In an optimistically titled “analysis” (Analysis Of Electric Car Pros And Cons, January 10), James Tyrrell confused readers with nebulous mathematical mumbo-jumbo which did not in the least support his wildly wrong assertion that electric cars are “20 to 100 times worse” (whatever that means) than “petrol” cars. At best, all that can be deduced from Mr Tyrrell’s weird maths is just this: batteries are darned heavy...which everybody knows anyway. Incidentally, a petrol engine is also darned heavy, but this item was conveniently omitted. As pointed out by a blogger, Mr Tyrrell mixes apples and oranges by confusing energy density with efficiency.

Contrary to what Mr Tyrrell implies, the electric car is extraordinarily efficient but, because batteries are so heavy, the distance that can be travelled on one charge is limited. This need not be a problem in small countries like Malta.

That the electric car has zero emissions at street level was downplayed by Mr Tyrrell. To this end, he told us that the electric car “simply shifts the pollution problem to someone else’s back yard”. This is false; power stations are not built in peoples’ back yards whereas people often live in traffic-congested streets in densely urbanised Malta.

Zero-street emissions puts the electric way ahead of the petrol car in terms of health. Electric cars also emit less carbon dioxide if recharged from a reasonably efficient source of energy. The threat to health from street-level traffic pollution is of particular significance in Malta’s densely urbanised environment. That living in a street with heavy traffic has serious health implications is scientifically proven. The evidence for this is reviewed in the Think Tank report Towards a Low Carbon Society – the Nation’s Health, Energy Security and Fossil Fuels ( http://www.tppi.org.mt/cms/index.php/reports ).

Mr Tyrrell’s devious calculations do not take into account the huge potential for further increasing the efficiency of electric cars. As energy generation becomes cleaner, so will the all-electric car. Hybrid cars are also set to improve dramatically. The Chevrolet Volt already has excellent performance coupled with unlimited range and an estimated fuel consumption of 102 miles per gallon.

Mr Tyrrell’s other unacceptable comment was that “wind and solar energy (sources) cost more to produce in greenhouse gases and energy than they will ever generate”. This is as Luddite and false as his pontification on the electric car. A wind turbine “pays back” the energy and greenhouse gases used in its production within two or three months of its 25-year lifespan of generating clean electricity. It was exactly this kind of ill-informed, bigoted chorus that greeted the proposal for the installation of what might have been Malta’s first wind farm in 2004. If this project had not been turned down it would now have been into its sixth year of electricity generation. It would have provided a significant amount of clean electricity and reduced Malta’s annual carbon dioxide emissions by about 80,000 tons. This wind farm would have given us realistic advance information on the potential of wind energy in Malta. It would have provided a valuable opportunity for our technicians to gain some hands-on experience with wind energy and tested the logistics of adding a major source of intermittent electricity to our grid. It would have provided new employment opportunities. But this was not to be, it was held back by shrill misinformation propagated by a few; we are consequently still at square one and remain stubbornly 100 per cent dependent on oil for our electricity.