Which means we shouldn't be swapping our car with 40,000 miles on it for an electric one any time soon.

My friend and her dh both have hybrid cars. They spend about £50 per year on petrol, and plug the cars in to charge on sunny days, where they charge up on their solar panels. Their solar panels have paid for themselves in the 5 years since they got them, through payments from the electricity company for the extra, savings on fuel bills and petrol. I am aware that the solar panels and cars took energy to build, as are they, but they are really trying.

When my car finally gives up (It's a 63 reg so it's still got quite a few years left I think) I'll be getting an electric/hybrid car. We're also going to get solar panels when we get the roof done, which will be in the next 2/3 years. We don't go on holidays or buy a lot of stuff either, as we're tight careful with money and also conscious of the effect on the environment. I haven't been on a holiday further than a 4 hour drive from our house in 15 years, and I'm not planning on it any time soon, due mostly to environmental reasons (and also because dh is an absolutely terrible traveler)

All those server farms need a lot of energy......

Yup. All server rooms are constantly kept cold to prevent the servers from over heating. It's horrible being in them, need a couple of layers on to stop yourself from shaking. They try to make them as green as possible, but they aren't great. Well some companies try.

YANBU and I bet half the people buying a new electric or hybrid car "for the environment" aren't averse to jetting off on long haul holidays and changing the kitchen and bathroom in their house just to fit in with fashions

What an idiotic thing to say. Firstly most people who care about the envionment don't do those things - you're just talking rubbish. Secondly if a few people are hypocrites that doesn't stop electric cars being better for the enviornment. I'd much rather someone did 1 good thing for the environment while failing to do another than did nothing at all.

I have NEVER seen it said that an EV ha son impact at all.

I never said they had outright claimed that - just that that's the clear impression I think they want you to assume when you watch the adverts.

Just look at the latest smart meter adverts: there's nothing about keeping people in the know about their energy use so as to supposedly make an informed choice about whether they want to sit in the cold or have a salad instead of using the same amount of power - it's all about 'by having one of these under your stairs, you're helping to save the planet'.

....and the colossal amount of raw materials and energy used in manufacturing and transporting the smart meters to everybody's homes, in order to rip out and discard perfectly functional existing meters, is NEVER ever mentioned in any of the publicity in favour of them.

It's assumed to be of no consequence at all, like when young children assume to make 100% profit by selling biscuits without a moment's understanding of what the ingredients and oven use cost their parents. Nobody expects kids to think about this; top government advisers should know a little better.

Of course they're not. They just move the problem somehere else. Helpful in a densely populated city where the emissions need preading about a bit but the overall impat isn't really reduced. If anything, i should imagine it's increased by another layer of inefficiency.

@PickAChew Total rubbish. This is why it's pointless having a conversation about it when people not only have no idea about the relative energy levels or efficiency involved but rather than finding out just make random assumptions in total ignorance.

@chomalungma

My flat hasn't got double glazing.

I could get double glazing...and it would save me money on my heating bills.

But it would take a long time to recoup the cost of that glazing - even though it would add value to my flat.

And how much energy has gone into making the double glazing in the first place vs the energy I am wasting through not having it?

(I may be over thinking this)

But is your flat actually warm?

Our house is double glazed and centrally heated but we're reaching for the blankets on a chilly day. It's far from energy efficient. It also has a damp wall that we can't fathom the fix for. That room is 3c colder than the rest of the house.

What about the materials required to make those solar panels? Clue: it's not fairy dust.

[quote BackBeatTheWordisOnTheStreet]@PickAChew Total rubbish. This is why it's pointless having a conversation about it when people not only have no idea about the relative energy levels or efficiency involved but rather than finding out just make random assumptions in total ignorance.[/quote]
Please explain those assumptions and that ignorance to me. You obviously think I need educating.

Whatever the facts and statistics, I think there's also an element of privilege in some people's assumptions of what is possible for everybody, to 'do their bit'. If you live in a middle-floor flat, as a great many people do, where exactly are you able to site solar panels?

There was an element of ignoring flat-dwellers during lockdown, when wealthy people living in expensive houses with big gardens made rules which just seemed to assume that everybody would 'make do' with their gardens for letting their children play outside, their pets get exercise and everybody get some proper fresh air. I don't think it even crossed their mind that millions of people live in flats, many of which were specifically designed without gardens on the proviso that 'well, we put a lovely big public park right outside, so you just don't need one'.

Also, it's just great if you have your own drive to park on and hook up to a purpose-installed socket on your property; but what about those without the luxury of a drive? Yes, I know there are plans afoot (who knows when exactly?) for pavement-level charging points; but considering the difficulty that many already have actually finding a space, how can we guarantee that there will be an available charging point in a suitable place for every single car that needs one? However carefully the council measures out a road and identifies that there are XX amount of spaces, we all know that people park carelessly/selfishly and will often leave 80% of a car length between every two cars. And that's not even considering the vandals (or those seeking 'protection money') who will find it hilarious/lucrative to sever the connection leads with insulated bolt cutters, so you never know when you'll go to leave for work in the morning and find your car completely dead.

It was the 'hydrogen' one that got me - a great fuel, zero pollutants in a crowded city - but currently needs a lot of energy to make it - or it's mainly made from methane and makes CO2.

On the up side, methane is a much much much worse greenhouse gas that CO2 so that's a net benefit for that particular pathway.

than CO2.

When do we get editing again, MN?

If they really wanted to reduce emissions they would be looking at different town and city planning ideas, so many people could walk to work, shops, and so on. Similarly with energy use in buildings like heating and cooling - why use a more energy efficient air conditioner when you can instead build the place differently and have a cool house without one at all?

Sorry haven't read the whole tread...
... an other environmental disaster in waiting are the batteries once they are finished.

@DynamoKev

YANBU and I bet half the people buying a new electric or hybrid car "for the environment" aren't averse to jetting off on long haul holidays and changing the kitchen and bathroom in their house just to fit in with fashions.

Of course the risk of hypocrisy doesn't mean we should do nothing, but you are right OP, at least until we manage to get to 100% renewables, the emissions are just be shifted. As you say, even then, there is an overhead with the manufacture and upkeep of wind turbines, solar panels etc.

The emissions are much less for electric cars. I had to get a plug in as the wait was so long for a fully electric, but I try to run it solely electric as I generally travel only short distances. I wish I'd been able to get a fully electric, it has been fantastic and I get frustrated on the rare occasions when it has to use petrol (the electric version of the same car has a range of 150+ miles, but my plug-in has just 33). It's way more convenient and way cheaper than running a petrol car. DH thinks I've only put fuel in twice since February. The stuff I was reading before we got it was that the electricity costs were about 1/4 to 1/2 those of petrol.

As for far flung travel, I have not flown for years 2014, I think).

The point isn't about how zero emissions something is right now, it's about where things are moving.

We chose a fully renewable tariff from one of the few providers that genuinely do fully renewable (Good Energy). The others are Ecotricity and ... one other whose name I forget, sorry. Yes, it all comes from the grid, but the more renewable is demanded, the more the producers have to shift to renewable. Electricity from entirely renewable sources is not only possible, we're moving ever closer to it as the amount of coal-free days shows. www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-renewables-generate-more-electricity-than-fossil-fuels-for-first-time/amp

I'm looking into how to get off LPG for our heating. We couldn't get solars as we have the wrong kind of roof. I had a company assess us for a retrofitted above-ground heat exchange system - they never even bothered coming back with a quote. I keep looking up for new ideas and am going to follow up the electric boiler thing. I'd thought that was too expensive still, but the prices will come down.

The more we invest, the more the technology will improve and the more mainstream the infrastructure will become. Unfortunately, governments haven't really done much and it's been left to individuals to muddle through so the pace of change has not been fast enough. That said, we're actually producing a lot less (40%ish??) emissions from electricity than we were in the 1990s simply because of energy saving regulations.

That said, we're actually producing a lot less (40%ish??) emissions from electricity than we were in the 1990s simply because of energy saving regulations

That's really important.

Yet some people don't (deliberately) understand the importance of energy saving regulations and won't be dictated to about how powerful a vacuum cleaner or hairdryer should be.

Secondly if a few people are hypocrites that doesn't stop electric cars being better for the environment

They are better for the local environment. Certainly.

Are they better overall for the environment?

I am not sure - as this thread has discussed, there is a lot of things to consider when answering that question.

It's certainly a good thing that the technology is being produced and we are moving that way - but there are a lot of factors in answering that question.

I have a 6 year old diesel car with Euro 6 rating. It's done 80,000 miles. There are benefits to the local environment if I replace it and get a new electric car. (but that's hard to charge from a flat). And someone should buy my car (1 reasonably careful owner). But is it better overall for me to keep running it or is it better for me to sell it and buy a new electric car? Or are there other alternatives I should think about such as using good local transport to get to work?

I think that all environmental measures should be measured by the lifetime energy cycle cost, not the end user environmental cost.

Making an electric car and its battery are expensive environmentally, and the electricity still needs to be made elsewhere.

DH is involved with the development of the next generation of batteries for cars (so they have a longer life). He says they are an environmental disaster, he wouldn’t have an electric car if you paid him. The chemicals used to make the batteries and then the disposable of those chemicals is just another mess waiting to happen. Likely though that process will happen in another country though, so you can all have nice clean air.

There is a huge human cost in the mining of the materials for all of these batteries including those in our phones. Child soldiers, child rape are used to gain control of mines.

So yes we sit here and benefit from lower emissions but before we get a bit smug with ourselves, know that someone is paying.

So yes we sit here and benefit from lower emissions but before we get a bit smug with ourselves, know that someone is paying.

The problem with this argument is the same is true of traditional vehicle manufacture and use, the carbon fuels necessary etc. It needs comparing as a whole life cycle both environmentally and ethically.

Apparently, there was a chap called Stan Meyer who patented a method of running cars from water - presumably by separating and harnessing the hydrogen. He died suddenly and mysteriously, so nothing further happened with it.

It would be interesting to see the details of his patent (well, for somebody who would understand all of the technical details; I wouldn't have a clue) and to work out if he was on to something massive, had a few good ideas that could be tested and possily developed or was just a completely deluded crackpot.

@PapsofJura

There is a huge human cost in the mining of the materials for all of these batteries including those in our phones. Child soldiers, child rape are used to gain control of mines.

So yes we sit here and benefit from lower emissions but before we get a bit smug with ourselves, know that someone is paying.

Sadly oil producing countries do not have stellar records when it comes to human rights either.

We must by all means improve the production of more sustainable alternatives, but we should not be blind to the continuing damage from existing technologies.