Are electric cars really the next big step for mankind?

ELISABETH JEFFRIES
The Spectator
WEDNESDAY, 29th APRIL 2009

If internal combustion is going to be superceded by battery power, says Elisabeth Jeffries, carmakers and governments need to invest on a scale akin to the Apollo space programme.

Putting Lord Mandelson into an electric Mini may not seem to bear much comparison with putting a man on the moon, but there are interesting parallels.

In 1961, the US government embarked on the Apollo space programme, with the ambition of landing astronauts on the moon by the end of the decade. By 1969, it had achieved exactly what it set out to do. But it was a risky project, with no guarantee of success. To land on the moon, scientists had to solve three problems: how to rendezvous and dock with another spacecraft, how to work outside a spacecraft, and how to survive prolonged periods of time in space. In total, the US government spent $20 billion on the project (about $350 billion in today’s money), driven by a desire to upstage and defeat the menace of the age — the Soviet Union.

That world has gone. A new perceived menace has emerged, greenhouse gas, and a new programme is creaking into gear to control it: low-carbon technology. Today’s challenge is to produce an electric car that can travel 200 miles without recharging its battery: a cinch compared to space travel, you might have thought.

Yet governments and vehicle producers are groping in the dark. Back in the 1920s, electric cars briefly commanded a 20 per cent share of the motor vehicle market, but the technology was sidelined as oil supplies became increasingly abundant and manufacturers concentrated on the carbon-fuelled internal combustion (IC) engine. An electric car launched by General Motors in the 1990s was quietly snuffed.

GM had gradually overtaken Ford and become the world’s most successful car producer, but its fortunes were on a long downward slide towards the brink of bankruptcy it faces today. After decades of consolidation across the industry, only a handful of global manufacturers remain, and far too many conventional vehicles are being produced.

Enter the green car. First there was the Toyota hybrid (a petrol-driven vehicle that can use electricity at low speeds). Next is GM’s Chevrolet Volt — due to be launched in the US next year — similar to GM’s Vauxhall Ampera in the UK, the prototype of which was unveiled at the Geneva motor show in March. For trips of up to 37 miles, the Ampera will run only on a lithium ion battery, more commonly used in laptop computers; for longer journeys, it will continue to use electricity, but generated by a small internal combustion engine.

And earlier this year an electric car in a different class altogether was unveiled — the Tesla Roadster, a California sports car that can go 220 miles without recharging, costs E112,000 in Europe, and was hailed by Boris Johnson under the Daily Telegraph headline ‘How to drive fast, have a good time — and still save the planet’.

The puzzle is why the hybrid electric car should be the next big thing, as competing announcements by car manufacturers suggest. It is pricier to develop than more efficient versions of conventional cars or new models using current electric-power technology. But, as Dr Paul Nieuwenhuis of the Centre for Automotive Industry Research at Cardiff University indicates, ‘The industry has hit a brick wall. To become more profitable, in the longer term it would have to change the way it approaches manufacturing and distribution’ — for example by using a greater number of smaller local plants and cutting out the dealers, an unlikely scenario.

Instead, the industry is locked into competing on the ‘power train’ — the parts that drive the car forward — and producing IC engines differentiated according to model or manufacturer. This means their factories are built along a particular format that is expensive to re-engineer for ‘pure’ electric cars. ‘That’s why the industry loves the hybrid,’ says Nieuwenhuis.

GM wants a new hook to compete on, and seems serious about hybrids. ‘This is the start of where we’re going. The way the system is designed it doesn’t have to have an IC alongside it, but there’s the flexibility of having the IC if you need it... we’re already in an advanced stage of development,’ says GM spokesman Craig Cheetham, who predicts that 4,000-5,000 Amperas will be sold in the UK in 2012 — about 1.5 per cent of GM’s UK sales. After that, he says, GM will take the power system and make it available for other models. The mouth-watering improvement in sales and image experienced by Toyota after the launch of the hybrid Prius is the most likely spur to GM’s enthusiasm.

GM says it will make its own battery pack for the Ampera at existing facilities neighbouring its Ellesmere Port plant, if the car is manufactured in the UK. But producers are still some way off solving battery performance, an essential requirement if hybrid and electric cars are to become widespread, allowing customers to feel confident that they can set off on a journey without running out of juice. Batteries still do not last long enough. To achieve its range, the Tesla has to carry thousands of lithium ion battery cells — one reason for its high price.

According to Nieuwenhuis, the main cost of a typical hybrid car is in its battery, amounting to around £15,000 at present — the same cost as producing the rest of the car. Improving the battery and bringing down the cost will take a decade, he thinks. ‘It is probably reasonable to assume that by 2020, battery costs will have halved as a result of mass production — which will begin for plug-in hybrids, but pure battery-electric vehicles will also benefit.’

So the plug-in hybrid (so called because it recharges at the mains), starting off as a lossmaker, could be fully functional and competitive within 11 years — a similar time span as the Apollo moonshot programme.

But there are major snags. GM and other mass carmakers are in deep trouble, pleading for bail-outs and more ‘scrappage’ schemes like the one introduced in last month’s Budget to encourage new car buyers. ‘Production of the Ampera is definitely going ahead regardless. What we are campaigning for is not government funding per se, but a government incentive to encourage customers to adopt the new technology,’ claims Cheetham. The recent photo-opportunity which put the Business Secretary Lord Mandelson and the Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon into an electric Mini on a Scottish race circuit was a partial response, announcing subsidies of up to £5,000 for buyers of electric cars from 2011. But no government has so far committed really big money for this endeavour.

Global government stimuli allocated for low-carbon vehicles have so far amounted to $15.9 billion, according to a study by HSBC. Most of that has been allocated to R&D for developing lighter batteries and plug-in hybrids, as well as tax credits or rebates for customers buying new, low-emitting vehicles. But more is needed. According to Lew Fulton, an expert at the International Energy Agency, plug-in hybrids may eventually cost about $5,000 more than conventional models, so putting two million plug-in hybrids on the road annually by 2020 could cost an additional $10 billion a year. Continuing research into battery and pure electric vehicle development generally could add another $1 billion a year, he suggests.

The total bill will run into hundreds of billions over the next two decades — more than the moon landings in real terms — if plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles are to become commonplace. And there will be much more existing clutter to clear away; for instance, a network of plug-in or battery-pack replacement points for cars needs to be set up in parallel with petrol stations. The widespread use of electric cars probably also involves adding to electricity generating capacity — though of course it also reduces demand for petrol distribution.

The auto industry can take electric cars in two directions. Nieuwenhuis suggests it can create a high-value market for them: ‘Historically, battery electric vehicles are usually sold to well-to-do ladies in urban areas who use them to do a bit of shopping, do lunch, visit friends. If such niches can be identified, there is a future for electric vehicles even with their existing limited range — as long as we don’t expect them to do the same things as our internal-combustion cars,’ he says.

Alternatively, it can try to sell them more widely and ramp up performance. Today’s governments should read the history of the Apollo programme: find a vision, set a deadline, put your money where your mouth is. But make no mistake, launching the age of the electric car will be tougher than going to the moon.

Traditions weigh heavy on China's women, BBC June 19th 2006

Summary:

In this article, Christopher Allen examines the suicide rate in China, where 1.5M women attempt suicide every year, 10% succeeding, according to WHO figures. The problem is worse in rural areas, where poisonous pesticides are more readily available. Some suicides are impulsive but many are due to traditional arranged marriages. Bought brides leave their own homes to enter an alien environment, where resentment can often lead to violence, and where the young wife is isolated. In rural areas particularly, wives are expected to play a subservient role. Furthermore, sons are preferred to daughters and widespread abortion of female foetuses means more boys than girls are born which could lead to a serious shortage of women in the future. There are fears this will lead to more female trafficking, prostitution, sexual violence & rape.

The Government has passed laws banning arranged marriages but traditional attitudes are hard to change. The Suicide Prevention Project at the Beijing Cultural Development Centre is attempting to help rural women by establishing village-based support groups. Early signs are encouraging and there are hopes of a national network

Young women in cities often face poor working conditions & sexual harassment but there are signs that, gaining in experience, such women are becoming more independent & confident than their rural counterparts.

206 words

Main idea:

Chinese women in rural areas, forced by tradition into arranged marriages where they are expected to be totally subservient, are seeking escape through suicide. Young women in urban areas face difficulties too but seem to be gaining more in confidence & self-reliance.

Comment:

I feel that this is an important topic and highly relevant to those of us who work here in the Middle East, where arranged marriages are also the norm. It will be interesting to see to what extent, if any, attitudes change in China and whether such change, if it comes, will be reflected here in the Gulf.

European initiative

Will Hutton, in How Europe can save the world, The Observer 11.03.07, says that the EU has committed itself to reduce its CO2 emissions by 20% from their 1990 level, by 2020. This will be achieved, he says, mainly through the use of renewable energy such as water, air & biofuels. Although France is heavily dependent on nuclear power, this will now be classified as clean. There will be strict limits on carbon emissions, with every new power station in Europe after 2010 having to have 'carbon capture and storage capacity'.

There are, however, problems. Renewable energy is expensive and European business will complain that Indian, Chinese and American competitors will continue to use cheaper fossil fuels.

But Hutton says that there is growing worldwide conviction that that action must be taken to prevent global warming and climate change. Clearly pro-European, he praises Europe's politicians, particularly German Chancellor Angela Merkel, supported by Tony Blair, for taking the lead over carbon emissions. With forthcoming UN talks over a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, Hutton says that the European initiative is of worldwide significance and he's optimistic it will be successful.

189 words

My carbon footprint

I measured my carbon footprint at
http://footprint.wwf.org.uk/
& it was 4.10.

Most of the students had similar figures. The average figure for CRC was approximately 3.86. The main factors which contributed to my figure were classified as:

a) travel

b) stuff

c) home

My individual carbon footprint is the GHG (greenhouse gases) emissions that I personally am responsible for. However, companies, institutions, e.g. ADMC, and countries all have carbon footprints. The UAE's carbon footprint per capita is the highest in the world.

What can I do to reduce my carbon footprint?

I don't spend a lot on consumer goods, or bathroom products.

Travel is the largest contributor to my carbon footprint but I'm not sure what I can do to make meaningful change. Admittedley, I drive a large petrol vehicle but I can't switch to the train here in Abu Dhabi because there aren't any. I could use the bus but I can't see that it would make much difference as my journey to work is only a few minutes. My car has been well serviced and I've had it for 12 years. I suspect it pollutes a lot less than most of the local buses I've seen, which also happen to be very dangerous in my experience.

With regard to air travel, I have to fly AD-UK-AD once a year, if I'm to carry on working here.

With regard to food, my diet is extremely healthy and I can't see what I can do to improve it apart, presumably, judging from the quiz, from becoming vegetarian or vegan. I play squash every day, eat only once a day during the week and so I don't over-consume food.

Reviews of 'An Inconvenient Truth'.

Brandon Fibbs, http://brandonfibbs.com/2006/05/24/an-inconvenient-truth/ , in a favourable review, points out that Al Gore is right and the climate debate is effectively over. Scientific opinion overwhelmingly supports the view that global warming is principally man-made and time is running out for us to find solutions. He says that Gore has a mass of scientific data, charts, diagrams & photographic evidence, enough to convince even the most hardened sceptic. What he finds most alarming is the time-lapse photos of Patagonia, Kilimanjaro, etc. He ends his review by praising the fact that the movie is not pessimistic but rather closes with practical advice as to how we can get emissions back to the levels of 1950.

Scott Nash, http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inconvenient_truth/articles/156, in a more negative review, says that the film is about Al Gore & his political ambitions, rather than about global warming. He goes on to complain that, with his references to his son's car accident & his sister's death from lung cancer, Gore is being emotionally manipulative. He also criticises the movie for making political digs at Bush & the Republicans. He feels that this will only alienate a lot of people Gore is trying to win over to his point of view. Eric, in a review at the same address, questions the before & after photographs, pointing out that many of the old photos could have been taken in winter & the latest ones in summer.

What is my opinion? I agree with the first review insofar as the mass of evidence, incidentally very effectively & colourfully presented, is, if nothing else, food for thought. It would seem impossible to refute the fact that global warming is a dangerous threat to the planet. I personally don't mind the personalising of the movie as I feel Gore is effectively pointing out that his & our personal tribulations are as nothing to the threat to the whole of mankind. With regard to Eric's point about the photographic evidence, there may be some validity to it, but surely not with regard to Kilimanjaro where there is little, if any, seasonal alteration. The political point made by Scott is more interesting because, in both the film & its trailer, Gore emphasises that the issue is moral, not political, but he concludes the film by saying that only political will can solve the problems created by climate change & that political will is a renewable source in the USA.