Since forty percent of the electricity produced in the United States comes from coal power plants, thus forty percent of the electric cars on the road are carbon-based.
That's a bad assumption to make. It likely a far higher percentage than that.
Electric cars are built in plants that are overwhelmingly powered by coal fired power plants. Most of the larger charging stations in cities are powered by coal fired plants. I don't know of a single Tesla charging station (for example) in an urban area that is powered by wind or solar.
Solar EV charging is typically done in corporate parking lots with extensive solar arrays, which themselves are extremely bad for the environment.
From my time in the power industry, Coal was being replaced with a lot of natural gas. Cleaner, but still a fossil fuel.
If you were to re-word that as "The majority of electricity in the USA is produced from fossil sources," that would be accurate. An alarming number of coal plants have gone offline in the last 10 years.
From my time in the power industry, Coal was being replaced with a lot of natural gas. Cleaner, but still a fossil fuel.
If you were to re-word that as "The majority of electricity in the USA is produced from fossil sources," that would be accurate. An alarming number of coal plants have gone offline in the last 10 years.
I hate the term "fossil fuel" so I skipped using it. Oil is abiotic. I doubt natural gas comes from dinosaur bones either. Still, your point is taken.
Mine was that the article's author was likely under-counting the percentage of EVs that are charged with non-green tech.
I use the term because in the power industry, "Fossil plant" is the term for a generation facility that uses a natural, burnable resource to generate power.
It's just a catch-all, and really only means "Not nuclear or wind/solar/hydro."
(post is archived)