Intuitive misconceptions about this harmful gas slow EV adoption 

By PETER DOUGLAS: MEMBER, ELECTRIC AUTO ASSOCIATION

The decision to purchase an electric vehicle (EV) over an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle involves several factors. The EV must demonstrate the same level of performance as a comparable ICE vehicle, feature a similar range for travel, enable a savings in fuel costs, and offer a substantial emission reduction.  

EVs are now advantageous enough to come out on top. Range has improved dramatically, prices have dropped, and often performance is even better than with ICE vehicles. Significant emission reductions have been there all along. Yet, EV adoption rates would skyrocket if consumers placed more value on environmental benefits. 

The fundamental green attribute of an EV is its ability to provide personal mobility without producing tailpipe emissions, delivering an unprecedented climate benefit even after accounting for  all of its life-cycle emissions. But before consumers assign appropriate value to low carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, they must make an accurate judgment about the malevolence of this well-known gas. Unfortunately, our intuitive concepts about CO2 conflict with our scientific appraisal of its harmfulness. Climate scientists tell us that the relentless buildup of CO2 (see image below) is causing many escalating harms, but our gut instincts tell us otherwise.

Our reluctance to think of CO2 as harmful begins with our awareness that we all breathe it in and out. We inhale air that contains trace amounts of CO2 and exhale approximately two pounds of CO2 each day. When we are in elementary school, we are taught that we provide CO2 for plants and they provide oxygen for us. Given this background knowledge, it can be difficult for us to believe that CO2 could be harmful. Some have gone so far as to assert that the buildup of CO2 will simply enhance plant growth, an argument that persists even though the catastrophic harm to our shared environment will outweigh any minor benefits to the plant kingdom. 

Carbon dioxide seems perfectly benign

Carbon dioxide has become a part of our daily lives. It in the fizz in our soda pop, the gas that makes bread dough rise, and the spooky white smoke that spills from witches’ cauldrons on Halloween. More of late, we have been purchasing canisters of CO2 to manufacture soda water on our kitchen countertops, but few of us read the warning labels.

When our government reports on the level of pollution in the local air, it is warning us about conventional pollutants, not CO2. Similarly, when we take our vehicles in to be smog checked, the technician is not concerned with CO2, the fundamental gaseous byproduct of internal combustion engines. The test does measure the level of CO2 in the exhaust, but the measurement has no bearing on whether or not our vehicle passes the smog check. These official measurements of conventional pollutants that are not concerned about CO2 contribute to the misconception that it is not a harmful pollutant.   

Time for a name change? 

When we think about air pollution, we think about toxic laboratory chemicals with long scary names. While “carbon dioxide” might sound a bit frightening because of that final syllable, as in “homicide” or “insecticide”, we don’t really associate it with premeditated murder. Perhaps we should  begin to see CO2 as close to its lethal sibling, carbon monoxide, another gas produced by the combustion of fossil fuels. Or, we might want to  refer to CO2 as “carbonic acid gas”, an alternate term often used by scientists. If we called it that, folks might take it more seriously.   

In the interest of brevity, we now avoid saying ‘carbon dioxide’ and simply say “carbon”, the element that diamonds are made of. Nice association, right?  We talk about our “carbon footprints”, not our “carbon dioxide footprints”, and adding “footprints” certainly doesn’t make our personal emissions sound any more menacing; we print cute little footprints on baby clothes. When we explore the natural world, we are admonished to “take only memories and leave only footprints”. Even in the parlance of tree-huggers, footprints are considered benign.  

Perhaps the most misleading aspect of atmospheric CO2 is the way it makes no impression on our senses. Even in concentrations high enough to disrupt our climate, it is a clear, odorless gas that is nothing at all like smog. You can’t see it, smell it, taste it, hear it, or feel it. The promising sound we hear when we pop open a beer is definitely the sound of CO2, and we can taste the absence of CO2 when our beer has gone flat, but we don’t perceive the CO2 in the air around us.  

Carbonic acid gas is especially discreet when it exits the tailpipes of our cars, sneaking its way into the atmosphere with deliberate stealth. We might see it for a moment on a chilly morning, but it quickly disappears. Gasoline produces over three times its weight in CO2 when ignited, expanding dramatically as its carbon atoms join with oxygen atoms from the air. Our clever mufflers quiet the explosions and direct the copious exhaust out the rear. Even if we understand the malevolence of tailpipe emissions, we can convince ourselves that our one vehicle will make no real difference in a world of over a billion cars. When we look up at the sky, it appears sufficiently spacious to accommodate our invisible exhaust. 

For the record, CO2 is a chemical that can be very harmful

Carbon dioxide has its very own chemical record number, 124-38-9. We have produced a whole lot of it since the onset of the Industrial Revolution. The concentration level in the atmosphere has fluctuated close to 280 parts per million for the past 800,000 years. It will likely reach a new milestone in 2021 when it climbs above 420 parts per million, 50 percent higher than its ancient equilibrium. All that accumulated carbonic acid gas ­is steadily warming our planet and increasing the acidity of our vast oceans. So far, we have failed to slow the buildup, and our excessive CO2 will persist in the atmosphere for centuries.

At even higher concentrations, CO2 can be quite problematic, and has a sharp, acidic smell. At 1,000 to 2,000 parts per million (ppm), people complain about the air’s stuffiness and begin to feel drowsy. When the level rises from 2,000 to 5,000 ppm, folks start to feel sleepy, experience headaches, have difficulty concentrating, and some may become nauseous and irritable. These symptoms increase and are joined by double vision, tinnitus, and seizures as the concentration moves to 40,000 ppm (4 percent), a very hazardous level that results in oxygen deprivation, brain damage, coma, and finally, death. Indeed, CO2 is used to euthanize poultry and pigs, and to put down rodents in laboratories.  

No worries. In our own experience, CO2 is a naturally occurring gas that seems perfectly harmless. A concentration level of 420 parts per million is no more perceptible than 280. We’re cool.

In conclusion, the unusually severe climate volatility we are experiencing around the globe is now readily apparent, but the connection between natural disasters and our tailpipe emissions remains complicated. As long as we continue to be swayed by our intuitive misconceptions about CO2, the strong moral argument for driving an EV will take a back seat to traditional vehicle attributes pertaining to their utility. Preserving the environment should be our top priority.