Among the countless effects of climate change, the transportation industry is a major source of pollution on our planet. This information has led to the development of electric cars which are designed to be more energy-efficient and less polluting than gas cars. Still, with the change from electric to gas cars, significant changes will have to be made in order to reduce the effects of climate change. 

In the article “Are Electric Cars Really Greener?” Andre Goncalves analyses the environmental impacts of electric cars and how they may be better than gas cars, but they still leave a carbon footprint. This piece of writing fits into the informational article genre. This article was shared through the medium of a website. The author of this article Andre Goncalves establishes his credibility by mentioning that he has studied sustainability management. The article says “We are running to avoid the 2° Celsius temperature increase and prevent the bad consequences of climate change from happening. But is preventing the bad the same as planning for the best?”(Goncalves). By mentioning the drastic changes needed to avoid the two degrees celsius temperature increase the author appeals to pathos. This question at the end causes people to really self reflect and look at their own choices when it comes to climate change. The language used throughout the article is very simple and easy to understand as a novice to the topic. The language helps to show that the intended audience could be people who own cars, people who are planning on buying a car, or anyone who is curious about the environmental impacts of electric v.s. gas cars. This particular audience may be impacted by this article because of the authors appeal to pathos as previously stated. This may cause car owners or people planning on buying cars to make changes to their decisions which shows how this article is not only effective at informing, but potentially sparking change. The article says “As cars make up 72% of the Co2 emissions in this sector (followed by planes, with 10%), the market of electric cars has been growing and seems to be a good solution to fight climate change. But is it true that EVs have zero emissions?”(Goncalves). The author writes this after explaining the climate change problem in the world which shows that the rhetorical situation is climate change. This quote helps to show that the purpose of this article is to inform the reader of the extent that electric cars are eco-friendly and to connect this transportation pollution issue to climate change. Gonclaves clearly takes the stance that electric cars are not as environmentally friendly as people suspect them to be and because of this, changes need to be made. This is made clear throughout the article as he makes multiple arguments as to why electric vehicles cause more pollution than is let on. The author consistently enhances his argument by adding more categories where electric cars are not actually as environmentally friendly as we think. For example, The author mentions that while electric cars may be a greener throughout their lifespan, they require rare earth materials that need to be mined and mining causes a lot of pollution. The author also mentions how the lithium used in the batteries for electric cars is not recycled and ends up in landfills or incinerated which is a waste of material. In the article, Gonclaves writes “As for the energy production if the car is being powered with energy from burning fossil fuels, it is still releasing CO2 in the atmosphere, not from the tailpipe but from some distant power plant.”(Goncalves). Gonclaves continues to prove that electric cars are not as sustainable as we think. Here he explains that while electric cars may not be polluting the air as you drive it, the energy needed for them to run is being produced for the most part by fossil fuels. This analysis helps to convey a critical tone throughout the article. While electric cars may have many benefits, Gonclaves does remain critical in his explanation of why electric cars are not as green as people often think they are. This critical tone contributes to his stance because it helps the reader understand that changes still need to be made without sugar coding the information. 

In the article “Electric cars emissions myth busted” Roger Harrabin discusses how electric cars create less emission than regular gas cars. “The new research from the universities of Exeter, Nijmegen – in The Netherlands – and Cambridge shows that in 95% of the world, driving an electric car is better for the climate than a petrol car.”(Harrabin) These cars aren’t polluting the air as they are driven, but the charging stations which they get their energy from are not always powered by clean energy. The author Roger Harrabin, an environmental analyst for BBC news,  also mentions “Travel demand reductions of at least 20% are required, along with a major shift away from the car if we are to meet our climate goals.”(Harrabin). This statement puts emphasis on the rhetorical situation which is climate change. The transportation industry is a large contributor to global emissions and here the author says that changes need to be made if we are going to protect the earth. This quote also helps to show the author’s stance and purpose. The author takes the stance that electric cars are cleaner than gas vehicles; however, in addition to switching to electric cars, more changes need to be made in order to keep the planet safe. This stance influences the purpose of the article and makes it to inform the readers of why we need to make changes to the way we transport. Additionally, the purpose of informing connects to the genre of this piece which is an informational article. Throughout the article, the author uses simple language to allow all readers to understand. This shows that the author may be directing this toward an audience who consists of novices to the subject of electric cars and their sustainability. This piece is shared on a news source medium, BBC news, which helps support the audience being novices because this news source produces news for everyday readers to get informed. People who are well informed about this subject may not have been able to grab any new information from this article. The article also says “But that doesn’t mean the problem of cars and the environment is solved. First, it’ll be hard to shift the car fleet to electric in time to meet the UK’s 2050 climate goal. Second, the process will put a huge strain on the generation and supply of clean energy.”(Harrabin). This analysis explains how the transition from gas cars to electric cars will not be an easy one. There are still many obstacles that will come along the way concerning clean energy and emissions. This quote helps to convey the author’s cautionary tone. By saying that the problem isn’t over he’s giving a warning that we still need to find a solution to the problems that come up along the way because if not we won’t reach our climate mark which could lead to irreversible changes. 

In the article “Sustainable Transportation: Electric v.s. Gas” Emily Folk discusses the benefits of switching to electric cars. The author Emily Folk, a sustainability and green technology writer, looks into the differences between the specific stages of pollution and the difference in pollution throughout the car’s lifespan. The rhetorical situation for this article is climate change. The transportation system is a major part of global emissions which has led to the creation of electric cars. The article says “EVs produce significantly fewer emissions than gas-powered vehicles. While there may be some debate over the environmental impact of the manufacturing process, the benefits of electric vehicles far outweigh their shortcomings.”(Folk) This quote helps to show the stance this author takes is that people should shift to electric vehicles. While they are not perfect they do produce significantly fewer emissions. This quote also helps to show how the author uses a direct tone to inform the reader of the facts and her stance. This article was published in the medium of a scientific magazine. Additionally, this article uses language that is easy to understand for all audiences. The medium and language together show that the audience of this paper is directed toward people interested in science and specifically the science behind cars and their pollution. The article also says “Electric cars may produce zero tailpipe emissions in comparison to gas-powered vehicles, but they require significantly more energy during production… When comparing direct emissions from electric and gas-powered vehicles, EV’s are the clear winner. While the production of car batteries is a carbon-intensive process, the lifespan of driving an electric vehicle is extremely efficient… Even when EV manufacturing is taken into consideration, the average battery-powered car still produces 50% fewer emissions than gas-powered vehicles over their comparative lifetimes.”(Folk) This quote shows that the author’s purpose is to inform their reader. Folk succeeds in informing the reader that while EV’s may produce more emissions while being produced, they still produce significantly fewer emissions throughout their lifetimes. This purpose is in line with the genre of the article which is an informational article. This quote also supports that the tone of this article is direct because the author is very straightforward when explaining the facts and why electric cars are overall better than gas cars. 

The journal article “Electric avenue: Electric cars on a 2-way street?” was published by NewSRX LLC. This article’s medium is an online journal. Specifically, this was published in the journal of engineering which shows that the intended audience may be engineers or researchers. This article uses some language referring to systems that not all readers may understand; however, despite this language, the article is understandable to many people outside of the intended audience. In the journal article “Electric avenue: Electric cars on a 2-way street?” The purpose is to propose and share a new more efficient function that could potentially be used for electric cars. The author makes it clear that the rhetorical situation is car efficiency and productivity. The author writes “No more sitting idle for hours in parking lots or garages racking up payments, but instead earning their keep by helping store power for the electricity grid.”(“Electric Avenue”). This shows that the author is trying to make it clear that cars could be created in a way that is more beneficial to the owner. Additionally, this sentence shows the author’s tone is informative by hinting at information that will be shared throughout the article. In the article it says “Stein leads a National Science Foundation-funded team exploring plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) that not only use grid electricity to meet their power needs, but also the car’s potential to store electricity from the wind or sun, or even feed electricity back into the grid, earning money for the owner.”(“Electric Avenue”) In other words, the author is proposing a new function for electric cars. One that would make them more valuable and efficient. This also contributes to the stance of the author which is that cars can be improved so that they can become more useful and efficient. Additionally, the author makes it clear that the genre of this article is an informational article. This is made clear by the introduction to the new concept for electric cars. The author clearly is trying to inform the reader of this potential advance in the efficiency of electric vehicles. 

Throughout all of the writings which were comparing electric and gas cars, there were many similarities between the medium, stance, purpose, and language along with a few differences in the author’s tones. All of the articles were shared online. This shows that the audiences were intended to be a variety of people including researchers, students, and just interested individuals. Additionally, the language used across all articles was easily understandable which supports the common purpose these authors had which was to inform the reader. Lastly, for similarities, all of these authors took the stance that was moving toward a more sustainable transportation industry. On the other hand, something that differed from text to text was the author’s tone. I think the difference in tone was good because every article may appeal to a different reader more. Overall, these articles were written by four different authors but had a similar objective which led to many similarities when analyzing the rhetorical devices used. 

Works Cited

“Electric avenue: Electric cars on a 2-way street?” Journal of Engineering, 10 Mar. 2010, p. 158. Gale Academic OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A220370890/AONE? u=cuny_ccny&sid=AONE&xid=6a26cc86. Accessed 1 Oct. 2020.

Folk, Emily. “SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION: ELECTRIC VS. GAS.” Science Connected , 1 June 2020. 

Gonçalves , André. “Are Electric Cars Really Eco-Friendly? Maybe Not as Such Much as You Think.” Youmatter, 9 Mar. 2020, youmatter.world/en/are-electric-cars-eco-friendly-and-zero-emission-vehicles-26440/. 

Harrabin, Roger. “Electric Car Emissions Myth ‘Busted’.” BBC News, 23 Mar. 2020, www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51977625.