Introduction
The ecological state of the modern environment regularly suffers from external factors, often created by humans. Air pollution, caused by many human inventions, is one of the most important and serious problems. Transport, which relies heavily on fossil fuels, is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions.
One action that can mitigate the negative impact of vehicles on the environment is the switch to alternative fuel sources. These include hybrid cars, plug-in hybrids, and fuel-cell or battery vehicles. However, there is yet to be a clear answer to the question of whether alternative fuels are actually cleaner than fossil fuels and whether they are so harmless in their daily use. This research paper proves that alternative variants reduce the negative impact of transport on the environment, but their introduction requires good funding and attention to the prospects among people.
Environmental and Economic Components of Alternative Fuels
It is worth starting with the advantages of alternative fuels and arguing for their implementation in modern vehicles. One of the benefits is fewer greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. Pipitone, Caltabellotta, and Occipinti (2021) conducted a study and found that during the life cycle of battery cars, their greenhouse gas emissions were 64% lower than those of vehicles on fossil fuel, and hybrid cars showed 32% lower. In this way, it becomes clear that battery cars are the most environmentally friendly and allow for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a minimum compared to other competitors.
Nevertheless, it is essential to note that the production of these vehicles is higher than that of different modes of transport, and this is due to battery manufacturing. Thus, although accumulator cars have lower emissions and lower environmental impacts during their lifetime, their overall effect is unfavorable. The manufacturing stage is an essential component of any product, so it should also be considered when summing up the car’s environmental performance.
An essential parameter in comparing different modes of transport is to consider the economic and environmental impacts of their use, which should consider the entire product life cycle. This includes the extraction of raw materials and the production of the vehicle, as well as its operation and further disposal if necessary. Comparing the impact of cars on alternative fuel on the ecological state of the planet should be carried out thoroughly, so each factor should be analyzed in conjunction with others (Cihat Onat, 2022).
Based on this fact, the environmental impact of these vehicles depends more on the energy source used to charge them. For example, alternative fuel vehicles would have fewer adverse environmental impacts if they used renewable energy sources. However, as they are undesirable, ecological benefits are immediately reduced if non-renewable sources are used. Batteries also require higher economic costs for production and operation than fossil fuel or fuel cell transport.
Combating Atmospheric Pollution
Another advantage distinguishing battery vehicles from other vehicles is their ability to reduce local air pollution. This ability significantly benefits human health and offers prospects for the future development of green car production. Carey (2023) in his work pointed out the study of the World Health Organization, which states that if the overall impact of the introduction of alternative fuel sources on human life, it can be concluded that the air pollution problem is about seven times greater for different populations groups, that accumulator car use can prevent nearly 2,500 deaths in the United States of America every year. The study also states that the benefits of this mode of transport exceed the costs of providing the infrastructure needed to operate.
Difficulties in the Alternative Fuel Vehicles Implementation
Despite the advantages described above, introducing alternative fuel vehicles faces global challenges. The global nature of the issue is still in question despite advances in this area in the US. Obstacles to the development of this industry include the need for universally available charging infrastructure, the high cost of production of the cars themselves, and low consumer awareness of the topic (Ghadikolaei et al., 2021). In addition to economic factors, there is also a need for higher education about the benefits of alternative modes of transport among the population to increase confidence in innovation. Government authorities should also be involved in promoting and eliminating barriers to the introduction of green cars.
In addition to harmful atmospheric emissions, alternative fuel vehicles have other health effects. The environmental and economic perspectives of this mode of transport can be considered, considering factors such as resource depletion, water use, and noise reduction in operation (Ajanovic & Haas, 2019). In estimating these indicators, battery vehicles performed better than fuel cell vehicles. However, the impact of cars on alternative fuels may differ, depending on the location and context of their use.
Conclusion
In conclusion, alternative fuel vehicles have great potential to improve the environment. They can reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere, but it is also essential to consider that the production of these products causes more harmful emissions to the atmosphere. The manufacturing cost is relatively high, and the proper infrastructure has yet to be established for implantation. To understand the prospects for alternative modes of transport, it is necessary to establish clear implementation strategies and promote public awareness.
Annotated Bibliography
Ajanovic, A., & Haas, R. (2019). Economic and environmental prospects for battery electric‐ and fuel cell vehicles: A review. Fuel Cells (Weinheim), 19(5), 515–529. Web.
In their work, the authors present an assessment of the environmental and economic prospects of cars on alternative fuels. These include batteries and fuel cells, both of which are more environmentally friendly. The article analyzes various factors that allow for a comparison of the environmental performance of vehicles. The author’s analysis is reliable, as it critically examines the development of modern technologies. However, the work is limited to reviewing only two fuels.
The strength of the study is that it provides readers with helpful information on different perspectives of alternative modes. It also emphasizes the importance of critical analysis and the need to consider various factors. The author considers possible negative consequences, which also strengthens the work.
In addition, the article focuses on the prospects of cleaning the environment. According to the thesis, this is the advantage of electric vehicles. The work supports the argument that alternative fuel sources are less environmentally damaging than fossil fuels. In this case, the thesis’s validity can be proved based on the article.
Carey, J. (2023). The other benefit of electric vehicles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(3). Web.
The article allows for a deeper study of the potential use of electric vehicles for their environmental impact. Battery vehicles deserve special attention because of their innovative nature. They should be essential in reducing air pollution and harmful atmospheric emissions.
This article’s strength is the study’s scope when considering potential problems. They may arise when an alternative type of transport is introduced. In theory, it should positively impact a human’s living standard. The author resorts to quotes from studies of the World Health Organization, which demonstrates credibility.
However, this article focuses on the influence of battery cars to a greater extent. This resource allows us to assess the economic benefits of the introduction of electric vehicles. The author confirms that this is a costly process. Nevertheless, the thesis also mentions the importance of avoiding pollution. This source supports the argument that introducing battery transport is necessary to prevent pollution.
Cihat Onat, N. (2022). How to compare the sustainability impacts of alternative fuel Vehicles?Transportation Research. Part D, Transport and Environment, 102(103129), 103129. Web.
The author’s research aims to study the impact of modern vehicles that use alternative fuels on their operating characteristics. Onat uses a comprehensive analysis in his work with details that make it relevant. The paper argues that previous studies on this topic have not been complete because they have focused on a limited set of indicators.
The strength of this article is its comprehensive analysis of vehicles’ impact on stability. The author emphasizes the importance of evaluating each stage, from the extraction of raw materials to the disposal of cars. In addition, various spheres of society are considered, allowing the topic to be addressed more globally.
Such research cannot give a complete picture and may lead to inaccurate conclusions. The work compares the performance of different modes of transport, which reveals the author’s idea. The analysis leads the reader to the basic concept of the thesis in this paper.
The analysis is not organic, as it considers all possible spheres of influence of transport. This work is generally helpful because of the integrated approach to investigating the environmental impact. This resource supports the thesis, as the author claims that implementing electric cars is expensive and time-consuming.
Ghadikolaei, M. A., Wong, P. K., Cheung, C. S., Zhao, J., Ning, Z., Yung, K.-F., Wong, H. C., & Gali, N. K. (2021).Why is the world not yet ready to use alternative fuel vehicles?Heliyon, 7(7). Web.
In this paper, the authors consider why alternative fuel vehicles take a long time to implement worldwide. Through a systematic review of the literature, they could conclude the main pitfalls of battery vehicles. It includes both economic and social components, which are essential. Among the social factors, the authors highlight the need for more awareness of innovation. This makes the study relevant as a combination of economic and environmental factors is considered.
The strength of this article lies in the fact that it reveals problems and offers potential solutions, which can contribute to the rapid introduction of alternative fuels. To overcome these challenges, the study proposes that various sectors of society. The author’s attention is focused on the collective struggle with problems. He emphasizes the high cost of changes, also mentioned in the thesis.
The author’s main idea is the need for innovation but preparedness for it. This work has no limits as it considers the long-term implementation of alternative fuels. The article supports the thesis of long-term adaptation to alternative transport.
Pipitone, E., Caltabellotta, S., & Occhipinti, L. (2021). A life cycle environmental impact comparison between traditional, hybrid, and electric vehicles in the European context. Sustainability, 13(19). Web.
In this article, the authors consider the environmental impact of different types of vehicles. A feature of the analysis is comparing the effects of hybrid, electric, and conventional cars. The ecological health of the European continent is considered and researched. Although the study does not cover the whole world, it gives a broad view of the problem in the European context. This makes the work more relevant as it focuses on a specific area.
An approach to the life cycle assessment of each vehicle type was used to assess the impact of transport on the environment. The author emphasizes that alternative fuel sources are more environmentally friendly, which confirms the thesis. The analysis considered not only greenhouse gas emissions but also particulate matter.
The strength of this study is that the authors emphasize the importance of analyzing the entire life cycle of the car. It is possible to assess the total environmental impact of vehicles. The study is limited to one continent, which narrows the scope of analysis. This work confirms that alternative fuel sources are less environmentally harmful.