Calculating the cost of cleaner cars
When discussing the expense of buying an electric or hybrid car, it seems too often the costs taken into consideration are merely short-term monetary ones. However, a new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine last week makes it clear that there are some savings to be realized that go far beyond filthy lucre. Its findings reveal that cleaner air directly correlates to a longer life. For instance, of the three year increase in the average American lifespan between 1978 and 2001, the authors of the study found that 4.8 months of that could be directly attributed to cleaner air resulting from a decline in particulate matter. Of 51 cities analyzed in the work, Pittsburgh and Buffalo, NY not only had the most improved air, but also the longest life extension at 10 months.
How much money would you pay for an extra 10 months time with your loved ones? How many more priceless months of life could be gained if we all drove zero-emission vehicles powered by non-polluting renewable resources? Of course, that's a dream that won't happen anytime soon, but it is one we might consider working towards if we truly value life.
[Source: Associated Press]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sam Abuelsamid 12:38PM (1/25/2009)
Given the ability of ability of humans to consume resources and damage their surroundings I'm not so sure that using extending human life spans is a good justification for doing anything. Frankly if all people lived everyday of their life to the fullest, I don't think taking extraordinary measures to live a few extra months would be worth it.
Reply
Luke 10:24PM (1/25/2009)
Ummm, you missed the point. That was the AVERAGE life span. In other words, it takes into account the people who died early in life because of health conditions as well, and averages them in with all those who live longer. So, if you develop lung cancer or liver cancer tomorrow and then die, but would have otherwise lived 20 years longer in a healthier environment, the only "extraordinary measures" needed for you to live a full life would be the healthier environment.
Really, Sam, these statistical stumbles of yours are also affecting your understanding of other things. But I'll leave the political discussions for another forum.
Don 8:33PM (1/25/2009)
I'd love to know how many billions of dollars in healthcare costs could be saved with an improvement in air quality. I suspect it dwarfs any cost related to making cars cleaner.
Reply
Aaron 8:55PM (1/25/2009)
It's also possible that the extension in human life in Pittsburgh and Buffalo isn't because of the decline in particulate matter, but simply simultaneous products of the decline in heavy industry in those two places - and nationwide - and the tole on life that that kind of work takes. It just so happens that this difference is most dramatic in the rust belt. Just a thought.
Reply
jharlan 11:50PM (1/25/2009)
This study could have been corrupted by other factors. What was the average age of autos, how many of the people in these cities were smokers etc. I think we can agree that decreasing particulate pollution will result in better health, but quantifying it like this is may or may not be valid. I would like to think there is a linear relationship between particulate pollution and overall health, and be able to quantify and expose the hidden costs of the ICE. It's another incentive to initiate the use of cleaner sources of energy.
Reply
meme 12:44AM (1/26/2009)
You honestly think it passed peer review without accounting for those factors? You're talking Statistical Studies 101 here...
Anyway, my biggest problem is with the summary: of all of the major pollutants emitted by cars (PM, CO2, CO, NOx, SOx, and VOCs), PM is the only one that goes *up* when you switch to EVs (using our current grid; yes, if you clean up the grid, you clean up the EVs, but that's in the future). Of course, it's more displaced from population centers, but still, PM can go a good distance.
Not that CO2, CO, NOx, SOx, and VOCs are exactly health food. SOx stays the same and NOx only drops slightly, but greenhouse gas CO2 drops by a third while cardiotoxic/neurotoxic CO is nearly eliminated, as are carcinogenic VOCs.
jharlan 1:54AM (1/26/2009)
What can I say? you obviously know it all.
Tim 8:18AM (1/26/2009)
Gas prices aren’t' the ONLY factor, but it's the MAIN factor for mass acceptance of EVs.
Health considerations?
What % of the American population exercises every day, eats a healthy diet and reads the labels on everything they consume in order to live a healthy, long life?
What & of Americans are FAT, consume fast food and junk food and spend their time on the couch watching TV instead of exercising?
The "health" argument is a total waste of time unless you're talking to a fascist or socialist Statist who will "FORCE CHANGE" on a population whether they want it or not.
EV “Green” Hitler (or Obama). Sounds good, right?
Be careful what you ask for. You may get more “change” than you wanted…
Reply
stas peterson 2:47PM (1/26/2009)
@Sam,
I know you are responsible for this page and I congratulate you for it, but in this case your bias is showing. Mankind is NOT always MEAN, EVIL, and a BLIGHT on GAIA.
This study might have meant something in 1970 on the first Earth Day, but such is NOT the case here in the USA, in the Year 2009. We have invested the skull sweat, and paid the economic price to make the Otto cycle ICE essentially pollution free. Even the most pollution intolerant CARBites admit that 56 car models using ICEs were either PZEV or AT-PZEV vehicles in model year 2009. That mean ZERO, NADA,, NO Pollution. I am certain model year 2009 wil be even better.
I agree that the Diesel cycle ICEs still need further cleanup work as T2B5 now arriving, is only meeting the dirty, high end of already-accomplished, Otto cycle cleanup.
Please go an spread your distaste for dirty Mankind, where it would do some good; in the pollution pits of sickening PM in Paris, Berlin and London. EU VI proposed regulation is a joke; and it needs to be broadcast from the highest mountaintops.
And they do not even envision matching T2B5, in any planning year that extends out to 2026! The rest of the World is even much worse.
Reply
Paul Sallmen 3:00PM (1/26/2009)
"...admit that 56 car models using ICEs were either PZEV or AT-PZEV vehicles in model year 2009. That mean ZERO, NADA,, NO Pollution."
That's not entirely true. The engine runs rich and catalytic converter doesn't even work for the first 10 minutes or so (longer when it's cold outside). However, when the vehicle is fully warmed up and at operating temperature, you are correct in saying there is virtually no pollution. That's when they do the pollution test. If anyone has taken their car to a pollution test before, they will be told to make sure it is at operating temperature or it will not pass.
In terms of NOx, SO2, CO, HC, etc there is virtually no tailpipe exhaust from warmed up new cars, but CO2 is the car manufacturers' next challenge, as fuel economy is largely unchanged over the last 20 years, due mainly to larger, heavier and more powerful vehicles.
America has probably the biggest challenge to meet this, as the public generally likes larger vehicles. Interestingly, that 35 mpg CAFE legislation could easily be achieved far before 2020, by taxing the heck out of gasoline, just like the Europeans do. Trouble is, this would probably lead to veritable anarchy; remember America was founded on not wanting to pay taxes.
A more reasonable solution would be a slight tax increase (perhaps a couple % per year) on gasoline, accompanied by incentives, such as much cheaper licensing and insurance rates for extremely fuel efficient cars.
Stan Peterson 5:40PM (1/31/2009)
Fuel taxes raise costs on everything. Only a fool buys the socialist idea that taxes are patriotic nonsense, and beleives that taxes "cure" anything. In theEU they have enormous fuel taxes, and still their cars are pollution pigs. The only thing they may be lower is in CO2, since they have forced everyone to drive diesel polluting, tiny pregnant roller skates, with weak emission regulations. Don't try to compare EU regs against the US, they are not even in the same league. EU regulations are pure phoney smokescreen.
The day of those cars is dying. When a "C" segment like the Ford Fusion, achieves 41 miles in the city, why woud anyone willingly, stuff themselves into a tiny "A" segment pile of junk.?
Pete 12:05PM (1/26/2009)
Is it socially responsible to let the bad part of our society drag us down?
example: in door smoking was allowed just 10 or some years ago, now it is almost impossible to find a place to smoke inside, same is true for car except we are all living in a big house(earth) and if 90% of people smoke with their car a high % of people will surely die. looks like evolution will favor more and more CO2 resistance animals in the near future.
Many will die few alive that is just part of live, evolution of the Carbon age, it is master plan to kill off all the weak gens. Many people want to save the weak, but the law of evolution will not have it.
Reply