4 ms·

I've heard that the environmental impact of building the vehicles (the batteries in particular) and charging them outweighs the savings in emissions. Basically

I've heard that the environmental impact of building the vehicles (the batteries in particular) and charging them outweighs the savings in emissions. Basically batteries use lots of toxic chemicals and require LOTS of energy during manufacture. Also isn't most electricity generation in China still based on burning coal? Have any experts done any analysis to see what environmental benefit this brings, if any?

mikeash 8y ago
They’re still a win even when you use coal to charge. It’s true that manufacturing is more energy intensive, but the breakeven point is in the neighborhood of 10-20,000 miles.
- rohit2412 8y ago
  Win compared to old models of gasoline and deisel? probably yes. Win compared to more efficient modern versions, I'm not sure. Win compared to hybrids? No way.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    I don't think so. The added impact of battery manufacturing is quite small compared to the impact of manufacturing any vehicle, and that in turn is a fairly small proportion of the total impact of a vehicle over its lifetime. Only looking at driving, a Prius emits about 238 grams of CO2 per mile. A reasonably efficient EV charging from the US's current generation mix emits about 150 grams/mile. If we assume they'll last 200,000 miles on average, that's about 17 tonnes more CO2 for the Prius. The EV produces in the neighborhood of 6 tonnes more CO2 during manufacture compared to a traditional gas car, and this advantage will be slightly smaller compared to a hybrid.
    - rohit2412 8y ago
      I'm not sure why this guy doing a state by state breakdown comes to a different conclusion than you have. https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM I can find you more sources that say the same thing he does.
      - mikeash 8y ago
        Do you have something that’s not a video? They’re very time consuming, and in my experience the odds are small that a video used as a source in an online discussion is actually worth a damn.
        rohit2412 8y ago
        Look at the map in the video around 9:20
- reirob 8y ago
  Do you have any references for the break even point?
  - mikeash 8y ago
    This covers that and much more: https://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-global-warming-emissions-953 https://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-...
datpuz 8y ago
You have heard wrong.
- joncrane 8y ago
  Source(s)?
  - hokkos 8y ago
    https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publications/TE%20-%20draft%20report%20v04.pdf https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publicat... -80% CO2eq emission for an EV compared to a diesel car in my country.
withhighprod 8y ago
It won’t be based on burning coal forever right? Actually the EVs CAN be a driver for building cleaner power plant. Chinese leaders definitely think long term given they could have longer impact even after they retired (Deng and Jiang remained powerful for years after they “stepped down”)
peterwwillis 8y ago
> Also isn't most electricity generation in China still based on burning coal? Xi Jinping is anti-coal, meaning China is anti-coal. The government's been converting coal power sources to natural gas and getting homeowners and businesses to do the same. In one year the level of the most harmful pollution went down by 33% throughout the region, 54% in Beijing alone. > Have any experts done any analysis to see what environmental benefit this brings, if any? The 4.8 million cars in Beijing are the second biggest cause of air pollution there, so switching to electric would significantly limit this source. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-02/u-s-china-trade-truce-side-by-side-comparison-of-statements https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-02/u-s-china...
alexc05 8y ago
That sounds like the kind of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) that would be really easy for motivated parties to spread. If organizations like the Competitive Enterprise Institute & Heritage Foundation, are willing to produce videos with slogans like "Carbon emissions, they call it pollution, we call it life" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sGKvDNdJNA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sGKvDNdJNA Then maybe wait for a proper study by a reputable source before you buy in to that FUD whole hog. "I heard vaccinations are actually bad for you" https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/health/russia-trolls-vaccine-debate-study/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/health/russia-trolls-vaccine-... "I heard the CIA invented AIDS as a way to keep black people in poverty" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infektion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infektion Who does your anti-EV talking points serve?
WhompingWindows 8y ago
1. You've forgotten WHERE the emissions occur. Would you prefer it next to children waiting for the school bus in urban neighborhoods OR out in the factory district? 2. Batteries are a new technology, they will get faster much better than ICE engines, since they are already mature tech 3. batteries do not use "lots" of toxic chemicals. Li-ion is the main type of battery used in EV's and buses and the tricky/worrisome chemicals are in the VAST minority compared with Li, Al, and other safe compounds. 4. Yes, experts have done the analysis, many many times. You are perpetuating false myths that climate change deniers like to use.
jillesvangurp 8y ago
The chemicals can be recycled and doing so is highly lucrative give how scarce some of them are. China is also a technology leader in producing the means to clean up their energy act (solar panels, wind mills, etc.) and is also deploying these on a massive scale. And it's not like it is super efficient to ship oil across the globe by burning more oil to produce fuel (in a process that is not exactly clean either), which then gets transported by burning some more oil, so that you can burn it in a car using a combustion engine that mostly produces noise and heat. So, no, these are not show stoppers.
ericd 8y ago
Pretty sure that's FUD spread by parties interested in seeing ICE cars hold on a bit longer.
hokkos 8y ago
Please read that : https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publications/TE%20-%20draft%20report%20v04.pdf https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publicat...

mikeash 8y ago

They’re still a win even when you use coal to charge. It’s true that manufacturing is more energy intensive, but the breakeven point is in the neighborhood of 10-20,000 miles.

rohit2412 8y ago
Win compared to old models of gasoline and deisel? probably yes. Win compared to more efficient modern versions, I'm not sure. Win compared to hybrids? No way.
- mikeash 8y ago
  I don't think so. The added impact of battery manufacturing is quite small compared to the impact of manufacturing any vehicle, and that in turn is a fairly small proportion of the total impact of a vehicle over its lifetime. Only looking at driving, a Prius emits about 238 grams of CO2 per mile. A reasonably efficient EV charging from the US's current generation mix emits about 150 grams/mile. If we assume they'll last 200,000 miles on average, that's about 17 tonnes more CO2 for the Prius. The EV produces in the neighborhood of 6 tonnes more CO2 during manufacture compared to a traditional gas car, and this advantage will be slightly smaller compared to a hybrid.
  - rohit2412 8y ago
    I'm not sure why this guy doing a state by state breakdown comes to a different conclusion than you have. https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM I can find you more sources that say the same thing he does.
    - mikeash 8y ago
      Do you have something that’s not a video? They’re very time consuming, and in my experience the odds are small that a video used as a source in an online discussion is actually worth a damn.
      - rohit2412 8y ago
        Look at the map in the video around 9:20
reirob 8y ago
Do you have any references for the break even point?
- mikeash 8y ago
  This covers that and much more: https://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-global-warming-emissions-953 https://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-...

datpuz 8y ago

You have heard wrong.

joncrane 8y ago
Source(s)?
- hokkos 8y ago
  https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publications/TE%20-%20draft%20report%20v04.pdf https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publicat... -80% CO2eq emission for an EV compared to a diesel car in my country.

withhighprod 8y ago

It won’t be based on burning coal forever right? Actually the EVs CAN be a driver for building cleaner power plant. Chinese leaders definitely think long term given they could have longer impact even after they retired (Deng and Jiang remained powerful for years after they “stepped down”)

peterwwillis 8y ago

> Also isn't most electricity generation in China still based on burning coal? Xi Jinping is anti-coal, meaning China is anti-coal. The government's been converting coal power sources to natural gas and getting homeowners and businesses to do the same. In one year the level of the most harmful pollution went down by 33% throughout the region, 54% in Beijing alone. > Have any experts done any analysis to see what environmental benefit this brings, if any? The 4.8 million cars in Beijing are the second biggest cause of air pollution there, so switching to electric would significantly limit this source. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-02/u-s-china-trade-truce-side-by-side-comparison-of-statements https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-02/u-s-china...

alexc05 8y ago

That sounds like the kind of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) that would be really easy for motivated parties to spread. If organizations like the Competitive Enterprise Institute & Heritage Foundation, are willing to produce videos with slogans like "Carbon emissions, they call it pollution, we call it life" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sGKvDNdJNA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sGKvDNdJNA Then maybe wait for a proper study by a reputable source before you buy in to that FUD whole hog. "I heard vaccinations are actually bad for you" https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/health/russia-trolls-vaccine-debate-study/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/health/russia-trolls-vaccine-... "I heard the CIA invented AIDS as a way to keep black people in poverty" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infektion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infektion Who does your anti-EV talking points serve?

WhompingWindows 8y ago

1. You've forgotten WHERE the emissions occur. Would you prefer it next to children waiting for the school bus in urban neighborhoods OR out in the factory district? 2. Batteries are a new technology, they will get faster much better than ICE engines, since they are already mature tech 3. batteries do not use "lots" of toxic chemicals. Li-ion is the main type of battery used in EV's and buses and the tricky/worrisome chemicals are in the VAST minority compared with Li, Al, and other safe compounds. 4. Yes, experts have done the analysis, many many times. You are perpetuating false myths that climate change deniers like to use.

jillesvangurp 8y ago

The chemicals can be recycled and doing so is highly lucrative give how scarce some of them are. China is also a technology leader in producing the means to clean up their energy act (solar panels, wind mills, etc.) and is also deploying these on a massive scale. And it's not like it is super efficient to ship oil across the globe by burning more oil to produce fuel (in a process that is not exactly clean either), which then gets transported by burning some more oil, so that you can burn it in a car using a combustion engine that mostly produces noise and heat. So, no, these are not show stoppers.

ericd 8y ago

Pretty sure that's FUD spread by parties interested in seeing ICE cars hold on a bit longer.

hokkos 8y ago

Please read that : https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publications/TE%20-%20draft%20report%20v04.pdf https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publicat...