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 create as many places cannot devote their budget to new sources that are less effective than 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 can store enormous amounts 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 the angle. If the case is made that since the vehicle itself does not emit anything, then it would be correct to say it is better for the planet. But if the case is made that the entire process of creating and maintaining an electric car emits the same amount of pollutants as the standard gas-powered car, it would be right as well.

The environmental cost of a car includes both building it and fueling it. One has to consider the materials needed to produce the parts and how those materials are sourced. The process needed to create lithium-ion batteries is notoriously dirty. 

While it is true that EVs do not emit anything from their tailpipes, unless the electricity they run on is clean and sustainable, the miles they travel are not pollution-free. Tesla, the biggest manufacturer of electric vehicles today, claims its cars are better than traditional gasoline-powered cars as they do not release harmful emissions. They run solely on electricity and do not [burn products derived from fossil fuels] like gasoline. But the electricity isn’t always clean to begin with. That means factoring in emissions associated with oil drilling, [fracking to extract natural gas], and power plant smokestacks when calculating the “emissions” cost of driving the car.

In addition to the pollution created by generating electricity, EVs pollute in novel and insidious ways. Every EV uses a massive battery to store power. The metals needed to make lithium-ion batteries require significant amounts of energy to extract. This energy is produced through fossil fuel burning, contributing to an electric car’s overall emissions. The environmental cost of producing the batteries is enormous; for example, the cost of mining metals such as nickel and cobalt that are needed for electric-car batteries, which Russell Gold states in his article, “Are Electric Cars Really Better For the Environment.” Since the batteries are rechargeable, people tend to assume they are cleaner, but they’re dirty to produce and dirty to recharge.

By the end of the life cycle of an electric car, several tons of harmful pollutants are released into the atmosphere. While many know the effects of a gas-powered car on the environment, the EV’s emissions are often overlooked. There is still a significant amount of pollution being created when it comes to EVs, just not in the traditional form of burning gasoline and tailpipe emissions.

When looking at the beginning stages of an EV and how much emissions are released,  people often need to remember to also look at the end of an EVs life. The battery recycling process has both many pros and cons. In Sergio Manzetti’s article, he mentions that materials such as cobalt, nickel, and manganese are recovered and sent to refining. They can then be used to manufacture stainless steel from which the car body comes.

However, unlike those metals, the lithium and other rare earth metals are turned into slag, which is then used in making pavements and roadbeds. Manzetti mentions that there is a process that can recover rare metals, but it is too expensive and not worth the money as it is cheaper just to purchase new materials. 

Researchers are working to create a more effective and cost-friendly way of battery recycling. Still, until they develop a better method, a new lithium-ion battery will have to be produced for every EV made.

Most of the batteries produced come from China, where it is notoriously known that their primary energy source comes from burning coal. Making the batteries in mass quantities needs to be done cost-effectively. China only knows how to do so by using coal, which is cheap to mine and readily available. In Iris Crawford’s article, “How Much CO2 is Emitted By Manufacturing Batteries,” he claims that when producing a battery, the metals require significantly high temperatures to melt down, a process that can only cost-effectively be achieved through coal burning. Coal is also known to emit almost two times the amount of greenhouse gases compared to other natural resources such as natural gas, causing a substantial increase in air pollution. 

Crawford mentions how much CO2 is released when producing such LI batteries. He states 

the Tesla Model 3 holds an 80 kWh lithium-ion battery. CO2 emissions for manufacturing that battery would range between 3120 kg (about 3 tons) and 15,680 kg (about 16 tons). Just how much is just one ton of CO2? Just about the same weight as a great white shark!” Batteries may seem like the next step in the automotive industry, but manufacturers must look at all aspects of the production process, not just the life span of emissions. 

Despite the toxins being expelled during production, the energy electric vehicles run on also contributes negatively to the environment. Depending on where the energy is produced plays a significant role in how much CO2 is released. The U.S. Department of Energy claims, “In regions that depend heavily on coal for electricity generation, EVs may not demonstrate a strong well-to-wheel emissions benefit.” Many places still rely heavily on coal as their primary source of energy production, which essentially contradicts the entire point of electric vehicles. If cars are still involved with burning fossil fuels, why even make the switch to electric in the first place?

The world has improved by switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, but more places are needed. In the article “5 Places Running On Renewable Energy,” Iceland, for example, has made the switch and is now running on 100% renewable energy. Most of their power comes from hydropower and geothermal energy, which they get from taking advantage of their volcano activity. If more countries followed suit, electric cars would no longer be fueled by fossil fuels, actually making them cleaner for the environment.

Companies like Tesla claim that their cars are pollution-free and have no effect on the environment. They must disclose to their customers that while there may be zero tailpipe emissions, the vehicles still impact the environment. Since the varying factor of whether or not an EV will produce CO2 depends on the region in which the car is driven, Tesla does not feel the need to make this critical claim to its consumers. 

In places like California, where many residents drive EVs, their energy comes mainly from renewable sources. Tesla likes to imply that all states are like California in claiming that all of their cars are better for the environment, regardless of region.

 Virginia McConnell, an economist at the environmental research firm Resources for the Future, claims that “if you use coal-fired power plants to produce the electricity, then all-electrics don’t even look that much better than a traditional vehicle in terms of greenhouse gases.” The only way electric cars will make a difference in the environment is if the means of production are clean. Without changing how lithium-ion batteries are made or eliminating fossil fuels from energy production, little to no progress can be made. All countries should follow Iceland’s direction and run solely on 100% renewable energy, or close to it. This is the only way the environment will benefit.

Electric vehicles are falsely advertised as “better for the environment” based on one fact alone: they emit no greenhouse gases during driving. Big car companies benefit hugely from this characterization’s “half-truth” nature, and the media does nothing to dispute it. The sad truth is that making their massive batteries is hugely polluting. And until the electricity they spend can be produced cleanly, they still depend on coal or natural gas produced by fracking. When the final calculations are done, EVs may be even worse for the planet than gasoline vehicles, at least for now.

The media likes to play into this false reality of electric cars being less environmentally harmful as a marketing tactic to convince the average consumer to make the switch. The same information has been advertised since the being of the electric car movement almost 20 years ago. Since then, new information has been collected about how clean electric cars actually are. However, there is no media coverage of these new findings, as it may steer a potential customer away from purchasing. Despite what big companies say, electric cars are not completely clean and are still responsible for CO2 emissions. 

The idea that electric cars are better for the environment because they do not rely on gas burning is a viable argument to make. For years car companies have been pushing the narrative that electric cars are the future and that everyone needs to switch over as a way to reduce air pollutants. This is the story in many Americans’ heads, as it is the only side we have been exposed to. Most potential EV customers are attracted primarily to the “green claims,” explicit and implicit, in the carmakers’ promotions.

But when the other side is considered, one can clearly see that the big car companies are leaving out vital information about their products. While yes electric cars are decidedly better for the environment in just one way than traditional gas-powered ones, as there is no CO2 emitted from their tailpipes, there are still pollutants produced by the manufacture and operation of every electric vehicle, just maybe not in the same way. The Alternative Fuels Data Center, created by the U.S. Department of Energy, states that “all-electric vehicles and PHEVs running only on electricity have zero tailpipe emissions, but electricity production, such as power plants, may generate emissions.” Car manufacturers never mention energy production as it goes against their main claim. 

Major carmaker KIA, to keep pace with competitors, has recently entered the EV marketplace. As a major car company, KIA is responsible for letting its customers know how clean their new EVs are. The KIA website has a section titled “Are Electric Cars Better?” which gives prospective customers frequently asked questions about their vehicles. The entire page relays nothing but information in favor of EVs and never mentions the environmental costs of EV production and operation. KIA claims that EVs “produce no or fewer tailpipe emissions than internal combustion engine cars. Gasoline or diesel-powered vehicles have been blamed as one of the major culprits for air pollution.” While this is true, the next part of the article claims, “using renewable energy for charging an electric car can contribute to reducing CO₂ emissions even further.”

 As a prospective customer reading this article, I assume that KIAs electric vehicles release no emissions, and when renewable energy is used for charging, those emissions decrease even more. They first make the claim that their cars do not release tailpipe emissions, then go on to say how using sustainable sources for energy can “contribute to reducing CO2 emissions even further.” It is never mentioned how EVs are responsible for CO2 emissions. The points contradict each other as one says no emissions are released, and the other says emissions can be reduced. KIA should make all the evidence available to the customer and state that the electricity needed to charge the batteries is what is creating the pollutants. 

While many EV purchasers do their research on which model is best for them, they often need to research the number of emissions that model will produce. The common misconception regarding EVs that is almost always overlooked is where the energy for charging comes from. 

We don’t know for sure, but EVs might produce more CO2 emissions per mile. It’s certainly possible. A coal plant might have to emit a massive amount of carbon (and other pollutants) to produce enough electricity to power an EV for one mile (especially after so much of the electricity is lost in the transmission lines from the plant to the car) than a gas-powered car emits to drive the same mile.

Depending on the area in which you live, the energy used for charging is only sometimes clean. In the most recent breakdown of Electricity Generation by State, the primary energy source per state is very diverse. In states like Arkansas, Colorado, and Florida, their primary energy sources are coal and natural gas. These are the most common energy sources that also create the most fumes. In states that rely on non-renewable energy, the energy at an EV charging station would be produced using fossil fuels. This goes against the entire point of EVs not contributing to air pollution. 

In contrast, in states such as Maine, Oregon, and Vermont, the primary energy source comes from renewable sources like hydroelectric and solar. Electric cars in places where renewable energy is the primary source will have a chance of being completely free of all emissions at the tailpipe but may still be less green than gasoline vehicles when the entire lifespan of the vehicle is calculated as a cost per mile.

People need to understand the many components of the energy used during the lifespan of an electric vehicle. It is not simply no there are zero emissions connected with electric cars, as so many people tend to think. Electric vehicle companies only tell their customers the positive sides of owning an EV and how zero tailpipe emissions are coming from it. They tend to withhold that the energy needed to power the car has to come from somewhere else, which may be from a fossil fuel power plant, and is how EVs contribute to air pollutants.

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 November 30, 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

Crawford, I. (2022, March 1). How much CO2 is emitted by manufacturing batteries? | MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering. MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://meche.mit.edu/news-media/how-much-co2-emitted-manufacturing-batteries 

5 places running on 100% renewable energy. (2020, November 5). World Smart Cities Forum. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://worldsmartcities.org/5-places-running-on-100-renewable-energy/ 

Ngo, V. (2021, March 22). Are Electric Cars Really Better for the Environment? The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://www.wsj.com/graphics/are-electric-cars-really-better-for-the-environment/ 

Wade, L. (2016, March 31). Tesla’s Electric Cars Aren’t as Green as You Might Think. WIRED. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://www.wired.com/2016/03/teslas-electric-cars-might-not-green-think/ 

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Emissions from Electric Vehicles. (n.d.). Alternative Fuels Data Center. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html 

Are electric cars better? (n.d.). Kia. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://www.kia.com/dm/discover-kia/ask/are-electric-cars-better.html 

Electricity Generation by State | November 2022. (n.d.). Choose Energy. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/electricity-sources-by-state/