Ethical Issues From Hybrid Car Technology

Ethical Issues That Arise From Hybrid Car Technology

Since hybrid technology is touted as the best alternative for curbing greenhouse emissions as well as having fewer impacts on the environment, the most important ethical issues therefore arise from the gap between the ideals of the hybrid vehicles and the actual efficiency of the vehicles. In order to determine these issues, this paper looks at how the vehicle is made, the energy that it uses, and whether the vehicles actually meet their reputation in terms of environmental safety.

Hybrid car technology has come a long way in the past twenty years, yet very few people are aware that the technology has been around since the mid-1800s. Early electric vehicles were weak, problematic, and quite expensive, making them unable to meet customer expectations. The Ford Model T revolutionized vehicle manufacturing by offering cheaper, more powerful vehicles fueled by an abundant source of energy—gasoline. During that period, the United States produced enough oil to meet internal demands and for exports, causing the hybrid car concept to diminish until the oil crisis of the 1970s.

The energy crisis prompted a reconsideration of hybrid vehicle technology as a means to reduce dependence on oil imports (Electric Power Research Institute, 2007). Moreover, growing concerns over greenhouse gas emissions—the main consequence of burning fossil fuels—highlighted the environmental impact of such energy sources. This urgent need to develop cleaner fuels and efficient vehicles fueled innovations in hybrid technology, supported by government incentives like tax breaks and widespread advertising to encourage adoption.

However, like any emerging technology, hybrid vehicles raise ethical concerns that must be addressed to realize their full potential. This paper examines production ethics, energy sourcing, and the implications of marketing practices, applying ethical theories to better understand the dilemmas involved.

Production and Material Ethics

Though hybrid vehicles are believed to have a lesser environmental impact during operation, their manufacturing process presents substantial ethical challenges. Hybrid cars are more complex, requiring more energy-intensive manufacturing processes. For example, hybrid vehicles utilize aluminum frames to reduce weight, as aluminum production consumes ten times more energy than steel (Fortenbaugh, n.d.). Consequently, the energy footprint of manufacturing a hybrid vehicle’s frame is significantly higher than that of conventional vehicles, raising questions about the overall environmental benefit.

Furthermore, hybrid vehicles require a large quantity of minerals—such as nickel for batteries—that are obtained through strip mining. Strip mining is known for its destructive environmental effects, including deforestation, soil erosion, and chemical runoff that contaminates water sources (Fortenbaugh, n.d.). Such environmental degradation can take centuries to recover from, raising ethical concerns about the sustainability of the materials used and the long-term ecological harm caused by pollution from mining operations.

Energy Source and Impact

The environmental benefits of hybrid vehicles are highly dependent on the electricity used to charge their batteries. Electricity generation varies widely in environmental impact: hydroelectric, wind, and nuclear power plants produce relatively clean energy, whereas coal and diesel-powered plants generate significant pollution (Fortenbaugh, n.d.). If hybrids are charged using electricity from coal or diesel, their overall environmental footprint may surpass that of traditional combustion engines.

Therefore, the ethics of promoting hybrid vehicles hinge on the energy mix of local electricity grids. As renewable energy sources become more prevalent, the environmental advantages of hybrids are likely to increase. Until then, the notion that hybrid cars are inherently 'green' remains questionable, illustrating the complexity of ethical judgments related to energy sources and environmental sustainability.

Breakeven Point and True Environmental Benefit

A key concept in evaluating hybrid vehicles is the breakeven point—the number of miles driven before the total pollution emitted during manufacturing and operation equals that of conventional vehicles (Fortenbaugh, n.d.). Studies suggest that certain hybrid models, like the Ford Fusion, need to be driven approximately 150,000 miles in city conditions or up to two million miles on highways to reach breakeven (Gerstenfeld et al., 2010). Others, like the Toyota Highlander, may never break even if mainly driven on highways.

This indicates that unless hybrid vehicles are driven extensively, especially in city driving conditions that favor regenerative braking, their environmental benefits may be negligible or even negative. The disparity in breakeven points underscores an ethical concern about overstating the environmental savings of hybrid technology and potentially misleading consumers.

Marketing Ethics and the Role of Engineers

The automotive industry often markets hybrid cars as 'green' and environmentally friendly, but this branding can be deceptive. Such marketing strategies may conflict with the ethical standards outlined by professional engineering bodies, which emphasize honest communication, safety, and sustainable development (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2006). Engineers have a duty to provide truthful information about the environmental impact of their products, yet companies may exaggerate the claimed benefits to boost sales.

This discrepancy raises ethical questions regarding transparency and the integrity of engineering professionals. If engineers are complicit in misleading advertising or if their efforts to develop sustainable technologies are undermined by corporate interests, the ethical foundations of their profession are compromised.

Applying Ethical Theories: Deontology and Hybrid Vehicles

Deontological ethics, as articulated by Immanuel Kant, emphasizes duty, motives, and adherence to moral principles rather than consequences (Kant, 1781). From this perspective, engineers working on hybrid technology act ethically if their motives are pure—aiming to reduce environmental harm—regardless of the outcomes. This view supports the idea that their intentions stem from a duty to society and environmental stewardship.

However, if companies misrepresent the environmental benefits of hybrids to increase profits, they violate Kantian principles of honesty and transparency. Similarly, developing technologies that cause more harm than good—due to manufacturing impacts or electricity source—would conflict with the duty to avoid harm, indicating a breach of ethical obligation even if the motive for innovation is altruistic.

Thus, the ethical assessment of hybrid vehicles requires a balanced appreciation of motives, actions, and outcomes—underscoring the importance of ethical integrity at every stage, from engineering to marketing and policy-making.

Conclusion

The development and promotion of hybrid car technology present complex ethical challenges. While their potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on fossil fuels is promising, the environmental costs associated with manufacturing processes, resource extraction, and electricity sourcing complicate the overall benefit assessment. Additionally, the marketing practices used to promote hybrids may misleadingly portray them as entirely environmentally friendly, which conflicts with professional ethical standards.

Applying deontological ethics highlights that the motives behind hybrid technology are generally aligned with societal good—aiming to address urgent environmental issues. Nonetheless, for hybrids to realize their full ethical and environmental potential, industry stakeholders must improve transparency, ensure responsible sourcing, and adopt cleaner energy generation methods. Public awareness and regulation should reinforce truthful marketing and sustainable development goals. Only through such multifaceted efforts can hybrid vehicle technology fulfill its promise to be a genuinely ethical and environmentally sustainable transportation solution.

References

• American Society of Mechanical Engineers. (2006). Code of Ethics of Engineers. Retrieved from https://www.asme.org/about-asme/engineering-government/engineering-ethics
• Electric Power Research Institute. (2007). Environmental Assessments of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Retrieved from https://www.epri.com
• Fortenbaugh, C. (n.d.). “Hybrid cars”: Not So Environmentally Friendly. University of Pittsburgh. Retrieved from https://www.pitt.edu
• Gerstenfeld, A., Bova, N., Marrs, Z., & Goodwin, J. (2010). Environmental & Social Issues Concerned with Hybrid Cars. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Retrieved from https://web.wpi.edu
• Kant, I. (1781). Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge University Press.
• Hawkins, T. R., Singh, B., Majeau-Bettez, G., & Strømman, A. H. (2013). Comparative Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 17(1), 53–64.
• Liu, J., & Wu, Y. (2019). Sustainable development and electric vehicles: Inspirational insights. Sustainability, 11(14), 3911.
• Ridley, D. B. (2018). The ethics of green transport: A critical review. Environmental Ethics, 40(1), 31–50.
• Shafiei, M., et al. (2020). Life cycle environmental impacts of hybrid electric vehicles: An integrated assessment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 137, 110557.
• Wang, Y., et al. (2021). Energy source effects on the environmental benefits of hybrid vehicles. Energy Policy, 149, 112078.