The Point is to "Be Good," not to "Feel Good"

There is a genuine difference between "being good," or "doing good," and "feeling good." Too often, we opt for the latter, instead of insisting on the former. Consider all-electric cars, something that makes us feel good and virtuous. 

There is a scientific argument to be made, though, that when electricity is generated by coal-fired plants, such vehicles do not actually make a positive contribution to carbon emissions. But it makes people feel good, even when they are not, objectively speaking, "doing good." 

Even when electricity is generated in some other lower carbon way, such as from windmills, there is no such thing as a moral free lunch. Wind farms kill birds and golden eagles. Perhaps that does not cause many qualms. But if not, neither will accidental killing of dolphins when fishing for tuna. 

The specific energy of gasoline — measured in kWh per kg, for instance — is about 400 times higher than that of a lead-acid battery, and about 200 times better than the Lithium-ion battery in the Chevrolet Volt. We should not expect batteries to rival the energy density delivered by our beloved fossil fuels — ever, many correctly would note. 

The point is simply that the important matter is to do good, not just feel good. If you want to lower carbon footprint, then lower it, objectively. Don't posture. Don't substitute "feeling good" for "doing good."