Enviromental Contradictions

Grady wrote: The article quoted above doesn’t take into account the energy and pollution caused by the mining of the materials used and manufacture of the batteries themselves.

The greatest environmental impact comes from the pollution caused by the elaborate battery system that powers the electric engine. The battery pollution is substantial because the creation of the batteries requires destructive mining to produce the batteries and the caustic substances that power the batteries must later be disposed of. The caustic substances that power the batteries are very poisonous and when released into the environment leech into the waterways and poison groundwater.

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~coreyp/hybridenvimp.html

Grady, I notice that this article doesn't specify which type of batteries. As far as I know, most hybrid batteries are either Lithium ion or Nickle Metal Hydride, and I believe all electric vehicle batteries are lithium ion which do not contain caustic, toxic substances (unlike lead acid or zinc acid of ICE engines) and can be completely, or almost completely, recycled at the end of their life. The nickle is not mined cleanly, but then again neither is coal.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 120945.htm
Batteries for Battery Powered Cars Are More Environmentally Friendly Than Expected
ScienceDaily (Aug. 30, 2010)

Researchers at Empa's "Technology and Society Laboratory" ...calculated the ecological footprints of electric cars fitted with Li-ion batteries, taking into account all possible relevant factors, from those associated with the production of individual parts all the way through to the scrapping of the vehicle and the disposal of the remains, including the operation of the vehicle during its lifetime.

The study shows that the electric car's Li-ion battery drive is in fact only a moderate environmental burden. At most only 15 per cent of the total burden can be ascribed to the battery (including its manufacture, maintenance and disposal).

The outlook is not as rosy when one looks at the operation of an electric vehicle over an expected lifetime of 150'000 kilometers.

The conclusion drawn by the Empa team: a petrol-engined car must consume between three and four liters per 100 kilometers (or about 70 mpg) in order to be as environmentally friendly as the e-car studied, powered with Li-ion batteries and charged with a typical European electricity mix.

The study: http://pubs.acs.org/action/doSearch?sea ... rtme=Never

Hybrids and pure-electric vehicles are two different beasts, as hybrids still have an ICE. There are comparable production costs, but they do reduce the amount of fuel used and the amount of emissions from the tailpipe. This article makes one important point: the most effective way to reduce your carbon footprint is to reduce the number of miles you drive, regardless of the type of car you have. http://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/Hybri ... tal_Impact

Now to the source of the power to charge the battery. Depending upon in which area of the U.S. one lives (who cares about the rest of the world!), this could either be a high fossil fuel:renewable energy source ratio or a low one. California, for example, gets only about 16% of its energy from coal making it a better choice than say Arizona where 67% of its energy comes from coal. However, as renewable energy sources become more prevalent, this will reduce the pollution burden on charging these vehicles.
http://www.electroauto.com/info/pollmyth.shtml (note: not entirely confident of these statistics - haven't been verified by an independent source)

I like this synopsis of a Master's Thesis produced by a Dutch student on costs and environmental impacts of electric cars - peruse if you have time!
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5104 - summary of the Master's Thesis
http://www.peakoil.nl/wp-content/upload ... sfinal.pdf - The thesis (3Mb)