...depending on where its made (heavily coal-powered or not)Just to build each car battery—weighing upwards of 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) in size for sport-utility vehicles—would emit up to 74 percent more C02 than producing an efficient conventional car
It could take a Leaf 3 years to break even with a gas guzzler according to the article.“It will come down to where is the battery made, how is it made, and even where do we get our electric power from,” said Henrik Fisker, chief executive officer and chairman of Fisker Inc
NorthVolt AB CEO Peter Carlsson, a former Tesla manager who is trying to build a 4-billion-euro ($4.6 billion) battery plant in Sweden that would run on hydropower, said “Electric cars will be better in every way, but of course, when batteries are made in a coal-based electricity system it will take longer” to surpass diesel engines
The article is claiming that the current CO2 released by battery manufacturing is causing EVs to be dirtier than ICE/Diesel cars while at the same time ignoring the operational issues with ICE, and more specificially diesel vehicles.Many of you are focusing on the tailpipe emissions of an ICE engine, or the fact that you get your charge from solar, etc. And while that may not be insignificant, the main focus of the article was on the environmental cost to produce the batteries in the first place.
It doesn't ignore that at all. That's baked into their calculation of the return.The article is claiming that the current CO2 released by battery manufacturing is causing EVs to be dirtier than ICE/Diesel cars while at the same time ignoring the operational issues with ICE, and more specificially diesel vehicles.
The article makes an assumption that the ICE engine's emissions performance doesn't change over time. The reality is that even a properly maintained ICE engine will slowly emit more as it ages. An improperly maintained ICE engine can emit a lot more after even two or three years. Therefore one of the base assumptions the study made is invalid - the CO2 cross point is very likely two or three years earlier than that study reports, and in fact, I suspect it's somewhere between the 7 and 8 year point based on the emissions warranty required by US Law.It doesn't ignore that at all. That's baked into their calculation of the return.
I smell Koch brothers stench in the funded misleading article.It doesn't ignore that at all. That's baked into their calculation of the return.
It's 4-6kWh of _energy_. Not electricity.As for the operational day to day use of the vehicles, consider that it takes 4-6 kWH of dirty electricity to produce a gallon of diesel or gas from oil. The same amount of electricity can move an electric car the same distance as a gallon of comparable performance ICE car. Have they conveniently omitted this source of additional CO2 from electricity for the ICE cars?