Will there not be just as much of a carbon footprint from mining materials to make batteries for all the new electric cars?
And all the precious metals that go into making electronics to make that car operate?
Plus the power generation associated with charging everyone’s vehicle.
It’s my first day, but I’m here to learn something new
In: Other
A new study came out literally few days ago that considers all of the lifecycle in different parts of the world: [https://theicct.org/publications/global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021](https://theicct.org/publications/global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021)
It takes in consideration both influence of ecological additives to fuel for standard cars and non-green energy used for charging electrical vehicles, and still EVs win.
In Europe where is a lot of renewable powerplants the total emissions per lifecycle are up to two-thirds lower, in India with much more emissions created in power plants it is still up to 20-30 % better to use EVs. There is a nice visualisation in the study article.
there are some things about generating electricity on a large scale that can be hard to understand, just because as people we have a hard time understanding things on a industrial scale.
I work in a factory that generates steam, as a heat source, and also uses some steam to reduce the electrical bill
the amount of efficiency that electric generation gains from increases in scale is over powered. majorly.
where I work we have 3 boilers that have big water tanks over them to be boiled away. the fire is fully enclosed on the top bottom and sides. and has gobs of air forced into it. the fire from the coal is so bright that you need a welding hoods to view it safely.
the steam that is boiled off goes threw a turban pushing a 2, 6 ft fans with like a millon fan blades in it. when the steam comes off the fan blades is still stupidly hot. so we send it back into water and it boils, making more steam at a lower pressure, like 1.5 lbs lower. this steam feeds 2 more turbines. rinse and repeat 4 times.
this is for a factory that’s more concerned with steam vs electricity. we use the same energy 5 times. a power plant will do this 9 times. a nuke plant even more so.
the factory I work at produces water as a waste product. its dumped into a river cleaner then the drinking water that the city produces for the people
Electric car tech is is simpler to maintain and thus requires less replacement parts long term, that alone cuts back on providing as much part surplus. There’s still a lot of parts that aren’t EV related in such cars but the motor and transmission parts alone usually require more precise machining and precious metals, simplifying that eases resource usage.
Battery tech is where the bulk of the controversy comes from, lithium is not easy and cheap to process, with lots of pollution created from the extraction alone. Thankfully, newer improvements in already well established theory have made it so in the near future we’ll have denser energy packs, cheaper, safer, and less pollutant to the environment.
Charging from a fossil fuel plant is still more efficient than the small engines of cars. Also, thorium and other renewable resources make for a great solution long term over existing power plants.
I have a love hate relationship with modern cars, too much technology, too much that will fail and harder for the user to repair. Once the newer battery tech comes out and become cheap enough I’ll convert an old beetle.
I agree with a bunch that has been said however, the source of electricity needs to be considered. Gas powered is better then coal so it depends on region
What precious metals are you referring to?
Depends. If your energy is generated via coal *absolutely not*. If by other means then yes by either a little (Petro) or a lot (nuclear).
As with most things, it depends.
Long story short: the breakeven point is a few years out.
Initially, EV’s footprint is actually higher but catches up down the road. Actual point will vary by model, country, power generation mix..ect.
If you’re someone who gets a new car every few years then, no. Buying a new EV every couple of years is actually worse. You have to be in it for the long haul for it to have a real impact.
There are a few good visualizations out there. I’ll try to find some and post.
Always remember: “EVs also have a carbon footprint” does NOT mean “EVs have the same carbon footprint as fossil-fuel vehicles.”
We have a natural human tendency to think in terms of either “this thing is **perfect** and has no drawbacks” or “this thing is **just as bad** as this other thing,” but real life is almost never that simple. A thing can be significantly less bad than another thing, without having to be perfect.
Latest Answers