Slips the Green Halo

In our government’s universe, a small flash of green on a number plate will both demonstrate virtue and drive a green economic recovery

Preamble: EVs

I like EVs. However, I think that banning the ICE alternative is asinine. Similarly, I like Champagne, but would object on principle to a law banning sparkling Shiraz.

Main Discussion: Green Haloes

Around these parts EVs are not as rare as they used to be. Probably 1 in a hundred cars that I see are now electric, I think. You will have noticed EVs with increasing frequency wherever you happen to live. Newer ones are easily told from a distance by the green flash halo on their number plate. In “No Smoke Without Tyres” I highlighted this in the featured image. The rest of the colour scheme was chosen to mimic a poster for 1931’s Curse of Frankenstein. No-one will have noticed, but rest assured that some thought does go into these things.

Anyway, about that green flash. How did they come about, and what are they for? A quick rewind 2 years:

Green number plates are set to be rolled out from autumn, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps confirmed today (16 June 2020), under plans to drive a green economic recovery.

As part of the government’s plans to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, drivers will be encouraged to make the switch to electric vehicles through the introduction of green number plates.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/green-number-plates-get-the-green-light-for-a-zero-emission-future

Good, yes. This paragraph makes perfect sense. Just not in this universe. Their green haloes enable the virtuous to penetrate sacred zones that the rest of us sinners have to pay to enter. The appearance of the green plates followed a consultation in 2019, which explained:

The commitment to consult on the use of green number plates for ULEVs was a flagship announcement by the Prime Minister at the UK’s international Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Summit on 11 September 2018.

I can see how a green flash on a piece of plastic would be a “flagship announcement” for our government. (Note: this was Theresa May, not the present Prime Barnacle.)

In “No Smoke Without Tyres” I also noted the possibility that, owing to their increased weight, EVs might cause more particulate pollution than new ICE cars. But no-one can argue that they produce more CO2 than ICEs.

Or can they?

A few months ago, some sceptics got rather excited about a study by Volvo cars which compared the carbon dioxide emissions from an electric and ICE version of the same vehicle, the XC40. Volvo undertook a full life-cycle analysis of both models, from etracting raw materials to scrapping. The bottom line was that the EV had to be driven a bagillion miles (I exaggerate slightly) to emit less CO2 over its lifetime than the ICE version.

At this news the table banged my sceptic’s funny bone. Jit, (the sudden pain shouted into my ear), that must depend entirely on how much CO2 is emitted by the generators that supply the electricity for the battery, hence whatever number they put on this is clearly wrong, and even if it was right, it varies from country to country and is changing moment to moment as the grid mix in each country changes! And some people will charge at home from solar panels!

It just seemed like a too-handy piece of favourable data that a sceptic could use as a four by two to bash their opponents rather than an authoritative statement of fact. So I filed the story in a pigeon hole labelled “investigate the actual facts later” and moved on.

Well, later eventually became now, so here we are. What are the facts of this Volvo study?

Figure 6 from the Volvo study

In terms of carbon dioxide emissions, the ICE vehicle wins in the extraction, refining, construction and disposal stakes. It incurs 16 tonnes CO2(e) of Gaia’s wrath up to the completion of its construction. By contrast the annual per-capita CO2 emissions of the UK in 2020 was 4.66 tonnes.

The (e) means equivalents, so the per-capita value for the UK is slightly low. And 2020 was lockdown city. But handwaving all that out of the way, buying a new shiny Volvo XC40 costs you 3.5 times the average UK resident’s annual CO2 allowance.

However.

The EV incurs 25 tonnes CO2(e) of Gaia’s wrath by the time it is built – about 5 years of a UK resident’s carbon dioxide allowance. Of the total, 7 tonnes is emitted in building the battery.

It is interesting that so much of the emissions arise even before the manufacturing stage:

Table 5 from the Volvo study (“functional unit” means a car driven 200,000 km).

[Regarding the manufacturing itself, Volvo makes the XC40 at two plants, one in Gent, and one in Luqiao. No prizes for guessing where the Chinese plant gets most of its electricity. Is there an irony here?]

So the ICE starts out 9 tonnes “better” than the EV, but inexorably catches up as it burns fuel across its lifetime. Depending on the generation mix of the electricity grid, this takes 47,000 to 146,000 km. If your grid is similar in carbon dioxide intensity as the world average, it takes 146,000 km for your ICE to overtake the EV in the sinfulness stakes. If your grid is entirely wind powered, it takes 47,000 km. And it’s somewhere in between for the EU average grid.

Bearing in mind the planned lifetime of their cars (200,000 km), Volvo say that in their new EV they’ve made something better for the environment than their ICE petrol. (They no longer make a diesel model…)

My version of the basic calculation is as follows: when you roll your new car off the forecourt, if it’s ICE, you have 9 tonnes of Gaia’s goodwill banked in your centre caddy. Then, you burn through that credit at the rate of 163 g per km. Assuming that the EV is recharged solely by the purest green means, then the distance for you to catch up in sinfulness with your twin who bought an EV on the same day you bought your ICE is an easy calculation: it’s

9,000,000 g CO2/ 163 g CO2/km = 55,000 km

[163 g is the book value used by Volvo, which might be (harrumph) a tad on the optimistic side. My distance value is higher than theirs, presumably because they account for extraction and refining the petrol.]

To put it another way: if you buy a new ICE, that’s 16 tonnes of CO2 accounted for as soon as you turn the key (you probably don’t turn the key these days). At the XC40’s 163 g CO2/km, that’s the equivalent of about 100,000 km of actual driving. So if you really cared about CO2, you wouldn’t buy a new car. You’d keep the old one running. The calculation gets worse of course if you opt for the EV: the equivalent running of your old car in terms of CO2 emissions to match the production emissions of the new EV is 150,000 km.

Let me just screech to a halt and say: I don’t care about carbon dioxide emissions from your tailpipe or in the manufacturing of your car. As far as I’m concerned, I would be pleased for you to choose the car you like, whether that be EV or ICE. I am more concerned about real pollutants, which until recently I thought the EV won at. Now (as highlighted in “No Smoke Without Tyres”) I’m not so sure.

However, if you care about CO2 emissions, you should not think that you are polishing your green halo by buying an EV, or that your green halo is worth polishing in the first place.

The first driver to get a green plate fitted was Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, who had a Tesla Model 3 adorned with the eco-conscious-signalling registration mark. Shapps said: “Green number plates will help increase awareness of cleaner vehicles on our roads, demonstrating that a more environmentally friendly transport future is within our grasp.”

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/104561/new-70-plate-marks-arrival-of-green-number-plates

[That’s the same Shapps who used to boast about his 3 high-end cars, 6 bedroom house and aeroplane to flog his “get rich quick” pamphlet retailing at $1000 but discounted to $197 for the first lucky 250 purchasers:]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-election-guru-grant-shapps-5379086

As everyone knows, it doesn’t matter how many sins of emission you have committed in the past, so long as you buy an EV now.

Commenting on green plates, Edmund King, AA president, said: “Having a green flash on the number plate may become a badge of honour for some drivers. We support this concept which shows that the EV revolution is now moving from amber to green.”

Autoexpress, link as above

A badge of honour, huh? Does Mr. King think honour is so easy to come by?

After all, as someone once said, virtue is its own reward.

Conclusion

The evidence is that the green number plate signals virtue but does not demonstrate it. EVs have no tailpipe emissions, but whether they contribute to clean air locally is debatable. For those who care about carbon dioxide emissions, not buying a new car at all seems to be the better choice.

Featured Image

Three proposed designs for the green number plate.

via Climate Scepticism

https://ift.tt/39ZQEq2

June 3, 2022 at 05:33AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s