Batteries or fuel, which is more environmental friendly?

Question

A. Consider the amount of fuel that is being used by every type of automobile, from the moped to the jets, ships, turbines etc.

B. Consider if all were to work only on batteries, of different types for different applications.

Now, hypothetically, if B existed, then they would not produce any pollution since there would be no burning of fuel to power the applications. My questiuon is how much pollution will be added during the various battery manufacturing, using, recycling processess although no smoke pollution would occur.

PLEASE GIVE ONLY GENUINE ANSWERS AS I WOULD NOT LIKE JOKERS TRYING TO SHOWOFF OVER HERE. KEEP THIS AS A SERIOUS DISCUSSION.

Answer 1

batteries

Answer 2

Fossel fuel is burned to provide the electric that charges these vehicles so where is the saving on green house gasses?

I think the future lies in Hydrogen you can easily produce it at home with just a couple of solar cells and a hydrogen generator

Answer 3

A battery is a means of storing energy.

There is an efficiency rate to the way energy is converted into a stored form in the battery and another energy efficiency rate at which the battery converts to a usable format.  So here you will see a loss of energy (feel a battery in use, it gets warm, this is lost energy).  Batteries lose around 30% of the energy in energy storage, leakage (batteries go flat over time) and usage).

It is much better to use the energy as you create it and only create energy you are using. Don't use it in the first place is the best - you don't run a marathon just because you have a few hours to spare, so don't burn other fuels just because they are there.

Answer 4

Yes battery are better less pollution, because even now in the disposal of car's there is more pollutant's going into the ground from gas car's because of anti-freeze tyranny fluid, and allot of these pollutant's would be eliminated as electric car's don't use them.I read your answers and your right .what I want to know is why we dont have a car that runs on water like the stanley steamer over a 100 years a go that went a 100 miles a hour faster than anything on the road.With all our modern crapology today why don't we have a car like that today?

Answer 5

fuel one day I think will run out.But with batteries(NOT THE BIN) the one you can re-changer would last longer.Or keep to wind/water/sun as to fuel.

Answer 6

It requires energy to manufacture batteries.

In the case of an accident, a battery can spill a lot of toxic acid which can do far more damage then gasoline.

Spilled acid can be much more hazzardious to rescue workers then gasoline.

Answer 7

Batteries would be far less polluting.

Only problem is they dont provide as much readily available power as fuel and the cost of manufacturing that many batteries would be mindboggoling.

Answer 8

Depends on the types of fuel and batteries.  You also need to charge the batteries so what are you using for that?

Both have cleaner and dirtier types.  Usually cleaner ones cost more.  The batteries in hybrid cars do some pretty nasty stuff to the environment.  

The real solution is to make either of them more efficient and maintain a reasonable cost.