Pete Kerby-Miller AP Lang 5/2/12 Electrical Environmentalism: Hampered, Inflated and Misunderstood

Human nature has always inclined individuals to pursue what society deems as just. Just as 13th Century monarchs dedicated their lives and countries to crusades, ordinary citizens volunteered to put their lives at risk to fight in our American Revolution. These sacrifices were always centered on character - the notion of chivalry and reputable morals even when unnoticed- not perception. Today, this intrinsic value has been translated into participation in the green movement. Now, our supposed knights in shining armor are not mounted upon sleek equine steeds - they are quietly whirring down the road in their malinformed defense of the environment. Driving their electric cars may reflect positively on their moral character, but this respect is absolutely superficial. In truth, while electric cars do have the potential to reduce environmental impact, their implementation today only further mires an outdated system into unforgivable reliance on hopelessly unsustainable practices.

This truth is intentionally muddled by manufacturers of electric vehicles (EVs). Every major company has some kind of EV in development, primarily to advocate the companies environmentally responsible reputation. They do so through absolutely fallacious claims of zero emission electric cars, claims that nonetheless popularize EVs with masses of well meaning, yet irresponsibly inattentive green consumers. The notion of green EVs is so easy to conform to because the casual observer will see no emission. An electric car seems to simply whir past driven efficiently and absolutely free of the emissions related to

Pete Kerby-Miller AP Lang 5/2/12 burning fossil fuels. However, the energy- in the form of electricity- that operates said vehicles must be produced somewhere. Every time our assumed knights of environmentalism plug in to charge their vehicles they are connecting to the national energy grid. While these vehicles show no visible emissions, because of the nature of how our energy grid is powered-deriving, as it does, 70% of its power from fossil fuels ( Enderton1)- they do not really negate harmful emissions, they merely offset it to a convenient, more easily ignorable location. To maintain an ethical selling point through their supposed green endeavors, manufacturers obscure the fact as much as possible, but the truth is electric cars are only as environmentally friendly as the overlooked electrical plants that power them. Plants that under our current infrastructure, present the inconvenient truth that each electric vehicle is indeed still run primarily by fossil fuels.

Beyond the environmental impacts of the means of current electrical production, popular electric vehicles face further hurdles with regards to capacityhow much electricity can even be produced. The current grid could support a popular fleet of EVs (Anderson 4), but only barely. Each electric car charging draws as much electricity as the air conditioners notorious for causing rolling blackouts on hot summer days. Even with charging at low demand hours of the night, an electric vehicle fleet would regularly push the grid to its capacity limitwhich negates EVs offset of fossil fuel consumption as fossil fuels provide 70% of Americas electrical capacity while increasing capacity at a rate 16 times as much as all other energy combined (Enderton 1). Even now, without the strain of an EV fleet, our grid struggles to provide power in the summer and our few

Pete Kerby-Miller AP Lang 5/2/12 electrical cars operate with a miserable 20% emission reduction compared to gasoline and diesel alternatives- hardly impressive seeing as their internal combustion competition converts only 5% of energy into useful forward motion.

Even while electric vehicles are energized by fossil fuels, they are perceived as environmentally friendly because of many Americans lazy out of sight, out of mind mentality. This attitude is knowingly played by manufactures not only with their fallacious appeals to ethics, citing virtually zero emission, but to logic when they argue EVs low operational cost. When gasoline regularly tips over four dollars per gallon, this appeal is especially effective. As before, this argument seems perfectly sound to casual consumers. Cracks are only closely revealed upon close analytical thought that advertisers know is so rare. EVs are not just run off fossil fuels, they are run off coal. Coal- the most polluting of any fossil fuel, emitting in addition to carbon, sulfides, particulates, and even mercury (Miller 368)-produces 50% of US power. Electric cars are so cheap to run because they run on not only the crudest and dirtiest form of energy, but also the most subsidized (Energy Subsidies 1). The predominant source of electricity for these cars- and the predominant source for ecological havoc causing acid rain is still a system established in the 1700s and, although a mature and stable industry, enjoying billions in tax cuts and subsidies. Our government supports the worst of all energy production methods with OUR taxpayer dollars, indirectly marketing EVs through reduced electrical cost which only further supports our archaic and irresponsible coal gluttony.

Pete Kerby-Miller AP Lang 5/2/12 Government provisions for cheap coal not only pollute indirectly by providing economic advantage to illogical electrical vehicles, but Uncle Sams misguided and misguiding subsidies are also what have so limited EVs development. Only $68 billion in subsidies can hide what would otherwise be fuel prices breaching $11 a gallon (Miller 368) effectively eliminating the primary cause for innovation-marketability. To put the effects of this painfully swollen government handout in perspective, a 1908 Model T Ford had a fuel economy of 25 miles per gallon, while fuel efficiency of new car in 2006 was 6% lower than that of one in 1998 (Miller 365). Government subsidization for cheap fuel has inhibited the development of fuel efficient or electrical vehicles because there has simply been no economic need for such sustainable design. It was only in the fuel embargo crisis of the 1970s that companies first even thought to make a more efficient product. Oil subsidies are doubly harmful because they not only allowed for this engineering embarrassment, but also in doing so destroyed the development of environmentally sustainable electric cars- of which we have only in 2009 surpassed the number registered in 1908 (Kallenos 1). It has taken a century to even remotely repopularize a technology that with the careful research and development that would be funded to fill an economic need, could offer realistic and responsible solutions to sustainable transportation.

Electric vehicles represent a promising idea, a move towards taking responsibility for the health of our planet and living in a sustainable manner.

Pete Kerby-Miller AP Lang 5/2/12 Unfortunately, the ugly facets of human nature have severely limited the EVs effectiveness. Greed has driven manufactures to sell vehicles fueled in ways that not only will meet an ultimate end, but will continue to harm our planet as fossil fuel reserves dribble to nothing. Ignorance has allowed the populous to be swayed by fallacious claims and beguiled into unwarranted faith for flawed product, flawed infrastructure. Negligence has caused a powerful government to be complacent-continually funding a poisonous industry despite its environmental consequences and sound financial security. Electric cars may provide an environmentally sound transportation alternative in the future, but first society must self educate and demand change in both basic policy and corporate values. The world cannot afford for its people to be so ensnared by shallow misdirection. Look not to owner of electric cars as our chivalric environmental heroes, but to the political implementing change, to the engineer devoted beyond all expectations to bettering efficiency, to every environmental activist inspired purely out of concern for this fragile and communal home we so tenderly call Earth.

Pete Kerby-Miller AP Lang 5/2/12 Works Cited Andersen, Glen. Going Electric: state policies have an enormous effect of the popularity of plug-in vehicles. State Legislatures. 37.5 (2011): 22+. Academic OneFile. Web. 23 Apr. 2012 Enderton, Daniel. U.S. Electricity Fact Sheet. MIT Energy. MIT Energy Club, Oct. 2006. Web. 30 Apr. 2012. www.mitenergyclub.org/assets/2008/11 /15/ElectricityUS.pdf>. Energy Subsidies Favor Fossil Fuels Over Renewables. Environmental Law Institute. 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2012. http://www.eli.org/Program_Areas/ innocation_governance_energy.cfm>. Kallenos, Michael. Trivia Question: How Many electric Cars Are There in the U.S.? Greentech Media. Vector Meadia Group. 3 Apr. 2009. Web. 1 May 2012. http://www.greentechmedia.com/green-light/post/trivia-questionhow-many-electric-cars-are-there-in-the-US-1323/. Miller, G. Tyler, Jr. Living in the Environment. Ed. Scott Spoolman. 15th ed. N.P.: Jack Cary, 2007. Print.