What would the world be like if we had developed the electric car instead of the internal combustion engine?

Question

We had a choice about a 100 years ago and oil was chosen. Greed? What would our little world look like now if we made the right choice, in regards to War,Pollution,Global Warming,Health,Economics etc?

Would it be a better world?

Answer 1

We would have different types of pollution in different places.

We would have many more coal fired power plants. We would have much more pollution from coal. We would have much less pollution in the cities where the car is used, unless we located more coal fired power plants in our cities to recharge our electric cars.

Answer 2

better less contamination but still a lot of roads

we would have been best off, if we had gone straight  into the air like those star wars floating bikes ,Anti gravity

The only roads would have been paths for walking and horses.

Answer 3

How come you lefties always call normal advances in technology through Captialism, "GREED"???

When the car was being developed, steam was tried, electric was tried, I'm sure a couple other methods were tried. But Gas won because it was CHEAP, easy to produce, easy to distribute. Its all about Capitalism. We all won.

Hey on the flip side, what if gas was never discovered and everyone drove around in cars with steam engines instead of internal combustion? Do you realise how much more CO2 would be in the atmosphere right now?

Answer 4

I'm picturing that instead of a network of asphalt roads criss crossing every little corner; there would be a system of light gauge electric rail (door to door). Less visually obtrusive. Lower maintenance. In a combination of under ground above ground and on ground formats.

Vehicles would be much lighter much lower powered and capable of much higher speeds. Taking full advantage of the efficiencies of the electric motor.  Better give an example here; solar racecars are capable of speeds in excess of 100 mph (160km/h) with about 10 hp (7.5 kiwi) axial flux motors that run around 98% efficient. (They also carry a source of power with them that adds weight and in efficiency.)

Being separated light rail there would be less traffic jams and little to no need to stop in transit. Light rail can easily be raised or lowered eliminating intersections.

Simple deliveries like the daily bread and milk could be done via drones. Meaning that to pick up say a few pounds (or kgs) of groceries it would not require about 2200 lbs (1000 kg) of vehicle and driver to go and collect. Secure point to point transport could also mean that children need not be accompanied to school etc.

Yes we would have to power this system with addition power stations. Considering the fact that there is significantly less power required to drive this sort of network than the millions of tiny inefficient energy converters current doing the job. (I.e. cars) The overall difference would be huge. It is possible to reduce the emissions of power stations to near zero. Clean burn coal technology. Eg this link

http://www.csenergy.com.au/research_and_...

Yes I think the world would look a fair bit different and probably for the better. There would be economic advantages. I doubt it would have had much effect on wars though, we seem to be just to good, at finding excuses to hate each other.

Answer 5

You need to charge electric car up. This is done by various ways one of which is fossil fuels. So you burn coal to boil water to turn a turbine to generate electricity to be stepped up go along power lines stepped down transformed to low voltage dc to electro-chemical move ions in the battery. Then the power spins a motor which turn the wheels. Now not knowing about pollution, which is the most efficient? Burning remotely or at the point of use.

Answer 6

well there will be less pollution.but we will have the same problem to much demand and too little of electricity. i mean during the day everything will be  fine (sun) but at night. i mean we don't have electric car and the world can't come up with enough  electric power.

Answer 7

Oh wow, wouldn't it be superb here.  Fortunately (and unfortunately) there is only so much oil left.  They are having to rape us while they can.  It's not that they would LOSE money, per se, just that they wouldn't MAKE AS MUCH.

:)

Answer 8

We would be stuck in the 1890's...

Fossil fuel was chosen due to power and range.

The Wright Flyer wouldn't have flown on electric power technology of the early 1900's.  It would be difficult to fly it on electric power technology of the 1970's. (which developed partly due to use of fossil fuels...)

The longest commute to work by electric car would STILL be under 20 miles.... rather than the commutes of up to 80 miles some people drive each way every day.

The railroad would be the preferred mode of transportation, as the personal car would still have trouble competing with a horse.