Electric vehicles are better than Gasoline vehicles, as of now.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Ask me anything
- Gasoline cars emit more CO2 and that is bad.
- Electric cars cost less to fuel and cost less to drive.
- Gasoline also isn't biofuel, hopefully Con understands.
1. Electric vehicle: A vehicle running on induction motor as its chief source of power with lithium-ion battery as its power source.
2.Gasoline vehicle: A vehicle running on Internal Combustion Engine with conventional fuel(gasoline) as its power source.
By Pro stating electric cars are better than gasoline cars is speaking on an overall perspective, CON is assuming it.
Electric cars run on electricity, so little to no emission is popped out of its rear end.
OBJECTION: As a point source, yes! but speaking in an overall matter no, any electrical power station would be depedent on the power grid of the country for electricity as , since PRO has cited USA as an example , US is still 60% depedent on conventional fuels for its electricity demand, plus the energy generated is not transfered completely to the end user , which is an electric car. Some amount is always decipated in transfer from power-grid to connector station, furthermore a lithium ion battery gets heated up while charging so lot of energy is decipated in the transfer process,lets take 65% for safer side.
Thus in reality only 35% saving of emissions are saved, this is under the consideration that the energy conversion rate of a power plant and a car is same while running on conventional fuel .
Electric cars may only drive 100 miles or so upon on full charge, but:
3 years ago, Tesla has chargers already across the nation. There is one charging station within 100 miles of another charging station, so if you are going on a trip across the US with an electric car, you would be guaranteed to pass.
ARGUMENT: Nowhere in the topic," Electric vehicles are better than Gasoline vehicles, as of now", it is written we are talking about the USA , world's leading economy in terms of GDP. The debate has to have a global perspective to it otherwise, factors associated with other nations will be ignored and that should not be the case US only inhabitates a fraction of world population(4.6%).
Gasoline also isn't biofuel, hopefully Con understands.
- Electric vehicles are a technology well out of reach of 95% of world population.
- Electric vechicles run on Lithium-ion battery which cannot be recycled properly as of yet.
- Electric vehicles emit highly toxic Lithium fumes if they catch fire.
- Electric vehicles make no significant contribution to the world's pollution problem since they cannot be used in most of the places around the world, but improving gasoline vehicles can cut emissions significantly, and in an effort to this Euro Stage 6 like initiatives are already in function.
- Saying Electric vehicles is better than Gasoline vehicles is like saying a sub-species of an animal is better than entire wildlife range of a country.
- Gasoline cars opting for Ethanol blending with cut CO2 emissions than electric vehicles, having the added advantage of not having to recycle a Lithium ion battery.
Electric vehicles are a technology well out of reach of 95% of world population.
Electric vehicles run on Lithium-ion battery which cannot be recycled properly as of yet.
Electric vehicles emit highly toxic Lithium fumes if they catch fire.
According to Bachus & Schanker, 6.2 million car crashes occur every year. The number of highway crashes that have resulted in fires has dropped over the last thirty years from nearly half a million in 1980 to 174,000 in 2015, with the sharpest drop happening since 2007. Some of that drop can be attributed to improvements in fuel injector technology and other safety features found in modern vehicles. But the increased incidence of electric vehicles on America’s roads is certainly making roads safer! Because they are powered by batteries instead of flammable gasoline, electric vehicles have a lower risk of fire than their gas counterparts. Granted, lithium-ion batteries — the kind used in electric vehicles — can burn, but there’s a very low risk of this happening when compared to gas vehicles. And given the recent improvements in lithium-ion technology, we’ll likely see even fewer electric vehicle fires in the years to come.
Electric vehicles make no significant contribution to the world's pollution problem since they cannot be used in most of the places around the world, but improving gasoline vehicles can cut emissions significantly, and in an effort to this Euro Stage 6 like initiatives are already in function.
Saying Electric vehicles is better than Gasoline vehicles is like saying a sub-species of an animal is better than entire wildlife range of a country.
Gasoline cars opting for Ethanol blending with cut CO2 emissions than electric vehicles, having the added advantage of not having to recycle a Lithium ion battery.
SO essentially very few to none cars COMPLETELY run in the USA on conventional fuel( petrol) commercially known as gasoline . Same case for Europe, and now from this year in India as well.
2.Gasoline vehicle: A vehicle running on Internal Combustion Engine with conventional fuel(gasoline) as its power source.
- Electric cars are safer, cheaper, and less dirty compared to their same-level Gas competitors.
- Electric cars have fewer emissions.
- Gasoline is Gasoline.
ARGUMENTS:
1. It was pre-established that since the topic is " Electric vehicles are better than Gasoline vehicles, as of now." , it will need to cover the entire world with the whole world population under lense. CON used that premise to state that an Electric Car is out of reach for most of the world(95 %), only USA(4.6%) and Scandinavia(0.4%)(considered) have access to Electric cars.
PRO's contests: (part1)
"Con had used this as a reason, Wow. ................. 1988!"
More like saying an alien species is smarter than all humans and animals on earth. .....................................me sense.
CON's counter part 1:
That is only under geographic lens, even in America I highly doubt a person with a 40,000 dollar salary can afford to buy a 35,000 plus added expenses( lowest model of Tesla),If we put economic realities under consideration safe to say major chunk of population is ruled out again,a threshold of 98% can be safely assumed. CON's first point becomes irrefutable, needs of 98% world population must come before the 2% who can afford such a car. I will make this point more evident by using Tata Nano as an example, mentioned by PRO.
CON's counter part 2:
Subsection A: Economics
Since Tata Nano name has been mentioned PRO will use it to explain the economics, was it in the US(Since PRO is US based I am using USA as an example)
Nano has a mileage of 15.8125 miles per litre of fuel. If we assume an average life of a car to be 150,000 miles, at that mileage 9879.79 litres of fuel is needed. Multiplying it by price of USA (0.654 dollars per litre). 6461 dollars are needed to drive the car for 150,000 miles compare it with a Tesla 6120 dollars considering 12 cents per Kwh []and 0.34 kwh/mile consumption. [Consumption rate based on PRO's source][]
Total Bill Comparison:
Tesla Model 3 : 35,400+ 6120 =41,520 dollars
Tata Nano: 3413+6461= 9874 dollars
Economics of a gasoline car are more favourable for any person walking on the earth. A reader may be feel apples to oranges are being comparison is being made, CON can elucidate, the lowest possible price of both an electric vehicle and a gasoline vehicle is being compared in the same country (lowest price available from a reputed manufacturer), because an economic car is not meant for performance but to provide basic transportation to the customer. Perfect or ideal functioning of both cars has been considered.
NOTE: Tata Nano was not allowed in the US because:
To further his point here is Pew Research Center analysis of data from the World Bank PovcalNet database (Center for Global Development version available on the Harvard Dataverse Network) and the Luxembourg Income Study database[1] attached in citation stating:
Con may state that there are far fewer charging stations, but would you put an LMP1 on slippery ice in Mount Everest, .............................ewer cars.
This argument makes sense, but it does not make electric cars worse consider many of them are marketed towards those that can buy a BMW out of their pockets.
PRO contests:
First, to say, my chart has included the lithium-ion battery in the pollution on the production line......................................................... actually good.
PRO Contests:Essentially, very few to none .......................................... ethanol
PRO contests: This argument is self-defeating. ............................ and look at this
- Electric vehicles are a technology well out of reach of 96-97% of world population.
- Electric vehicles pander to the rich and do not make life easier for the poor, a well designed gasoline car does.
- Electric vehicles are bad economically,for business,for rough terrains, for logistics and for military usage.
- Electric vehicles make no significant contribution to the world's pollution problem.
- Gasoline cars opting for Ethanol blending with petrol cut CO2 emissions more than electric vehicles, having the added advantage of not having to recycle a Lithium ion battery,this is done as ethanol is produced from plants which absorb the same amount of co2 emitted next year when they grow back.
Argument: As Ragnar mentioned in comments, Pro would need to overcome the argument of cost-to-benefit ratio. Con raised the issue of cost, not just in purchase and use of electric vs gasoline powered vehicles, but that over 60% of the world's electrical energy is provided by fossil fuel, which raises the cost of use for electric, a cost not successfully countered by Pro, not to mention the emissions for which electrical energy from fossil fuel sources generates since energy from green energy sources is minimal. In addition, Con's argument of the inability of electric-powered vehicles to supply the elevated power requirements of a variety of commercial vehicles cxould not be overcome by Pro. Points to Con.
Sources: On the point re: energy sourcing, Pro had at least two sources extolling green energy sourcing for electric car charging, but green energy supplies a minimal percentage of sourcing for electrical power compared to fossil fuel sourcing, and neither source acknowledged this lack. Con noted in r3 that a source from pro speaking to elecrtic power benefits left lithium battry power off the list. Point to Con
S&G: Tie
Conduct: Pro forfeited round 2, Con argued all rounds. point to Con
check R1 of CON ,"By Pro stating electric cars are better than gasoline cars is speaking on an overall perspective, CON is assuming it".
okay but neither side of this debate clarified what 'better' means.
could anyone of you guys vote?
Could anyone of you vote on this if you have time ?
Bump
Good luck. Expect challenges from a cost to benefit ratio.