EV carbon footprint

Some interesting comparasons for total carbon emissions ( including manufacturing), for ICEs, EV, and Hybrids.
Pure EV is handicaped by high carbon footprint in battery and motor copper manufacture, but have less emissions from fuel.
That handicap is greater for larger battery/longer range EVs
Hybrid has much smaller battery, and uses less fuel than full ICE.

People create those graphs often use data on batteries from 2005.

The simple economics show that graphs starting values are impossible.
26tons of CO2 is 3,000gal of gasoline or 29,500lbs of coal. Coal is currently $400/ton, gas is $5/gal.
To pollute like that it would require $15k in gasoline or $5900 in raw coal. This doesn't make sense when considering the mfg costs, including the Nickel and Copper extraction costs, as we do battery recycling I have a solid grasp on the energy used to extract ore or recycle it from shredded batteries, and these numbers are orders of magnitude off reality.

Probably a study paid for by a big oil to try to delay the enivtable.

There's also options for EV's that work pretty well and use the cheapest and most simple of materials and low energy processes. Sodium-ion Iron-Phosphate, its lower nominal voltage, but still good enough capacity to make useful mass market EVs when charging infrastructure reaches a threshold people can accept 250miles of range over 400miles.

Yeah more recent research shows the emissions cross over after about 50,000 km. We've gotten much better at making batteries, and all those minerals are above ground for good, so the production of more batteries and motors are recyclable.

Mining of metals is like generating building materials for harnessing energy for thousands of cycles. Burning of fossil fuels is one-off.

liveforphysics said:

People create those graphs often use data on batteries from 2005.

Click to expand...

And US grid data from 1980.

Personally I now generate far more electricity than I use. When I am home during the day I charge directly from solar, and when I'm not I charge at midnight when wind power peaks. (And when demand is lowest.)

There are multiple reviews of these carbon footprint comparasons, all reaching similar conclusions with varying “time to reach equivalence”.
Most agree that both ICEs and EVs have similar manufacturing CO2 of 5-10 tons, with the main addition for EVs being the battery production requireing an extra 1-2 tons per 10kWh . Hence the “start point”
Obviously the “time/distance to equivalence” varies depends on the pack size, so a 50k km figure could be viable for a EV with a small pack , ….especially if estimated by someone within the EV industry !
Few EV packs have reached end of life yet, so recycling % are low and the vast majority of EV packs are still being manufactured from virgin raw materials, with the consequent high CO2 penalty.
The CO2 load fron grid recharging also varies worldwide, so an average (60% fossil fueled) is generally used since most EVs are not just in Ca or Norway. …..China has a few also !
This is a world wide view, not a individual situation comparason.
Remember also, that solar and wind generation carry their own CO2 loading !
. BUT.. the main point of the above graphic was to point out the relative CO2 performance of HYBRID cars in this area…
….and that UNTIL battery recycling and manufacturing significantly improves, and grids become less dependant on FFuels, then EVs are not a solution to reducing CO2 emissions.
….for those that are concerned about CO2 !

Hillhater said:

Some interesting comparasons for total carbon emissions ( including manufacturing), for ICEs, EV, and Hybrids.
Pure EV is handicaped by high carbon footprint in battery and motor copper manufacture, but have less emissions from fuel.
That handicap is greater for larger battery/longer range EVs
Hybrid has much smaller battery, and uses less fuel than full ICE.

Click to expand...

not crediting source of the graph is about as weasel as safe's graphs,"How You Might Screw Up" not bothering with axis labels.
Tesla's entire operation is less than net zero.
don't remember where i heard this but since you don't waste time citing you should be cool with it (but think it wuz 60 min).

for RecycleLad, i'd like to know if you've seen this paper b4 & if there's any reason it wouldn't hold true beyond NiMH??

Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh said:

not crediting source of the graph is about as weasel as …..

Click to expand...

Yea, well , that may be your view….but not mine.
Its just not necessary , its just a graphic to get the key point across,… that EVs just may not be as good for the environment as some would like to believe !
But if you really want to dick with the details, try this……. https://youtu.be/S1E8SQde5rk

Hillhater said:

Remember also, that solar and wind generation carry their own CO2 loading !

Click to expand...

Yes, they do. Let's look at solar panels first.

First off let's look at the materials that the panels are made of. None of them emit CO2. The EVA encapsulant is made from oil, but that carbon is not released during operation. So that's not an issue.

Next is the energy required to make the panels. In 2004 energy payback time for a solar power system (the whole thing, not just the panels) was about 4 years - 2.5 years for the panels, 1.5 years for everything else including the frame. (https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/35489.pdf) That means that the energy that is taken to make everything on the panel, from the frame to the glass to the PV wafers themselves, is generated back in 2.5 years.

Nowadays that has fallen by almost 50% as manufacturing becomes more efficient - so payback time for panels alone is now 1.5 years.

To get actual CO2 released you have to calculate the CO2 released by the particular energy mix used to make all that stuff. But in any case, within 1.5 years, that panel is generating more energy than it took to make it.

The solar system on my first house is now 18 years old and going strong. The ones on my current house are 12 years old. So all of that "enerdy debt" has been paid back long ago.

Now let's look at wind. They are considerably faster, and pay back their energy in 5 to 8 months. (https://www.vestas.com/en/sustainability/environment/energy-payback) So within a year they have paid back the energy "debt" it took to make them. And since they last about 25 years, they are carbon negative for a long, long time after that.

Again, you are missing the point jack…
You need to thinkbeyond your personal or local situation,
The vast majority of EVs are charged using mains grid supply, and that (globally) power is currently 60-70% produced from fossil fuels.
Even if solar and wind generation is considered to have zero CO2 contribution, EVs are still contributing 100-200g/mile CO2 from charge power alone, depending on battery capacity….
…..which is not much different to a Toyota Corolla (170g/ml) !

Whuddaboot the lawn mowers.

lawn mowers man. More Co2 than all of those. those drops in a bucket.

lawn mowers gonna gitcha.

DogDipstick said:

Whuddaboot the lawn mowers.

lawn mowers man. More Co2 than all of those. those drops in a bucket.

lawn mowers gonna gitcha.

Click to expand...

Yeah small engines are gross. Like I THINK I get the appeal of old 2-strokes? But every 2-stroker pumps more crap into the atmosphere than something like, 80 modern corollas because you can't put cats on em'. Especially weird since people make 2-strokes in their garages that kick modern emission test's asses using direct injection techniques; but frankly that's a discussion too big for this.

Hillhater said:

Again, you are missing the point jack…
You need to thinkbeyond your personal or local situation,

Click to expand...

I do; my state generates 60% of it's power from wind, like North Dakota. Georgia finally fired off the Vogtle nuclear plant generating terrawatts of nuclear power. Efficiency of electrics mean after all the conversion and line-losses, an EV would still get nearly ~80% of the power even from coal whereas a gas car only uses 30% gasoline's power from burning. AND the USA has shut down most it's coal plants, with 289 being closed in the past 12 years. https://phys.org/news/2019-05-coal-...ave closed,additional 241 plants remain open.

Even if solar and wind generation is considered to have zero CO2 contribution, EVs are still contributing 100-200g/mile CO2 from charge power alone, depending on battery capacity….
…..which is not much different to a Toyota Corolla (170g/ml) !

Click to expand...

Prove it.
... wait why the hell am I doing this? It's not like you'll read

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING said:

Hillhater said:

Again, you are missing the point jack…
You need to thinkbeyond your personal or local situation,

Click to expand...

I do; my state generates 60% of it's power from wind, like North Dakota. Georgia finally fired off the Vogtle nuclear plant generating terrawatts of nuclear power. Efficiency of electrics mean after all the conversion and line-losses, an EV would still get nearly ~80% of the power even from coal whereas a gas car only uses 30% gasoline's power from burning. AND the USA has shut down most it's coal plants, with 289 being closed in the past 12 years.

Click to expand...

Shutting coal plants,sure,…but replacing most of them with gas !
And why dont you look even further to get the full picture ?….

Throughout the past decade, the U.S. has been decreasing the use of coal, and increasing the use of natural gas for electricity generation. In 2021, natural gas was by far the largest source of electricity in the North American country, with a share of 38 percent. Nevertheless, that year, the contribution of coal registered the first annual increase since 2013, once more surpassing renewables to account for 22 percent of the power mix……

Click to expand...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/528603/distribution-electricity-net-generation-in-the-us-by-fuel-type/
..so the USA overall is still 60+% fossil fueled electricity
And if you bother to look deeper on thatw statista site, you will see that the World overall is still 60+% fossil generation !

Even if solar and wind generation is considered to have zero CO2 contribution, EVs are still contributing 100-200g/mile CO2 from charge power alone, depending on battery capacity….
…..which is not much different to a Toyota Corolla (170g/ml) !

Click to expand...

Prove it….

Click to expand...

Prove what exactly ?…..
Toyota CO2 emissions are well documented.
Overall world electricity generation CO2 data is published at 500 g/kWh for the USA , and slightly more for the World as a whole

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electricity

So with EVs typically using 250Wh/mile (EPA data) , then 125 + g/mile for a world average is a fair figure.

https://www.evspecifications.com/en/model-driving-range/6f4a42

Hillhater said:

You need to thinkbeyond your personal or local situation

Click to expand...

Did you really think that I made solar panels or wind turbines? I don't. Those are for energy usage to build those things worldwide.

The vast majority of EVs are charged using mains grid supply, and that (globally) power is currently 60-70% produced from fossil fuels.

Click to expand...

There are more EV's in California than any other state - and in California we get only 40% of our energy from fossil fuels. And that's dropping all the time. That's the future.

EVs are still contributing 100-200g/mile CO2 from charge power alone, depending on battery capacity….
…..which is not much different to a Toyota Corolla (170g/ml) !

Click to expand...

Let's compare via the US DOE website!

Nissan Leaf in California: 90 grams per mile
Nissan Leaf in the US in general: 130
Average new gas car: 410

So a gas car is over three times worse even if you are in a "bad" section of the country. And unlike EV's, gas cars just keep getting worse over their lifetimes.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?year=2020&vehicleId=42563&zipCode=92121&action=bt3

JackFlorey said:

There are more EV's in California than any other state -

Click to expand...

You are STILL stuck in your own back yard !..
The entire USA has less than 12% of the worlds EVs !
And Ca, only a fraction of those.
And most are in China where coal is the major source of electricity !

EVs are still contributing 100-200g/mile CO2 from charge power alone, depending on battery capacity….
…..which is not much different to a Toyota Corolla (170g/ml) !

Click to expand...

JackFlorey said:

Let's compare via the US DOE website!
Nissan Leaf in California: 90 grams per mile
Nissan Leaf in the US in general: 130
Average new gas car: 410

Click to expand...

No !
Lets compare real WORLD data for COMPARABLE CARS..!
….such as a BMW 3 series,..210g/ml
https://www.car-emissions.com/cars/model/BMW/page:9

I would not look at the Hybrid (or European diesels ) data though,…it might scare you !
PS:- are you not even a little suspicous of that 410g/m figure ?
….and dont you find it odd that those EV figures seem very similar irrispective of battery capacity ??
It is actually hard to find a CAR with that level of CO2 emissions,..
A Mustang V8 is only 260g/km (380g/ml)

EDIT..
Jack, i think you will find that those figures for EVs from the DOE site, are for the electricity for recharging only.
They seem to completely ignor any “upstream” CO2 figure for battery manufacture.
As me tioned before in the video, the consensus of reports put that CO2 load at between 100 and 200 g/kWh
So a 400 mile range (100kWh) pack would account for 10-20 tons of CO2 in manufacture.
Taking a mid point of 15 tons, Over the course of a 200,000 mile life (10 years @ 20,000 miles /yr), it would effectively add 75g/ml to the electricity recharge figure.

The graph is flawed.

How can ice and ice hybrid start from the same c02 consumption point at Creation ?

Making out its batterys has little impact to manufacture but the pure ev jumps up the reality is the hybrid should start somewhere inbetween them.

Plus how many electric cars will actually get over 100000 miles ? Versus how many diesel cars regularly exceed 200000 miles.

Whats the percentage of differing per models of car that get crashed in accidents and catch fire, there was a vauxhall astra in uk that had a habit of catching fire took years for a recall, manufacturer passed the buck.

Those people had bought a new car and had to fight for insurance payout and drove around with nothing till they coughed up the cash for something else how will these ev fires be paid out ?

As for the c02 output figures my first hothatch made in 1990 weighed 850kg had a 160bhp n.a 1.8 and put out 185 c02 so the 410 figure is mad if todays cars put that out you just went and picked a lamborghini v12 or alike.

Nox was the issue with older cars thats how diesel got its brake theres very little nox created vs petrol.

Ianhill said:

How can ice and ice hybrid start from the same c02 consumption point at Creation ?

Making out its batterys has little impact to manufacture but the pure ev jumps up the reality is the hybrid should start somewhere inbetween them.

Click to expand...

Yes, it should be “somewhere inbetween”….but
The pure hybrid (Prius etc) only has a 1-2 kWh battery, so compared to the 100kWh (400mile range) Tesla pack,…
…its excess CO2 from battery manufacture is hardly noticeable on the scales used.
Again, it is just a grapical picture to wake up those who are convinced that EVs are an Environmental godsend !
Currently, the Hybrid is a better answer,..or even a Diesel !

The entire time I've been here, HH has never posted practical advice on biking or parts. Shit, I don't even think they've been anything but the official contrarian; bro do you even have a bike?

Hillhater said:

And why dont you look even further to get the full picture ?….

Click to expand...

I did. My entire state still gets ~60% of it's power from wind alone. France is 70% nuclear. Scotland has made 100% of it's energy on renewable alone before.
Is there a point to all this? Cause if you're gonna ignore posts you could at least not be so blatant about it.

Toyota CO2 emissions are well documented.

Click to expand...

Then prove them :lol: I've seen Volvo-Geeleys long-term studies on the XC40 and I've seen that their EVs reach carbon parity- when built on Chinese coal power- at US ~85,000 miles, or 170,000 Kilometers. When built on the same coal plants, best-case was charging from majority wind power in the EU which was ~40,000KM; or about 26,000 miles.

Wait, why am I doing this? Its not like you're gonna read.

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING said:

The entire time I've been here, HH has never posted practical advice on biking or parts. Shit, I don't even think they've been anything but the official contrarian; bro do you even have a bike?

Click to expand...

That could be because you have not been here long…
…and dont appear to know how to use the search functions !

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING said:

Hillhater said:

And why dont you look even further to get the full picture ?….

Click to expand...

I did. My entire state still gets ~60% of it's power from wind alone. France is 70% nuclear. Scotland has made 100% of it's energy on renewable alone before.
Is there a point to all this? Cause if you're gonna ignore posts you could at least not be so blatant about it.

Click to expand...

You are cherry picking high RE countries ! ( but forgot Norway etc) rather that taking a full world picture…
…or at least those countries with high EV usage,..like China !!
The WORLD is 60+% fossil fueled electricity, China is 80+% FF !
And exactly what posts have i ignored ?…be specific .

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING said:

Toyota CO2 emissions are well documented.

Click to expand...

Then prove them :lol: I've seen Volvo-Geeleys long-term studies on the XC40 and I've seen that their EVs reach carbon parity- when built on Chinese coal power- at US ~85,000 miles, or 170,000 Kilometers. When built on the same coal plants, best-case was charging from majority wind power in the EU which was ~40,000KM; or about 26,000 miles.

Click to expand...

When somethig is well documented , it does not need proving !
Are you too lazy to check a Toyota site ?
If you are going to accept info from an EV manufacturer, you will never see the full picture.
Why dont you try thinking it through from basic data yourself, as i have been trying to show you ?

Wait, why am I doing this? Its not like you're gonna read.

Click to expand...

Well i just did read it..
So that makes twice in one thread you have been wrong !