It seems like a no-brainer: EVs producing no carbon emissions are good for the environment. As Uber’s CEO Dara Khosrowshahi says, they are “part of the solution to the climate crisis” while US and EU tariffs on cheap Chinese EVs are a “negative.”
Unfortunately for the planet, EVs are not a climate change panacea. A strong case for tariffs on Chinese EVs — usually discussed in economic and security terms — can be made on environmental grounds. A close look at the physics behind EVs and electricity generation explains why.
Consider the Peugeot 208, popular in Europe. The gasoline version weighs 1,090 kilograms, while the electric Peugeot e-208 weighs 1,910 kilograms. With almost double the mass, the e-208 requires almost twice as much energy to move it the same distance. However, the EV is supposed to make up for this greater energy requirement with its superior efficiency at converting stored energy into motion (70% compared to just 20% for a gasoline car).
The problem with this argument is dirty electricity generation. In the world’s biggest economies, only around half of all electricity comes from renewables. Last year, Germany relied on fossil fuels to generate 42% of its electricity. In the US, 60% of electricity comes from fossil fuels.
A true efficiency comparison between a gasoline car and an EV requires comparing what happens when cars burn a fossil fuel to when cars use electricity to charge a battery. Generation and transmission of electricity from oil and coal has an energy efficiency of less than 30%. Around 65% of the energy is lost in the process of making the electricity and a further 6-12% is lost in transmission and distribution. Since 30% of 70% is 21%, the overall efficiency of an EV is similar to gasoline-fueled cars, at around 20%.
EVs double carbon emissions compared to gasoline cars, due to their having double the mass. Where half of the electricity comes from fossil fuels, carbon emissions from EVs are similar to emissions from gasoline cars and higher than for diesel cars.
Production of EVs also pollutes. Building an EV creates more carbon emissions than building a gasoline car. The “embedded carbon” in manufacturing a typical EV is around 8.8 metric tonnes of CO2, of which 43% stems from the production of the battery. By contrast, the production of a standard gasoline car generates embedded carbon emissions of 5.6 metric tonnes.
Tire wear from EVs must also be counted. Each EV emits six million tonnes of rubber, nylon, and steel nanoparticles annually, a problem worsened by their weight. That’s before even thinking about the negative environmental impacts of lithium extraction in Chile to make EV batteries, or the human rights abuses by the Chinese Communist Party as it tries to dominate the market for copper needed for EV motors.
In this context, it seems reasonable to slow down the rollout of EVs to match the rollout of renewable electricity generation and energy storage. Large investments must be made in renewable infrastructure such as offshore wind turbines, and storage of energy for periods with little sun or wind. These investments will take time — considerably longer than it takes for Chinese state-subsidized manufacturers such as BYD to flood Western markets with cheap EVs.
Get the Latest
Sign up to receive regular Bandwidth emails and stay informed about CEPA’s work.
Seen through the cold lens of physics, then, US and EU tariffs on Chinese EVs make perfect sense.
The long-term solution to reduce carbon emissions from powered urban transport is to use much smaller EVs for short journeys. Innovative vehicles such as the CitiPod have been mooted in Cambridge, UK — but these cannot safely circulate on roads with existing cars. Without adapted road infrastructure, the CitiPod and similar vehicles risk going the same way as the Sinclair C5.
What can we do while we wait for the required road and generation infrastructure changes? Choose alternative means of transportation. Current EVs are too big considering most journeys transport one or two people. For short trips, public transportation, cycling, or walking can replace most car journeys. If you really need power, consider an e-bike. All of these are much better for the health of the planet than driving — and much better for your health too.
Christopher Cytera is a Non-resident senior fellow with the Digital Innovation Initiative at the Center for European Policy Analysis and a technology business executive with over 30 years of experience in semiconductors, electronics, communications, video, and imaging.
Bandwidth is CEPA’s online journal dedicated to advancing transatlantic cooperation on tech policy. All opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the position or views of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis.
Learn More
Read More From Bandwidth
CEPA’s online journal dedicated to advancing transatlantic cooperation on tech policy.
Read More
