a3图纸尺寸
home | about spiked | issues | support spiked | get spiked by email
Tuesday 21 July 2009
Who’s afraid of electric vehicles?
Green opposition even to eco-friendly electric cars shows that what environmentalists really dislike is travel itlf.
James Woudhuyn
The latest news on electric vehicles (EVs) looks good.
Toyota has just confirmed that it may build a hybrid variant of its Auris hatchback in Burnaston, Derbyshire - the first such plant for making petrol-electric vehicles in the EU (1). And at a Frankfurt conf
无问西东出自诗经erence of FISITA, the International Federation of Automotive Engineering Societies, which I attended last week, Tsinghua University professor Ouyang Minggao, chief scientist at China’s New Energy Vehicle Programme, came from China’s top science university in Beijing to give a widely acclaimed paper outlining China’s ambitious plans for EVs.
In line with this, America’s most famous investor, Warren Buffett, has taken a $230million, 10 per cent stake in BYD, China’s only integrated batteries-through-to-full-scale-cars manufacturer (2). Meanwhile, even that old jalopy, New Labour, has promid, in Low Carbon Transport: A Greener Future, a document newly issued by the Department for Transport (DfT), to publish the tentative safety, reliability and emissions criteria under which, from 2011, it hopes to allow people to gain
‘help worth in the region of £2,000 to £5,000 per vehicle’ for buying electric and plug-in hybrid cars (3).
Reasons for sobriety
Worldwide, however, Toyota made a lot fewer than half a million hybrids last year, compared with an overall addition to the planet’s fleet of pasnger and commercial vehicles of more than
鬼索
70million. Moreover, EV designs stripped of the last vestiges of fossil fuels have only just begun to hit the road. So there’s a long way to go before hybrids, let alone all-electric vehicles, become the majority purcha of choice; and still longer to wait before they displace hydrocarbon-powered
machines altogether.
As the International Energy Agency’s Lew Fulton also confirmed at the FISITA conference, cond-generation biofuels (and, no doubt, their 3G successors) will also power tomorrow’s highly efficient conventional engines. This may turn out to be critical for lorries, ships and aircraft, and, in my view, will certainly delay a pure, all-electric future for light vehicles – perhaps, forever.
Yet despite all the technical obstacles in the way of EVs, distaste for the autonomy contained in quiet, clean, all-electric forms of personal transport is growing fast. The technology is barely out of the lab, yet one newspaper editorial is already worrying about the environmental costs of simply manufacturing electric cars, and concludes, in sweeping style: ‘Over the past century, the car has gone from rare luxury to commonplace utility. Over this century, it will need to rever that journey.’ (4)
Perhaps, magically, the electric bus and trains which the newspaper prefers to electric cars will not
themlves need to be manufactured, and so will impo no environmental costs. Perhaps, magically once more, the forms of public transport will move individuals and families from door to door, and so will really prove an alternative to private transport. But in the real world, owning one’s own conventional or part-electric or all-electric car is what billions of people around the world would like to do. People are more interested in a highly mobile future than a low-carbon one.奇异博士英文
This essay is about the technical and political prospects for EVs. It is worth reviewing the prospects in a sober manner becau, both before and after COP15, the United Nations climate change conference to be held in Copenhagen between 7 and 18 December, we can expect hysteria about the impending motorisation of China and India to intensify.
It is true that CO2 emissions from global transport as a whole (including maritime and air travel) are by no means a match for emissions from the energy ctor in absolute terms. But transport emissions are growing faster than emissions in all other ctors. They are coming under the spotlight more and more.
As a result, China and India, always targeted by Western environmentalists for their allegedly abject CO2 performance in the matter of coal-fired power plants, now stand in the firing line on cars, too. Ju
st this last week, for instance, two top American policymakers - energy cretary Steven Chu, and the Brookings Institution’s Strobe Talbot - have suddenly discovered that China and India must do what the West says about climate… to avoid being overwhelmed, like few other countries, by rising
a levels (5).
China has for some time had plans to add, by 2020, a million kilometres of new roads to the
3.5million it has today (6). Now, too, India’s Tata has just delivered its first production-line Nano car - which will cost just $2,531 (7). So leave aside the fact that, in what Fortune magazine calls ‘the great electric car race’, Asian manufacturers are leaving US rivals ‘in the dust’ (8). The discussion on electric cars is one that reveals not just the potential for wonderful innovations in transport, but also the strength of Western hostility to mobility, and especially hostility to the mobility of people ‘over there’.
The discussion also reveals that, for all their obssive attitudes towards CO2 emissions, environmentalists would rather have no transport than plenty of the zero-carbon sort. Your personal lifestyle, not the planet, is what really bothers our green friends.
Some basics
The first thing to reali about EVs is that the Toyota Prius, which is on the market now, is primarily a petrol-driven affair. The 2010 Prius, the subject of 1,000 patents and already on sale in Japan and the Philippines, us nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries to get more bang for the hydrocarbon buck - capturing energy from the process of braking (‘regenerative braking’), shutting down the engine when it is idling or going very slowly (‘start-stop system’), running the internal combustion engine at its optimum rate. This third-generation Prius runs, roughly, at a very creditable 70mpg, and cranks up to 60mph in fewer than 10 conds. However, it can only run purely on its battery at speeds of about 30mph or so, and for short journeys.
Right away, then, today’s hybrids are more about higher efficiency with existing fossil fuels than they are about motion derived from battery power. With plug-in hybrids, in which batteries will be recharged from electricity sockets in US garages or, in the tighter ca of European housing, perhaps from redesigned lamp-posts, the balance shifts a fair bit more to independent, battery-powered motion. In the ca of China’s BYD, the company - which relies, it should be said, more on labour-intensive methods than on automation - already lls a plug-in which can run for 62 miles on its battery before its conventional engine, ud as back-up, is required (9). This puts BYD ahead of Toyota, which plans commercial production of plug-ins only for 2012.
In fact, BYD intends to field all-electric cars later this year. Its e6 vehicle can receive, it claims, half of its battery charge in just 10 minutes, which makes it good for 125 miles (the other half takes
perhaps another hour, but adds another 124 miles). Top speed is 100mph; 0-60mph is achieved within eight conds (10).
That China’s BYD appears, technically, to have overtaken Japan’s Toyota, says a great deal. Moreover GM’s Chevrolet Volt, bad on a 40-mile lithium-ion battery and due for launch in November 2010, will require two more technological generations for volumes to ramp up enough for prices to come down and profits to be made (11). So as with nuclear power, carbon capture, wind turbines and solar power, China looks t to lead much of the rest of the world in EVs. What’s wrong with that? Quite a lot, according to the green philosophy.
Bad arguments against EVs
At the FISITA conference, Professor Ouyang Minggao outlined how China’s government plans a differentiated approach to the development of EVs.
转炉
施东红For long-distance journeys in dans, it favours the conventional internal combustion engine, hybrids,
and plug-in hybrids. For public bus, which are ubiquitous in China, it wants battery-assisted machines that u liquid petroleum gas, not petrol. Finally, drawing upon China’s success with electric bikes, it will look toward all-electric small cars for personal transportation. The machines will have in-wheel motors, will be charged with houhold power, and will run up to 50mph. Particularly impressive was Minggao’s modular approach to each major automotive component involved in the shift to a more electric future. In China, the chance to make economies of scale in EV production is out there, and modularisation can only help that process.
The considerations, however, would not be enough to satisfy environmentalist critics in the West. As Minggao pointed out, the Chine government hopes, by 2020, to bring coal-fired electricity generation down from 78 to 65 per cent of its total electric power. In other words, the batteries in China’s EVs will draw most of their juice from CO2-belching power stations for well over a decade.
For Western governments and greens alike, that would make China’s effort in EVs a non-starter. Yet this objection fails to grasp a point eloquently made at the FISITA conference by Dr Lee Schipper, of Stanford University’s Prescourt Institute of Energy Efficiency: that if you aim simply to cut CO2 emissions, you don’t get nearly as good results as if you aim for good transport.
EVs derve support regardless of the emissions they bring in their wake. Though they will take a very long time to develop fully, they reprent technological progress in their own right - regardless of whether they lower CO2. Given that 80 per cent of journeys in the EU and US involve fewer than
40 miles, EVs are the technology of the future for door-to-door trips. IT-assisted bus scheduling will never give the instant availability that personal transport gives. Particularly in rainy Britain, children, families, commuters and tomorrow’s ageing population cannot be expected to take on multi-mile journeys by bike, even if the bikes ud are electric. EVs, like conventional cars, give personal independence, time flexibility, and geographical freedom. Problems of congestion, and attendant air quality, are real enough; but only a very poor scientist would attribute the to the metal and fuel that goes into cars, rather than to poor planning by human beings. Indeed, EVs will make a uful contribution to improving day-to-day air quality in cities.
The real message: don’t drive around!
dns欺骗In this context, the DfT’s fanfare for a low-carbon Britain can only be interpreted as a general injunction not to travel, and as a general suspicion, too, of EVs. The DfT’s Low Carbon Transport report argues that ‘technology and cleaner fuels alone will not be the answer to the CO2 challenges i
n transport - when, where and how we travel will all need to evolve’ (12). How delicately put! What it means is that you should travel less, and in the manner that The Authorities decide - all in the cau of Britain saving the planet, you understand.
Early on in the DfT report, the usual patriotic arrogance is followed by a truly pathetic commitment to EVs: ‘We are committed to making the UK a world leader in rearch, development, demonstration and commercialisation of ultra-low carbon vehicle technology. For example, over the next 18 months around 340 new-tech vehicles will be demonstrated on the UK’s roads through the Technology Strategy Board’s ultra-low carbon vehicle competition.’ (13)
No fewer than 340 new-tech vehicles! Why so puny a total? Becau throughout the 117-page document, EVs get 22 mentions - and ‘eco-driving’ 22 mentions, too. Indeed eco-driving is being integrated into Britain’s new driving test, and the esteemed Energy Saving Trust will ‘promote eco-driving techniques to existing drivers’. You should pump up your tyres, have less clutter in your car, drive at an appropriate speed, and stop and start less as well (14).
Not content with telling us what to eat, and planning to meter our energy u in the home, New Labour wants to control our every move - literally:
男生面相‘Government also has an important role to play. At a national level we ek to influence transport choices… Local authorities and regions have considerable influence over the way we travel, through direct delivery of transport rvices as well as through their decisions on strategic planning, or on the
