Pope Francis’ visit to the United States was met with both enthusiasm and skepticism. Many within the Catholic Church have been used to a hardline stance on social issues, but this Pope has turned a new leaf with a focus on the poor, the powerless and the environment. He was unafraid to step into one of our most contentious political issues, our energy policy.

On Thursday, Francis made an address to Congress, the first ever by a Pope. He turned to his Encyclical that was released earlier this year, "Care for Our Common Home," which outlines our “environmental challenge.” Francis told the Congress that we must “redirect our steps to avert the most serious effects of the environmental deterioration caused by human activity.”

Francis called upon Congress to be proactive, for “now is the time for courageous actions and strategies, aimed at implementing a culture of care and an integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same time protecting nature.”

For many years, the United States has been dependent on oil for the majority of our energy. There wasn’t much contention on this issue until the 2008 election when then Senator Obama talked about finding alternative fuels, contrasted with Sarah Palin’s call to “drill, baby drill.” In 2005 we imported 12.5 million barrels of oil, compared to just 7.5 in 2012, according to TIME.

Both views sought energy independence, but Obama’s view is clearly better for the environment, and is the winner, given his election to the presidency. The president released a plan to combat climate change earlier this year. The plan states that 28 percent of emissions come from transportation and plans to combat this by raising fleet fuel MPG to 54.5, according to the White House.

One way that fleet milage is being improved is through the development of electric vehicles (EV’s). This falls in line with Pope Francis’ call for the “proper application of technology.” EV’s run completely on electric power, so owners never have to visit the pump, helping both the environment and your wallet. Like any other vehicle, EV’s take up resources to produce and dispose of after they can no longer run, but while you own them, your carbon footprint is minimal. If you live in a state like Oregon, which is mainly powered by hydroelectric dams, your footprint is minimized even farther.

According to a UCSUSA study, today only about one percent of households own an EV, but as many as 69 percent could use one as a commuter car because they drive under 60 miles to get to work, which is well within the range of many EV’s.

When it comes to the emerging EV market, there are quite a few options to choose form. One of the most popular options is the Nissan Leaf, which has an estimated range of 84 miles and starts at about $29,000. Mid-range options include the Chevy Volt, with a 53 mile range starting at $33,000, and the Volkswagen eGolf, with an 83 mile range starting at $22,000. The most technologically advanced EV’s are Teslas, whose Model S has a range of 230 miles starting at $75,000.

There are obvious drawbacks to EV’s, one of which is charging stations. Because of limited ranges, it’s difficult to take out of town trips. Charging stations do exist, but the charging station network is still underdeveloped. It also takes time for the car to recharge, with ranges varying on which car you own, as opposed to filling up in a matter of minutes at a gas station. Some cars, like the first generation of the Nissan Leaf, also experienced a reduction in range as the car depreciated.

Electric Vehicles are far from perfect, but they are a solid alternative as a commuter car that help save the environment and cost a little less. The technology can certainly be developed farther if we show that these things are a priority. It’s the least we can do to care for our common home.