A new report from the National Research Council confirms something we already knew — that switching to electric cars won’t do anything to reduce air pollution or carbon emissions unless the electricity comes from a “clean” source like nuclear or wind.

The report, “Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use,” mainly measures the health effects from air pollution, specifically the sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxides, ozone, and particulate matter released in burning fossil fuels. Annual damages are estimated at $120 billion, with about half coming from coal in utility boilers and half from burning gasoline in cars and trucks. The report notes that ethanol from corn produces about the same level of emissions as gasoline but suggests that cellulosic ethanol from crops wastes would be a big improvement — except it has never been done at a commercial level.

Clean-air activists have long argued that burning coal in utility boilers has a big impact on lung diseases; the EPA has estimated the annual death toll at 24,000 per year. Yet somehow these arguments never come around to the conclusion that nuclear power would be a better alternative; nuclear has never caused a civilian death, but is somehow considered a dangerous technology.

As for reducing transportation emissions, the report concludes that switching to electric cars won’t help unless the electricity for overnight recharging of car batteries comes from an emissions-free source such as wind or nuclear. While the report doesn’t take sides, nuclear seems like a better choice. Otherwise, Americans may be going bed every night praying for a strong, steady wind so they can start their cars in the morning.

– William Tucker is author of Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Power Will Lead the Green Revolution and End America’s Energy Odyssey.