Greenwashing

Opening disclaimer: I write it as a driver and a car-owner.

The very term appearing in the title of the post has been coined more than a decade ago, yet I, shame to confess it, ran across it in early December 2019. Back then, while browsing LinkedIn I found a post by my employer’s fleet manager, in which he had boasted of handing over to staff another batch of hybrid Toyotas (to replace petrol-fuelled vehicles manufactured between 2015 and 2017).

Regardless of automobile’s industry’s efforts and despite countless marketing campaigns, there is no such thing an environment-friendly car. You will not circumvent laws of physics, hence the bigger a car, the more energy you need to set it in motion.

Don’t also think if you buy a hybrid or an electric car, you will save the planet. The graphic to the right from the European Parliament’s webpage (I trust if has not been bought off by a lobby of carmakers) dated March 2019 shows the total carbon dioxide emission during a vehicle’s lifetime (sadly, they do not define how the lifetime is calculated). The chart informs that in a country which fully relies on carbon in electricity generation (such as Poland), an electric car is all in all more harmful to the environment than a car with a traditional combustion engine.

If you believe a hybrid car is a remedy, I will let you down. Manufacturing and recycling (but not maintenance) of a car with batteries is more environment-detrimental than of a traditional vehicle. The energy to charge batteries is not delivered from outside, but is generated in a regular combustion engine, which apart from propelling the vehicle must work to charge batteries. This leads to efficiencies during in-town driving when the batteries support the traditional engine when a car accelerates, so a hybrid Corolla consumes between 5 and 6 litres of petrol per 100 kilometres in town. This is 30% less than my car would do, but the consumption figures are comparable to small city cars running on petrol only. The bigger problem is that you should use a car around town as little as possible. On a motorway, at the speed of 140 kmph, the hybrid Corolla consumes over 10 litres per 100 kilometres, some 25% more than my car. The car loses its edge where use of it is justifiable.

Plug-in hybrids and electric cars in Poland rely on electricity generated from coal (with PiS government doing little to accelerate switching into alternative energy sources). Abroad, with more environmental-friendly energy mix, the lifetime carbon footprint is lower than of a traditional vehicle, yet one needs to bear in mind the distribution of the footprint. At the exhaust pipes there are no fumes, but the batteries are produced and will be probably recycled (the problem will grow big in a decade of so when electric and hybrid cars produced today will begin to reach the end of their lives) in other countries where harm to the environment will be concentrated.

Modern traditional cars are not faultless. The automobile industry cares about its profits and passing more and more stringent emission tests. To comply with norms, it comes up with several tricks to declare possibly lowest carbon dioxide emission, the infamous Wieśwagen dieselgate scandal being the most glaring example. Particulate filters, found in every diesel engines manufactured over the last 2 decades, and in most petrol engines produced recently, do retain soot (then turning into ash) before it leaves an exhaust pipe, but as ash accumulates in a filter, it slowly clogs up. The process of self-cleaning the filter consists in burning out ash. A vehicle does it when its engine is warm, at revolutions above 2,000 rpm and at steady, rather high speed. Do you believe emission of harmful particles during the process of burning out ash remnants is low??? Do you believe the ash is burnt out during standardised WLTP measurements?

What can you do to reduce your carbon footprint? Drive less!

Start from reducing to those absolutely necessary around-town journeys, where you can rely on public transport and there because of traffic density, emission per kilometre is the highest and time savings are the lowest.

Cut down (unless absolutely justified by your health) on short-distance trips. Firstly, a cold engine during first seconds after being started up emits multiple time more fumes than after it warms up. Secondly, a vehicle’s wear-and-tear disproportionally accelerates on short distances. Thirdly, walking or cycling is healthier!

If you need to go somewhere by car, try doing this when traffic is sparse. Vehicles cause less air contamination when they are driven at steady speed, without frequent stops and accelerations. Many such trips can be taken over the working week after 8 p.m. or on Saturday mornings when traffic jams are not a plague.

Change the style of driving. Eco-driving is safer and reduces emission by approximately 20% vs. normal driving and by 40% or more in comparison to aggressive (but not making a journey faster) driving. Do it wisely, i.e. do not use the highest gear at too low revolutions and do not upshift too early – this might save fuel in short-time, but will decrease the life or engine and other components.

Look after your car! Production and recycling stand for 20-25% of a vehicle’s lifetime carbon dioxide emission, so keeping your car in good condition as long as possible will be better to environment than replacing it with a new one whose exhaust-located footprint is slightly lower (carmakers will try to persuade this assertion is untrue).

Take passengers or become another driver’s passenger. A passenger car carrying 4 persons emits only 5% more carbon dioxide per passenger than a train (in Poland running on electricity produced from coal).

Closing disclaimer: I have written it all with a sense of sadness. I draw pleasure from driving. Behind the wheel I get relaxed and because I need to focus on driving all worries and kept far away from my mind. Yet I need to see further than the end of my nose and mind the future of the planet more than my personal whims.