The present reality of electric cars
A year or two ago, it was hydrogen-powered cars which were capturing the headlines. Demonstration projects had been set up, and car manufacturers had made available a handful of vehicles which used hydrogen to feed either conventional internal combustion engines or fuel cells. However, these are the very early stages of a nascent technology, and many people have pointed out the major hurdles which have to be overcome before this could be the future for transport.
In particular, a complete supply, storage and distribution system would have to be set up. Hydrogen would have to be stored under high pressure and at low temperatures, and it escapes from tanks over a period of time. We also have to recognise that hydrogen is not a primary source of energy, but a way of delivering that energy to road vehicles. If the power used to produce hydrogen comes from coal- or gas-fired generators, there is no reduction in carbon intensity, but rather a less efficient use of the energy.
More recently, electric cars have taken front stage. The UK government will soon be offering grants of up to £5,000 to offset the cost of buying an electric car, and the mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has announced plans to make the city the electric car capital of Europe by introducing 100,000 electric vehicles and providing 25,000 charging points. As a further incentive, electric cars will continue to be exempt from the £8 per day London congestion charge. But is this enthusiasm really justified, or is it just an example of politicians wanting to be seen to be doing something supposedly good for the environment?
First, it is undoubtedly now possible to make useful electric vehicles in some quantity and at a reasonable price (compared with hydrogen-powered alternatives, but still costing considerably more than conventionally-powered cars). If there is access to an electricity supply, charging is also not a problem. These are clearly two big advantages over the alternative of hydrogen-fuelled cars. However, battery-powered cars continue to have two big drawbacks: their range is severely limited, and recharging takes several hours. These make the present generation practical in cities, but unsuitable for longer journeys.
Which really seems to go against the general trend of transport policy. We are encouraged to use public transport, and towns and cities are where buses, trams and metro systems can provide an efficient way of getting around. It is the impossibility of providing a worthwhile system of public transport for the majority of journeys in rural areas and between towns which means that car usage is so high. On the other hand, and despite the availability of public transport, urban journeys by car can be notoriously slow because the roads are crowded, hence the interest in congestion charging.
But electric cars have the same potential to create congestion as conventional ones. In fact, as their use increases, so does the likelihood of discharged vehicles blocking the road and causing much greater delays. They do nothing to reduce the number of long-distance trips fuelled by petrol or diesel. And yet here is a policy which will encourage greater traffic density in cities while making little impact on overall use of oil. Some people may replace conventional cars for electric ones, but in many cases they will be an additional family vehicle for households which will continue to use the internal combustion engine for much of their travel.
The current supposed environmental benefits must also be questioned. As green groups have quite rightly pointed out, carbon intensity is not reduced unless the electricity to charge the batteries is generated from a non-fossil fuel source. For the next decade at least, electric cars will make not a scrap of difference to emissions. And as penetration increases, additional generating capacity will be needed. This will inevitably have to be nuclear to give a low-carbon base load. Wind or solar power will not help because they will need the equivalent in conventional generating capacity available for when they cannot deliver.
The conclusion is that government encouragement of electric car purchase (using taxpayers' money) can be little more than a gesture at this time. It could be argued that such nurturing of a new transport motive system is needed to encourage innovation and build up the economies of scale necessary to bring electric cars into the mainstream. Maybe, but until battery technology improves to the stage where range and recharging time are no longer big negatives, electric cars can never be more than a niche in the market.
We should also note that charging cars is at present very cheap compared to buying petrol or diesel. If batteries become the norm, governments are hardly likely to absorb the loss of fuel duty: the cost of electric motoring would certainly go up to make sure government tax revenues did not fall.
Germany takes a backward step on GM crops
As global plantings of genetically modified crops continue to show strong growth on a global basis, political interests continue to prevent their widespread adoption in the EU. A hard core of countries have maintained an implacable and irrational opposition to cultivation in Europe. Austria, Hungary, Luxembourg, Greece and, from last year, France, had banned planting of the single approved GM crop, insect-resistant maize. In a deeply disappointing move, they have now been joined by Germany.
Agence France Presse, in a story reporting that the European Commission will now "reflect" on the illegal ban, adds "An anonymous source close to the European Commission told Agence France Presse that the German ban might bring a revision to the EU's legislation on GM crops. Public opinion throughout Europe is against GM cultivation, according the source. 'The spirit has changed, [but] the [EU] legislation in a way is operating like an automatic pilot and we have to put some direction in it,' the source said."
If this source is authoritative, it underscores the deep problem of environmental policy having been captured by the green movement. There is no evidence that European public opinion is overall against GM. Indeed, after the furore of the late '90s, this is no longer an issue for most ordinary consumers, and media coverage has become a lot more factual and balanced. At a time when the best available agricultural technology is needed to increase harvests, it is disturbing that so many European politicians seem intent on making Europe a backward-looking, innovation-unfriendly island, to the disadvantage of the bloc's farmers and consumers.
Clarification: Contraction and Convergence™
Last week's newsletter referred to "Contraction and Convergence" as a policy option for the equitable sharing of resources. We should make clear that Contraction and Convergence™ is the science-based, global climate policy framework proposed to the UN since 1990 by the Global Commons Institute (GCI), and is trademarked. C&C is essentially a logical proposition, not intended as egalitarian in nature. For more information, see www.gci.org.uk/briefings/ICE.pdf.
The Scientific Alliance
St John's Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: +44 1223 421242
Please pass this newsletter on to your own networks and encourage other people to subscribe. Simply send us an email request, and your name will be added to the list.
- The present reality of electric cars