Green Cars Persuasive Speech Outline
Andy Yowell
Geoffrey Bennett
Principles of speech
4/20/2015
General Purpose: To argue
Specific Purpose: To argue the point that green cars aren’t any better than non green cars.
Thesis Statement: The government and certain car manufacturing companies shouldn’t be promoting energy conserving vehicles as zero emissions vehicles because 1) the process of manufacturing electric cars pollutes the environment; 2) recharging the car uses a tremendous amount of fossil fuels; 3)The cost to manufacture an electric and hybrid vehicle is tremendous.
Introduction
I. (Attention Getter) The U.S. Government has wasted billions of dollars to develop electric cars to replace gasoline and diesel vehicles on the premise that they are “cleaner” for …show more content…
the environment. We have also been told that they are far cheaper to operate. However, new information reveals that the “green” cars may not be so “green” after all.
II. (Justification) President Obama calls for 1 million electric plug-in cars to be on American roads by 2015 and it hasn’t happened for good reason. A. While it appears that the goal is within reach in terms of production capacity, initial costs and lack of familiarity with technology could be barriers. (Keller) B. Consumers remain wary of the cars’ limited range, higher price and the logistics of battery-charging. (Lomborg)
III. (Credibility Statement) I work in the auto industry so I am intrigued when the industry and the government make claims for cleaner cars. Especially when they make claims about the zero emissions that electric cars produce.
A. Electric and hybrid car technology has gained popularity for instructors to teach in the automotive classes.
B. I have a whole section dedicated to subject matter of electric and hybrid technology in automotive class.
IV. (Thesis Statement)The government, and others, should not make claims that hybrids and electrics are a cleaner and cheaper alternative to today’s gasoline engines.
A. First, the lithium used in the ion batteries is incredibly dangerous and carcinogenic.
B. Secondly, EVs do depend on fossil fuels for their electricity from outlets.
C. Finally, an electric car has a limited range with a scarce availability of recharging.
(Transition) My first argument will show that lithium batteries are dangerous mine and handle.
Body
I. (Constructive argument)
A. The EPA has linked the use of extremely powerful solvents in the creation of lithium electrolytes and cathodes. (Braun)
1. Specifically, the cobalt used in the creation of the most energy dense lithium-ion batteries is poisonous and extremely carcinogenic. (Braun)
i. Pulmonary, neurological, and respiratory problems have all been connected to cobalt exposure.
B. While mining for lithium the nickel and cobalt ore is stripped from its solid state and depleted into the water source. (Braun)
1. Lithium extraction envetibly causes harm to the soil and also causes air contamination.
i. The lithium is evaporated over salt flats near where it is mined and eventually it leaches down into the soil. ii. Pretty big impact on the environment while mining (Transition):This argument will show that although, maybe cleaner out of the tailpipe, evs still need to be plugged in at the outlet and that makes these cars expensive to buy and charge.
II. (Second Constructive argument) EVs that depend on coal for their electricity are actually 17 percent to 27 percent worse for the environment than diesel or gas engines, because we depend so much on coal for our electricity. So the cost of the coal will go up, because of demand. (Braun)
A. This is especially true for the U.S., because we derive about 45 percent of our energy from coal. (Braun)
1. In states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas it’s around 100 percent. (Braun)
2. The global warming potential for EVs that rely on natural gas – generally considered to be the cleanest fossil fuel – show an improvement of only 12 percent over gasoline, and break even with diesel. (Braun)
B. The main crop of electric cars cost in a range of $30,000 and $40,000.
1. That is considerably more expensive than its comparably equipped gas powered counterpart.
2. Gas prices would have to top $8.53 for the Leaf competitive. (Braun)
i. It would have to hit $12.50 for the Volt to be worth it. ii. Based on a gas versus electricity, fuel efficiency and depreciation.
III.
(Third Constructive Argument) Electric cars need recharging and special plug-in stations.
A. most electric-car models can travel no more than about 100 miles on a full charge.
1. A typical 120 volt outlet will take 10’s of hours to charge the batteries.
i. Customers would need 240 volt accessibility to charge in a few hours. ii. Most areas as of yet don’t support an infrastructure with charging stations as readily available as gas stations.
B. Battery cost unlikely to change unless battery costs drop dramatically, despite the drastic change that represents from gas-powered vehicles.
1. currently batteries cost about $400-600 for each unit called a kilowatt-hour.
2. Current electric cars contain batteries with up to 85 kilowatt-hours.
(Transition) As I’ve shown you, retrieving the lithium needed for the batteries is dangerous and bad for the environment. The initial cost of an electric car is more expensive than most people can afford. And driving electric cars, comparatively to gas powered cars, isn’t really saving you any money, because of the cost of electricity and availiability of plug in stations. My final argument is in opposition to the fact that electric cars will replace gas powered cars and trucks in the foreseeable
future.
IV. (Refutation)This is a false analogy for a couple of reasons
A. (Denial) The world caters to gas and diesel powered vehicles.
1. Semi-trucks and off road vehicles wouldn’t exist without fossil fuels.
B. Second, rolling out charging stations and making plug in accessible outlets outside of a customer’s home is enormous and expensive to undertake.
1. Residential electricity charges would explode, due to the constant charging of a car with such an electricity capacity.
C. Lastly, people love their gas and diesel cars and especially trucks.
1. Motor sports: including racing of any type, winter motor sports, boating would suffer.
i. Although, there is a lot of speculation that electric race cars will take over because of less maintenance and better torque, Motorsports is more than going fast, it’s about sounds and vibrations. ii. You can’t beat the sound of a well tuned v8 engine.
V. (Impact) The fact remains; the world is so steeped and in love with fossil fuels.Electric cars have been on the table to take over gasoline for decades. Although, there have been tremendous strides in the technology, this world will never quench its thirst of dinosaur burners. (Transition) Now that the differences between gas electric cars has been established, and that electric cars aren’t so cheap or safe to manufacture and to change over to a completely new infrastructure would be next to impossible, let’s review the support that states gas is king.
Conclusion
I. (Restatement of main ideas) I have stated three arguments showing why fossil fuels and gas powered cars, will always be in the majority.
A. First, deriving the lithium needed to manufacture the batteries is dangerous to the people, and environment.
B. Second, the cost of electricity is still based on the cost of using fossil fuels.
C. Electric cars need a special infrastructure for charging.
II. (Closing statement) The fact is fossil fuels provide much more power than the equivalency of electricity. Although, deriving fossil fuels isn’t necessarily very safe and clean, telling consumers that electric cars are 100 percent clean is a fallacy, and to produce the lithium that is needed is just as or more so dangerous.
Work Cited
Braun, Peter. "Don 't Look so Smug: Your Tesla Might Be Worse for the Environment than a Gas Car." Digital Trends. N.p., 13 Nov. 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Keller, Kevin. "Electric Cars." Time. Time, 24 Mar. 2015. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Lomborg, Bjorn. "Bjorn Lomborg: Green Cars Have a Dirty Little Secret." WSJ. N.p., 11 Mar. 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Geoffrey Bennett
Principles of speech
4/20/2015
General Purpose: To argue
Specific Purpose: To argue the point that green cars aren’t any better than non green cars.
Thesis Statement: The government and certain car manufacturing companies shouldn’t be promoting energy conserving vehicles as zero emissions vehicles because 1) the process of manufacturing electric cars pollutes the environment; 2) recharging the car uses a tremendous amount of fossil fuels; 3)The cost to manufacture an electric and hybrid vehicle is tremendous.
Introduction
I. (Attention Getter) The U.S. Government has wasted billions of dollars to develop electric cars to replace gasoline and diesel vehicles on the premise that they are “cleaner” for …show more content…
the environment. We have also been told that they are far cheaper to operate. However, new information reveals that the “green” cars may not be so “green” after all.
II. (Justification) President Obama calls for 1 million electric plug-in cars to be on American roads by 2015 and it hasn’t happened for good reason. A. While it appears that the goal is within reach in terms of production capacity, initial costs and lack of familiarity with technology could be barriers. (Keller) B. Consumers remain wary of the cars’ limited range, higher price and the logistics of battery-charging. (Lomborg)
III. (Credibility Statement) I work in the auto industry so I am intrigued when the industry and the government make claims for cleaner cars. Especially when they make claims about the zero emissions that electric cars produce.
A. Electric and hybrid car technology has gained popularity for instructors to teach in the automotive classes.
B. I have a whole section dedicated to subject matter of electric and hybrid technology in automotive class.
IV. (Thesis Statement)The government, and others, should not make claims that hybrids and electrics are a cleaner and cheaper alternative to today’s gasoline engines.
A. First, the lithium used in the ion batteries is incredibly dangerous and carcinogenic.
B. Secondly, EVs do depend on fossil fuels for their electricity from outlets.
C. Finally, an electric car has a limited range with a scarce availability of recharging.
(Transition) My first argument will show that lithium batteries are dangerous mine and handle.
Body
I. (Constructive argument)
A. The EPA has linked the use of extremely powerful solvents in the creation of lithium electrolytes and cathodes. (Braun)
1. Specifically, the cobalt used in the creation of the most energy dense lithium-ion batteries is poisonous and extremely carcinogenic. (Braun)
i. Pulmonary, neurological, and respiratory problems have all been connected to cobalt exposure.
B. While mining for lithium the nickel and cobalt ore is stripped from its solid state and depleted into the water source. (Braun)
1. Lithium extraction envetibly causes harm to the soil and also causes air contamination.
i. The lithium is evaporated over salt flats near where it is mined and eventually it leaches down into the soil. ii. Pretty big impact on the environment while mining (Transition):This argument will show that although, maybe cleaner out of the tailpipe, evs still need to be plugged in at the outlet and that makes these cars expensive to buy and charge.
II. (Second Constructive argument) EVs that depend on coal for their electricity are actually 17 percent to 27 percent worse for the environment than diesel or gas engines, because we depend so much on coal for our electricity. So the cost of the coal will go up, because of demand. (Braun)
A. This is especially true for the U.S., because we derive about 45 percent of our energy from coal. (Braun)
1. In states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas it’s around 100 percent. (Braun)
2. The global warming potential for EVs that rely on natural gas – generally considered to be the cleanest fossil fuel – show an improvement of only 12 percent over gasoline, and break even with diesel. (Braun)
B. The main crop of electric cars cost in a range of $30,000 and $40,000.
1. That is considerably more expensive than its comparably equipped gas powered counterpart.
2. Gas prices would have to top $8.53 for the Leaf competitive. (Braun)
i. It would have to hit $12.50 for the Volt to be worth it. ii. Based on a gas versus electricity, fuel efficiency and depreciation.
III.
(Third Constructive Argument) Electric cars need recharging and special plug-in stations.
A. most electric-car models can travel no more than about 100 miles on a full charge.
1. A typical 120 volt outlet will take 10’s of hours to charge the batteries.
i. Customers would need 240 volt accessibility to charge in a few hours. ii. Most areas as of yet don’t support an infrastructure with charging stations as readily available as gas stations.
B. Battery cost unlikely to change unless battery costs drop dramatically, despite the drastic change that represents from gas-powered vehicles.
1. currently batteries cost about $400-600 for each unit called a kilowatt-hour.
2. Current electric cars contain batteries with up to 85 kilowatt-hours.
(Transition) As I’ve shown you, retrieving the lithium needed for the batteries is dangerous and bad for the environment. The initial cost of an electric car is more expensive than most people can afford. And driving electric cars, comparatively to gas powered cars, isn’t really saving you any money, because of the cost of electricity and availiability of plug in stations. My final argument is in opposition to the fact that electric cars will replace gas powered cars and trucks in the foreseeable
future.
IV. (Refutation)This is a false analogy for a couple of reasons
A. (Denial) The world caters to gas and diesel powered vehicles.
1. Semi-trucks and off road vehicles wouldn’t exist without fossil fuels.
B. Second, rolling out charging stations and making plug in accessible outlets outside of a customer’s home is enormous and expensive to undertake.
1. Residential electricity charges would explode, due to the constant charging of a car with such an electricity capacity.
C. Lastly, people love their gas and diesel cars and especially trucks.
1. Motor sports: including racing of any type, winter motor sports, boating would suffer.
i. Although, there is a lot of speculation that electric race cars will take over because of less maintenance and better torque, Motorsports is more than going fast, it’s about sounds and vibrations. ii. You can’t beat the sound of a well tuned v8 engine.
V. (Impact) The fact remains; the world is so steeped and in love with fossil fuels.Electric cars have been on the table to take over gasoline for decades. Although, there have been tremendous strides in the technology, this world will never quench its thirst of dinosaur burners. (Transition) Now that the differences between gas electric cars has been established, and that electric cars aren’t so cheap or safe to manufacture and to change over to a completely new infrastructure would be next to impossible, let’s review the support that states gas is king.
Conclusion
I. (Restatement of main ideas) I have stated three arguments showing why fossil fuels and gas powered cars, will always be in the majority.
A. First, deriving the lithium needed to manufacture the batteries is dangerous to the people, and environment.
B. Second, the cost of electricity is still based on the cost of using fossil fuels.
C. Electric cars need a special infrastructure for charging.
II. (Closing statement) The fact is fossil fuels provide much more power than the equivalency of electricity. Although, deriving fossil fuels isn’t necessarily very safe and clean, telling consumers that electric cars are 100 percent clean is a fallacy, and to produce the lithium that is needed is just as or more so dangerous.
Work Cited
Braun, Peter. "Don 't Look so Smug: Your Tesla Might Be Worse for the Environment than a Gas Car." Digital Trends. N.p., 13 Nov. 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Keller, Kevin. "Electric Cars." Time. Time, 24 Mar. 2015. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Lomborg, Bjorn. "Bjorn Lomborg: Green Cars Have a Dirty Little Secret." WSJ. N.p., 11 Mar. 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.