
In recent years, words like climate change, global warming and poor air quality have been talked about frequently and the effects of these things can be observed in the air and through research. As a result the world is searching for a way to stop this climate change at the source and that source seems to be air pollution, clinging for Eco friendly ideas, the thought of Electric cars may at first seem like the best idea to counteract these negative results from air pollution but in reality all these cars bring are different problems that are mostly hidden from sight. Through a little critical thinking one may be able to come to the conclusion that the electricity that runs these cars must come from somewhere, this source is only one of the many major problems surrounding the environmental efficiency of electric cars. Another question that seldom comes to mind is how the components for these cars are being made, and are there any cons environmentally when it comes to these components? Furthermore, both the cost in dollars from the amount of deaths associated with the emissions from these cars and the costs of production seem to be overlooked by most because of the need and the want for these cars to be the answer. In sum, the use of electric cars is simply not the answer for the environment in the United States today because of the many faults in its claim to eco-friendliness such as, the unclean power grid used to power these cars, the toxic components, and the amount of deaths surrounding the emissions from both, instead of clinging to these cars as the answer people should start seeing them for what they really are. This paper will explain in depth the different problems previously stated with these electric cars in an attempt to sway the audience to put an end to their belief in the electric car as the answer to the air pollution crisis, and to start thinking of other, more efficient ways to help the environment on a large scale.

The tail pipe emissions' from the burning of fossil fuels are one of the main concerns when it comes to conventional gas powered cars and are one of the main reasons why some believe a change in the standard  mode of transportation, gas powered vehicles, needs to be made. Electric cars are very deceptive in regards to this topic as stated by Chris Tessum, a researcher from the University of Minnesota when he says 

"The electric cars don't actually have emissions that come out of there tail pipe, because they don't have tailpipes. What happens is when you generate electricity there's a lot of emissions that come from power plants and from mining the feed stocks for the electricity" (Fox Business).

In order to elaborate further on the subject of electricity made by power plants, "about 38% of that electricity comes from coal" (Hall) says Jason Hall, a writer for investors on the Motley Fool. Though this percentage may seem low there is more to it than meets the eye. The hidden truth is that "electric vehicles tend to export air pollution to other states more than gasoline vehicles" (Russel) stated by Jason Russel, a regular for the Washington examiner. What this means is that even in states where the power grid is cleaner, the pollution given off by the power plants in the surrounding states effects that state in almost the same way it does in its origin state. These three claims tie back into the main claim by explaining the environmental incompatibility between electric cars and the power grid. In order to give some background information in regards to the percentage of renewables used in the energy grid, Bjorn Lomborg of USA states that "Today, the U.S. gets 14% of its electric power from renewables. In 25 years, Obama's Energy Information Administration estimates this will have gone up just 3 percentage points to 17%. Similarly, fossil fuels generate 65% of U.S. electricity today, and will generate 64% in 2040"(Lomborg) this means that the road to cleaner energy is a very long one and will not be completed for decades to come. This revelation supports my thesis in showing that the implementation of electric vehicles in today's world doesn't make sense. Although there are many cons when it comes to electric cars and the U.S.s power grid, there is a solution to this pollution epidemic. Basem wasef of popularmechanics.com shares some Intel from a study conducted by the Norwegian university of science and technology by stating that,

the findings suggests that EVs driven in Europe have an environmental advantage over other global communities because Electric vehicles powered by the present European electricity mix offer a 10 percent to 24 percent decrease in their global warming potential relative to conventional diesel or petrol vehicles,"(Wasef). 

What this is essentially saying is that across Europe is environmentally superior when it comes to power plants because of the increased amount of renewables used in the power grid which in turn leads to a more efficient electric car. This supports my thesis by implying that the United States' power grid is inferior in regards to the environmental efficiency of electric cars because of the unclean power grid. 

In addition to the impact of energy production there is another group of points that beg to be discussed which are the environmental impacts that are a result of the construction of the electric cars and also the substantial effects certain components of the cars through their life cycles have on the environment. On the subject of construction Ozzie Zehner, a writer for the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, says in an interview with James Conca from Forbes that "If we're going to build hundreds of millions of electric vehicles, toxic compounds will become an issue"(Conca). This means that replacing conventional vehicles with electric cars would just be replacing a negative with an even bigger negative. In regards to to toxic components used in some of the components such as the battery, Zehner states 

"Unusual metals are needed for awesome batteries, not to mention that the solvents and process chemicals required for their manufacturing release greenhouse gases like sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). SF6 is over 20,000 times as effective in global warming potential as CO2. SF6 gas also decomposes to form some pretty nasty things like sulfur/metal-fluoride gases, sulfur-oxyfluorides and hydrofluoric and sulfuric acids."(Conca) 

The entirety of this quote is necessary because each part of the quote pertains to my essay and without certain parts the quote would lose some of its importance. As bad as conventional cars may seem to be in regards to CO2 emissions, Electric vehicle batteries emitting sulfur hexafluoride which is exponentially worse than CO2 on a global warming potential scale most certainly has a much worst impact on the environment.

One of the last topics to be discussed has a significant impact on everyday families of the United States which is, the impact electric cars have on death tolls. Bjorn Lomborg gives insight on what the impact of implementing more All-electric cars into the united states power grid when he says this, "researchers estimate that if the U.S. has 10% more gasoline cars in 2020, 870 more people will die each year in the U.S. from air pollution ... But 10% more electric vehicles powered on the average U.S. electricity mix will kill 1,617 more people every year, mostly from coal pollution." (Lomborg) Therefore, electric cars would kill a little less than twice the amount of people conventional gas powered cars would. Other studies estimate even more deaths caused by poor air quality due to the emissions that result from the use of electric cars. A revelation by CNBC further solidifies the main claim when it talks about energy production for electric cars. The article states that a study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences says that "If it comes from coal, the electric cars produce 3.6 times more soot and smog deaths than gas, because of the pollution made in generating the electricity, They also are significantly worse at heat-trapping carbon dioxide that worsens global warming"(CNBC). This statistic really shows how bad electric cars can be for the environment, and with a large percentage of the United States energy coming from coal the effects could prove to be 

To elaborate more on the subject of tolls, electric cars not only effect death tolls but they also have a large effect on the economy. In order to represent this to the full extent, USA today found another result from an experiment previously discussed which involved a large implementation of electric cars and discusses the total pollution in comparison to the total financial toll. the statement from USA today reads detrimental for the environment. "If we had 25 million extra electric cars rather than gasoline cars on the road in 2020, they would over their lifetime avoid 75 million tons of CO2 at a market value of more than half a billion dollars."(Lomborg) though this number may show lower pollution levels keep in mind that this is only CO2emissions and does not factor in other toxic chemicals given off by Electric cars. Also this is the estimated cost for 2020, not present day. The second part of the statement shows the true downfalls of the situation described if it were to occur in present day. It reads "However, at present-day subsidies, they would cost a phenomenal $188 billion while creating more pollution than gasoline cars, costing about $35 billion in lives cut short by poor air quality. For every dollar of cost, the electric car does less than half a cent of good."(Lomborg). By showing how todays power gird and electric cars don't mix but there is hope for future generations if the grid is made cleaner makes this quote really support my thesis.

Although there are many reasons not to have electric cars replace conventional cars as shown in this essay, there is also an opposing side to the argument that has its own points to be made. One of the major points is explained by the union of concerned scientists which states "In regions with the "cleanest" electricity grids, EVs produce lower global warming emissions than even the most fuel-efficient hybrids" (UCSUCA) which is a mostly true statement besides the fact that "fossil fuels generate 65% of U.S. electricity today, and will generate 64% in 2040" (Lomborg) as stated previously in my essay. In a country with a substantially cleaner grid the point made by the union of concerned scientists would be much more impactful but in a place like the United States with a very substantial amount of electricity being generated from unclean sources, the statistic just simply doesn't have any meaning. Another point made by the Union of Concerned Scientists is concerning the economic benefits of the electric cars for the individual. The quote reads "EV owners can save money on fueling costs without changing electricity plans, but taking advantage of rate plans that offer lower-cost electricity at night ("time-of-use" plans) can mean hundreds of dollars in additional savings per year, especially in California."(UCSUSA) It is true that you'd save money on "fueling" your electric vehicle in places like California where the grid is cleaner in comparison to other states but even with this clean grid the charging time for the batteries on the electric cars is known to be a long process if used through your home but also a toxic one if a quick charge station is used. Through the fast recharging of a battery the toxic emissions previously discussed like sulfur hexafluoride are given off and if an electric car owner were to charge out of their own garage, that pollution definitely hits close to home. Which brings along another point, one assumption about Electric cars is that the emissions from the smokestacks that create the electricity for these cars are away from the more populated areas so the pollution doesn't affect the populace. In order to refute this point a statement by Eric Jaffe of Citylab.com in regards to an experiment performed by a group of economists reads "Take New York City. There, both gas cars and EVs produce harmful emissions: tailpipes hurt the dense local population, but the coal-powered smokestacks in moderately dense parts of Central Pennsylvania do similar damage."(Jaffe) This segment talks about how in highly populated cities, like New York, the same amount of damage will be done to the population by both conventional gas powered cars and electric vehicles. This refutes the opposition by explaining that even if the energy is being produced away from the cities, the pollution is still hurting the environment somewhere and though it might not directly affect the large cities it still has an overall impact on the environment. Lastly one of the major points has to do with the battery and all the "good" it does for the environment. An opinion shared amongst most is stated by Sergio Manzetti and Florin Mariasiu in volume 51 in the book of Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews when they say "The powertrain gives BEV s the possibility to operate with zero emissions in the place of use" (Manzetti, Mariasiu vol. 51) The power train is the term used to describe the power source of an electric vehicle, in other words it's the battery. In some ways this statement true, in regards to tailpipe emissions of CO2 given off directly from the electric car itself, there are none to be found. But, as explained above, there is more to be concerned about than just tailpipe emissions.

 In order to revisit those points Ohio State did a sort of compilation of different studies about 20 years ago in which the main points still hold true to this very day as shown in this essay. The first point being that "Electric vehicles produce little or no pollution directly; most of the pollution associated with their use is created at the power plant that provides their electricity" (Wilkins) this point is still very relevant because a large portion of the united states electricity still comes from coal power plants that emit harmful gasses into the environment. The second point made also stands true today, the statement reads "Not all pollutants related to electric vehicles arise from the generation of electricity. Any discussion of the environmental impact of electric vehicles must also take into consideration the problems associated with the manufacturing and disposal of their battery packs" (Wilkins). This statement refutes the point made about zero emissions being given off by electric cars because the battery packs give off toxic gasses through the manufacturing, the lifecycle, and also the disposal. The thought that Electric cars give off zero emissions is at its best a naive assumption of the uninformed citizen. 

As we have seen, there are many faults in the electric cars claim to being eco-friendly. From there toxic batteries to their indirect emissions from power plants and lastly to their toll on both the economy and smog related deaths, one can begin to see what happens behind the curtains with these electric vehicles. In conclusion, there is hope for a cleaner future through the demand for a cleaner power grid by the citizens of the United States or by simply staying informed and making informed decisions on modes of transportation.

