How clean is e-mobility?

Basically it is said, that electric driven cars are clean and environment friendly. Is this true? I think it is imperative, because there is no strict point of view. At first of all it should be defined what the meaning of “environment friendly” is, because there are a lot of different versions existing. The first option is, that the car does not exhaust any CO2 or other bad and unhealthy emissions. This is good in case of driving the car in big cities and metropolis, because these cars are not polluting this places directly. This cars can help by setting the air quality on a better level, at the same amount of traffic. Another positive aspect is that you don’t have to change the engine oil after a specific amount of miles. There is no need for recycle old motoroil. The gearbox is usually flooded with lifetime gearbox oil, there is no need for a change.

But negative is the production process of the battery cells. Some magazines and blogs are saying that you can drive a normal car for 8 years, if it has exhausted that amount of CO2, wich is necessary for the production of a battery pack for an electric car. In addition there is the problem with the origin of the power wich is used for loading the battery of an electric driven car. is showing a graphic, that 84% of the US energy-mix is driven by non renewable energy sources. So electric cars in the US are using energy wich is to a big part everything, but NOT environment friendly. Actually by thinking about the sense of e-cars, I don’t really find that. In my opinion electric cars are only good for the dislocation of exhausts. It’s a good way to keep cities clean, but the environment unfriendly exhausts are only getting produced on an other place. I think electric powered cars are a bit too much hiped, I would only buy one, because they are very fun to drive.

What do you think about this topic?


PS: Take a look at Driving licence and autonomous driving.


5 thoughts on “How clean is e-mobility?

Add yours

  1. A good dissertation on the topic, and hopefully eye-opening for some. We can’t “create” energy, only change it from one form to another. (burn coal to make steam to drive a turbine to produce power, burn gas to make compression to drive a motor). One equals one, and no matter how we convert the energy, we can not get more than “one”.
    The answer lies in non-carbon producing energy to begin with, e.g. wind and solar. It’s good to keep a scientific mind on the subject, and know that energy is needed to produce solar panels and build windmills. All these arguments are strictly about energy production and carbon release, and don’t even take into account the waste produced. Retired rechargeable batteries, retired solar panels. There must be some waste generated by windmills, too, I suppose.
    I’d like to say the real solution is to go back to horses, but alas, they produce carbon, too.
    You make a great and useful observation, though. As long as there are still downsides, why not keep the car exhaust out of the cities? Not only does this affect humans directly, but the buildup of carbon contributes to cities’ “heat island” affect, which has further ramifications to our environment.

    Seek peace,



Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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

Create a website or blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: