Not So Green
Electric vehicles have proven to be greener than gas combustion engines when looking exclusively at the tailpipe. They emit no harmful chemicals into the atmosphere as they cruise down the highway. But the tailpipe is just the most obvious place we judge vehicle greenness. From the design phase, through production, to the highway, to the junkyard, the overall impact of EVs on our world is massive, if not obvious, and we should think twice about racing to adopt them.
The primary source of pollution for an electric vehicle happens during the manufacturing process. Johnathan Lesser’s article, “Are Electric Cars Worse for the Environment,” brings up the point that “cars are charged from the nation’s electrical grid, which means that they’re only as “clean” as America’s mix of power sources.” The energy used to charge EV batteries is created using fossil fuels and other standard energy harvesting techniques. This is where the air pollutants come from that many people tend to glance over.
EVs create a constant need for new sources of electricity, which today means more coal, oil, and natural gas which are all unsustainable. Fossil fuels are the world’s most significant contributor to greenhouse gasses and other contaminants that cause climate change. Since these non-renewable energy sources are easily sourced, they slow our transition to sustainable sources. The article “Where Does Our Electricity Come From” explains that burning coal or oil entails creating heat, which generates steam and powers turbines to produce electricity. These plants “generate electricity reliably over long periods and are generally cheap to build.” Renewable energy sources cost too much to produce as many places cannot devote their budget to new sources that are not as effective as coal or oil in the same amount of time.
Since they are so cheap to harvest and easy to manipulate, fossil fuels are the go-to when building electric car batteries. Companies can quickly pump out the materials needed at a very low cost.
While other methods of producing electricity do not involve burning fossil fuels, they are less reliable sources. They often require more work for less energy, meaning they make less power in the same amount of time. Wind, water, and solar are all used to generate electricity but are mainly used to power other things, not produce batteries.
An electric car runs solely on electricity stored in a lithium-ion battery. This type of battery is the leading cause of emissions related to electric vehicles. Manufacturing an EV creates an abundance of greenhouse gasses, enough to be compared to the entire lifecycle of a standard combustion engine. Sergio Manzetti claims in his article “Electric Vehicle Battery Technologies: From Present State to Future Systems” that since electric vehicles are powered by batteries that require charging, they are constantly getting energy from fossil fuel production plants. While some power grids get their power from the previously mentioned renewable energy sources, not all countries can offer consumers the same.
Recent analyses show nevertheless that electric vehicles contribute to the increase in greenhouse emissions through their excessive need for power sources, particularly in countries with limited availability of renewable energy sources, and result in a net contribution and increase in greenhouse emissions across the European continent.
Suppose countries fail to provide their electric vehicle consumers with the means of cleaner energy production and management. In that case, EVs are no better than the standard combustion engine, the typical vehicle seen on the roads, as the same amount of emissions will be released in the cars’ lifetimes.
The lithium-ion battery is able to store an enormous amount of energy while being on the smaller side. The downside is that they are often prone to overheating as there is too much energy in such a small space. This leads to a shorter lifespan of the battery, with replacement being the only option. More batteries lead to more resources needed, causing an increase in the number of harmful environmental impacts.
When looking at the lifetime amount of gasses produced, the standard combustion engines are only sometimes the ones that are worse for the environment. As mentioned before, EVs run off batteries that require energy to be charged, which mostly comes from unsustainable sources. This makes them no better than their gas-powered counterparts, as the public tends to assume. The amount of energy needed to create and maintain one part of an EV, the lithium-ion battery, will be higher than the energy required for the entire production of a gas-powered car.
Fossil fuels, or non-renewable sources, release CO2 and other gasses that affect the environment when burned. The gas used to power a standard combustion engine is a non-renewable resource, making it harmful to the environment when burned. While an EV does not burn gas, it ” burns” electricity. Which, most of the time, is produced by burning fossil fuels. Since the batteries need charging, the conversion of fossil fuels to electricity keeps happening.
So yes, while the physical electric car itself may be better for the environment than a typical gas-powered car as there is no tailpipe, obtaining the electricity and energy needed to power the battery is how the gasses get released into the air. The standard gas car constantly pollutes the air, while an EV’s primary pollution time is during battery production; the same amount of CO2 is released when you look at the lifespan of these vehicles.
People can argue that electric cars are better for the environment, which may be true; it just depends on what angle you are looking at. If you make the case that since the car itself does not emit anything, then you would be right in saying it is better for the planet. But if you make the case that the entire process of creating and maintaining an electric car emits the same amount of pollutants as the standard gas-powered car, you would be right as well.
References
LESSER, J., Hopkinson, J., Allen, A., Diamond, D., Samuelsohn, D., Grunwald, M., Cassella, M., Demko, P., LeVine, M., Scola, N., Pradhan, R., Snider, A., Temple, P., Boudreau, C., & Schreckinger, B. (2018, May 15). Are electric cars worse for the environment? Politico. Retrieved October 17, 2022, from https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2018/05/15/are-electric-cars-worse-for-the-environment-000660/
Manzetti, S. (2015, November). Electric vehicle battery technologies: From present state to future systems. ScienceDirect. Retrieved October 17, 2022, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115006577
Where does our electricity come from? (n.d.). World Nuclear Association. Retrieved October 17, 2022, from https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/where-does-our-electricity-come-from.aspx
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Cinderella, I generally skip over posts in Feedback Please for which there are no Replies from the author specifying what sort of feedback would be most helpful and welcome.
You’ll eventually rise to the top of the queue, but you can get faster results by letting me know what sort of help you seek.
Thanks.
I’m removing this post from Feedback Please until you respond, Cinderella.
I apologize for not responding earlier. I was unaware you had commented on my post.
I would like some feedback on my entire essay honestly. I have no idea if what I am trying to say makes sense or if what I wrote is technically a definition argument.
After thinking about my topic after this was posted, I know that I want to make some revisions but am hesitant to do so until I know how you feel about it.
Anything would be helpful. Thanks.
One quick piece of advice, Cinderella, is to answer questions, not ask them. ”
Not So Green” would be a much better title than “Electric Efficiency?”
Since you’re in a better position than your readers to know the answer to that question (Remember, you’re the server, the cook, the restaurant owner. You know what’s on the menu and what isn’t. What’s fattening and what isn’t. What’s fresh . . . .), they count on you for guidance.
Here’s your opening paragraph:
Here’s an alternative:
That advice alone may help you incorporate REALLY CLEAR SIGNPOSTS along the way to COMPEL readers to understand your position on the many drawbacks of the EV revolution.
One paragraph in particular is very confusing. It begins:
I don’t understand how or why the two ways to burn fossil fuels differ in their gas release.
And I don’t understand how charging the battery converts more fossil fuel to electricity.
What you mean, by the second one, is that “recharging isn’t pollution-free.” There’s no emission at the charging station, but the electricity comes from somewhere remote where, depending on how it was produced, it might be as dirty as a coal plant.
Ask a new reader to follow your argument. See if there are places in your essay that confuse that new reader. Hope for an honest reply. A Writing Center tutor would certainly give you one.
By and large, you’re doing good work here, Cinderella. I can usually discern your clear point of view.
Provisionally graded.
Always eligible for Revision and a Regrade.
This is a very dubious claim that requires evidence:
I made some changes and would like to know your thoughts.
This is a really good paragraph except that the story is told backwards:
Or something like that.
Not quite. Batteries don’t produce electricity. They store it for later use.
And the cars don’t release emissions. But the manufacture of the batteries might certainly cause disastrous levels of harmful emissions.
It’s a strong argument, Cinderella, and you lay it out nicely. But it does get repetitive once you’ve laid out the basic argument. What we need is not another recap of the argument but some substantial evidence of the emissions cost of manufacturing those batteries. OR a comparison of the amount of harmful pollutants PER MILE for burning gasoline versus running off a battery charged by burning coal. Something nitty and gritty like that.
Otherwise, you’ve got a nice paper here.
Thanks for the feedback. I mention the number of pollutants per mile in my causal argument, but I could go into more detail in that paper.
I will try and move things around to make me sound less repetitive.
I fixed the issues you said. Let me know what you think.