Electrification

Electric Vehicles: are they really better for the environment?

Are EVs really greener than ICE vehicles?

Published April 2023 | Revised Nov 2023

The early attempts at mainstreaming Electric Vehicles (EVs) were sold on the idea that they are more environmentally friendly than Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles. This focus on environmental friendliness led to the creation of weird looking EVs of the 1980s and 90s. Most of which never really made commercial landing as they just didn’t appeal to the consumer.

Whilst some of the earliest electric cars dated back to the 1800s, GM, Toyota, Tesla and Nissan are the main drivers of the modern electric vehicles with the EV1 (1996), Prius (1997), Roadster (2006) and Leaf (2010) respectively.

Since transitioning EVs from environmentally friendly only to environmentally friendly, desirable, and nice to drive through the Model S and achieving mass market production of the same desirability through the Model 3, Tesla has continued to drag the industry away from ICE into EVs. Today every manufacturer on the planet has committed billions in funds to transition the car offerings to EVs.

That core reason for transitioning has, however, not been lost. EVs are still primarily about transitioning our economy to sustainable energy sourcing. But as their prominence morphs into dominance, questions are being asked whether they are really that better for the environment in the first instance.

Given that they share most of their parts with ICE vehicles – tyres, glass, cockpit etc, and they have huge batteries whose production is carbon intensive, are EVs really any greener than ICE vehicles?

Many scientific studies have examined this question, and significantly more opinion pieces have speculated on why they think EVs are no better for the environment than ICE vehicles are. This article avoids the numbers and claims game and focuses instead on the context upon which your review of the evidence should be based.

Below are five principles, around which claims on the green credentials of EVs as compared to ICE vehicles should be reviewed. These are predicated on the reality that environmental sustainability has become a fertile ground for people with opaque agendas, whose biases are not always apparent in the positions they take.

Apples and pears

One central problem seen in the arguments comparing ICE and EVs is that deliberately or inadvertently, many fail to use comparable data in their analysis. All comparisons are based on assumptions, and when these assumptions are wrong or simply focus on incomparable aspects of the elements being compared, the result is skewed.

EVs and ICE vehicles share many parts, but they also differ in significant ways. EV manufacture relies on a broader assortment of metals than ICE vehicles do. But including the carbon intensity of the production of battery minerals in a comparison whilst ignoring the engine block and its parts which ICE vehicles have and EVs don’t have can be problematic.

Unless comparisons between EVs and ICE include a detailed analysis of all the constituent parts of each car type and their carbon intensity, such a comparison cannot be considered valid.

Context is everything

To further elucidate the point that comparisons are based on assumptions, it is important for such assumptions to be contextualised.

For example, our economy has relied on oil and gas for decades, and the industry is so advanced it has achieved significant economies of scale, not to mention government subsidies and state actors dominating it across the world. The battery industry, on the other hand, is in its infancy even though costs have reduced.

Comparing this matured, decades-old, multi-trillion-dollar, government funded industry with the developing battery sector out of context makes for a very bad analysis and will lead to the wrong conclusions. EVs are being built on new technologies while ICE is based on established ones.

The future is electric

We are approaching what is becoming the EV decade and consumers, manufacturers and governments appear to have reached an agreement that EVs are definitely the future. With this in mind, more money is being pumped into EVs than is going into ICE vehicles. EVs therefore have momentum and the attention of experts and executives alike and is therefore likely to get a greater share of modern technology.

Almost none of the major manufacturers is investing in new ICE vehicle technology. Whilst ICE vehicles will continue to get a share of improved technologies, these are being designed and optimised for the EVs, not the ICE vehicles. EVs will therefore continue to be more desirable over time as ICE are likely to decline.

Being aware of this technological advantage is crucial to analysing comparisons between EVs and ICE vehicles. The future is optimised for the EVs and not the ICE, and that will increasingly have impacts on efficiency, safety, desirability, carbon-friendliness, and overall cost.

Positive spill-over effect

As billions of investment and research dollars is poured into EVs, the cost of key technologies is likely to reach the efficiency levels that economies of scale produce. Battery cost, for example, has been falling since the mainstreaming of EVs.

By mastering battery technology, we will no doubt see opportunities to apply it in other sectors of our economy – aviation and shipping come to mind. This positive spill-over effect is often missing in most arguments comparing ICE vehicles to EVs. The value of this effect should definitely be added to the tally of the EVs' green credentials.

Another positive point for EVs is that mass adoption by consumers will eventually force the power generation industry to transition to sustainable energy sourcing. That jarring feeling of charging your EV with electricity generated from fossil fuels will push the consumer to demand that all electricity is generated from sustainable sources.

Conversely, however, this point is raised as one of the arguments against EVs, and some analysts even dive into including the source of electricity used in charging as part of their analysis of the overall carbon emissions of EV. This is missing the positive spill-over effect. The dominance of EVs is about the surest way we can trigger the demise of fossil-fuel-based electricity generation.

Agendas, politicisation, and monetisation

One of the disappointing aspects of the discourse on climate change and global warming is the politicisation of the issues. The debate has been hijacked by politicians seeking a foothold in leadership careers that they barely deserve. And by commentators seeking to monetise content or achieve other forms of monetisable prominence.

It is therefore important to be aware of the agendas and biases of the commentators on this topic. There are the incumbents who don’t want to see their advantage as ICE vehicle makers and fossil fuel producers ebb, and they will put-up stats to thrash the green credentials of EVs.

Then there are EV enthusiasts who would gloss over every negative impact EVs can have on the environment. And there are those that see just the monetary or political benefit of a particular position, and they don’t even bother with analysis. A single point of failure is all they need to fortify their positions.

EVs are certainly greener than ICE vehicles. They may be more carbon-intensive to produce, but they are far less so to operate, and their adoption is certainly going to usher in new technologies and gains that will be felt across other industries as we attempt to transition our economies to sustainable energy sourcing.

Your next vehicle should be an EV. They are awesome.

Further reading: | iea.org : Global EV Outlook 2022 |