Are Electric Cars As Clean As They Seem?

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Zainab Calcuttawala via OilPrice.com,

Tesla’s unveiling of its mass market Model 3 sparked a global interest in making electric vehicles the next big thing in automobile manufacturing. But can the category’s green agenda keep up with its metal and recycling needs?

The concept of bunking the traditional engine for a non-gas guzzling counterpart has been here for decades, but creating an ecosystem for battery charging and bringing vehicle costs down was a challenge for decades.

The sheer force of Elon Musk’s vision is building the infrastructure needed to sustain millions of electric cars in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere. Most major manufacturers have joined the enthusiasm to ditch old-school engines to construct the international fleet of tomorrow.

But this new step doesn’t solve all of the world’s environmental pollution issues related to transportation. The extraction of rare earth minerals, the disposal of lithium-ion batteries, and the sourcing of the energy that powers charging stations are all issues that plague the future of the green argument for electric vehicles.

As Wired notes in an article from last year, electric vehicles are most efficient when they’re light. That way, they need minimal energy to transport their valuable cargo. In search for a light material to carry and conduct batteries, scientists discovered the power of lithium - a highly conductive metal that adds little burden to the vehicle’s frame.

Discovered in 1817, this key ingredient is mostly extracted from deposits in the United States, Chile, and Australia. The most cost-effective method for lithium processing involves pumping salt-rich waters into special evaporation ponds that eventually produce lithium chloride. Then, a special plant adds sodium carbonate to turn the former lithium chloride into lithium carbonate, a white powder.

The whole process requires power, which more often than not is sourced from fossil fuels, not renewables or nuclear energy. This is similar to the issue electric-car charging stations face when evaluating the efficiency of their establishments in eliminating pollution from the environment. In most parts of the U.S., if the stations source their electricity from the grid, they’re just increasing demand for fossil fuels since coal, oil, and natural gas power the majority of the country anyway. Some states, like California, are obvious exceptions because of their heavy investments in green energy, but for the most part, the pattern holds.

Moreover, lithium batteries need proper facilities in order to be recycled once they reach the end of their lifespan. Tesla’s Gigafactory, which promises to produce the electric car manufacturer’s batteries in an environmentally conscious way, says it will lead a program to recycle the hardware responsibly.

“The challenge that we have with recycling these rare metals is enormous,” author David Abraham, from The Elements of Power, says, “because the products that we have now use metals in such a small quantity that it’s not economic to recycle.”

But larger batteries should make a more convincing argument to start responsive recycling programs. Reusing the metal resources in these devices will lower the emissions and mining of rare minerals from the planet, paving the way for a healthier environmental report for future electric vehicles.

“The more batteries that are out there, in various devices, the more interest there is in figuring out how to recycle them or to recapture rare earth metals [from them],” electric car advocate Chelsea Sexton told Wired.

It truly has become a demand issue. As electric cars become increasingly popular, more services will be needed to deal with their production and disposal, accelerating the development of the vehicle category’s branding as the technology of tomorrow’s green Earth.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LawsofPhysics's picture

Well, that really depends on where you get the CONSUMABLE CALORIES to build them and drive them!!!!


Looney's picture

 

I wonder if an Electric Chair on wheels qualifies as an electric vehicle…   ;-)

Looney

Looney's picture

 

I ain’t no Spelling Nazi, but you may have misspelled something.   ;-)

Looney

jcaz's picture

But.... But..... Elon said that maff is hard......

 

 

DownWithYogaPants's picture

The problem here is the electricity industry is a monopoly functionally speaking.  Electricity is very expensive for what you get in energy.  

An example of what the electricity industry is up to lately:

  •  my quoted cost per KWhr == 0.05
  • lard on top of that the disty network charges = 0.08 per KWhr

Quite frankly electricity is a really bad energy deal.

And according to a city utility manager I talked to in Arcanum Ohio the network play is an end around the high regulation of the industry.  According to him there are only 12 companies in the USA doing most of the distribution and they plan to up the network costs by 100% over the next year.

One thing we could do to make industry competitive in the USA again is toss this retarded children's story of Sky is Falling / Chicken Little oops I mean to say Global Warming and work towards making electricity almost free.  Then and only then will you hear this engineer say electric cars are starting to make sense.

BennyBoy's picture

 

Lets see digging up copper from a mine, polluting the earth with acids and solvents to process it, poisonous tailings ponds, smelter slag...

Digging up lithium from mines...

Recharging the batteries with coal fired power plants....

Yeah, Teslas sounds eco friendly.

eforce's picture

While they may not be cleaner you can contain the pollution unlike with petrol/diesel vehicles, I am no fan of the green lobby/EV subsidies, removing socialism would allow a sustainable/'greener' free market alternative.

IH8OBAMA's picture

Dirty power.  Where's my home fussion reactor?

MoreFreedom's picture

I have to agree.   Free markets choose far more economical solutions, which waste less and lo and behold, create nations with cleaner environments because that's what people want. 

Besides, now that the $7500 electric vehicle subsidy may be eliminated, per the GOP tax plan (if it gets thru a RINO Congress that doesn't seem to want to live up to all the promises the GOP RINOs made over the past 8 years), we'll see what the real demand is for such vehicles.

RAT005's picture

The lifetime cost of a Tesla Battery is $0.05-0.10/mile.  About the same as the gasoline for a 35-40 mpg car.

Jethro Dull's picture

Get back to me once you add road tax, and, the big exogneous variable, of, re-cycling.

FringeImaginigs's picture

Another retard that never read and couldn't read a scientific journal. Newflash: Global Warming is real.  Now what that has to do with the price or chickens or electricity is another matter.  And "working to make electricity  almost free"  - nice try, but that ain't goin to happen. So back to reality please. Global Warming is real, and electric cars don't do anything to help solve it.  

RAT005's picture

By global warming do you mean the globe was warmer during one measurement period that followed an earlier measurement?  Or do you mean that the globe has been getting progressively warmer for a long time and will continue to keep getting warmer?  Do you mean that the earthlings are making it warmer and just need to change how they live to reverse global warming?  Do you mean that there was never a warming trend prior to the earthlings current lifestyle?  Do you mean the globe never cooled during the earthlings relatively modern lifestyle?  Regardless of the time period or earthlings lifestyle, are there any correlations to things outside our atmosphere that are influencing our global temperature (it's a great big universe out there, hard to imagine something as delicate as temperature isn't influenced somehow)?

The simple truth is no analyses of global temperatures stands up to isolating a rising trend associated with modern lifestyle that can't be debunked with conflicting data from other time periods.  In case you haven't heard, a Grand Solar Minimum kicked off a few years ago, and for the next 20ish years you'll be glad to be as warm as possible in most of the world.  Good luck!

City_Of_Champyinz's picture

This is a little dated, but shows how retarded the electric vehicle industry can be...

The Toyota Prius, the flagship car for the environmentally conscious, is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America, and takes more combined energy to produce than a Hummer, says the Recorder.

Consider:

 The nickel contained in the Prius' battery is mined and smelted at a plant in Ontario that has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the 'dead zone' around the plant to test moon rovers.

Dubbed the Superstack, the factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist's nightmare.

Acid rain around the area was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside, according to Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin.

After leaving the plant, the nickel travels to Europe, China, Japan and United States, a hardly environmentally sound round the world trip for a single battery.

But that isn't even the worst part, says the Record. According to a study by CNW Marketing, the total combined energy to produce a Prius (consisting of electrical, fuel, transportation, materials and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime), is greater than what it takes to produce a Hummer:

The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles -- the expected lifespan of the Hybrid.

The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles.

That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use almost 50 percent less combined energy doing it.

Source: Chris Demorro, "Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage," The Recorder, March 7, 2007.

RAT005's picture

Sad because I am a fan of the Prius because of what it is and isn't.  The Prius (not plug in) recycles energy for ~50mpg into an aggresivley sized small battery that I always imagined had a small "environmental" footprint based on its weight.  The car is never far from a fuel source, does everything a non hybrid in the compact class can do, doesn't add much weight that plays into tire wear and braking.  And this point is often lost on the green crowd.  Once a car gets over 35 mpg, the return on investment to improve mpg leads to a smaller and smaller justifiable investment.

For instance, $20,000 car gets 30mpg.  Take your pick there are dozens.

Slightly better conventional cars get 35mpg.  That savings with $2.50 gasoline at 3% cost of money for 15yr,15,000 miles life of 225,000, is only worth $2,132.  Each step up in 5 mpg is worth less and less.  Short answer is paying for more than 35-40 mpg doesn't work out well:

The table looks great in the editor but crap in the display and I can't delete it.  Here's the justifiable car cost per mpg starting with $20K at 30mpg:

30mpg, $20K

35mpg, $22,132

40mpg, $23,731

45mpg, $24,974

50mpg, $25,969

55mpg, $26,783

60mpg, $27,461

65mpg, $28,527

70mpg, $28,527

 

mpg Car Cost Miles per year $/gal Interest Rate Car Life Years Lifetime Fuel Cost Investment Amount 30 $20,000 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $18,750 $0 35 $22,132 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $16,071 $2,131.77 40 $23,731 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $14,063 $1,598.83 45 $24,974 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $12,500 $1,243.53 50 $25,969 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $11,250 $994.83 55 $26,783 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $10,227 $813.95 60 $27,461 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $9,375 $678.29 65 $28,035 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $8,654 $573.94 70 $28,527 15,000 $2.50 3.00% 15 $8,036 $491.95
RAT005's picture

To clarify, I'm not saying one car is a better investment than the other, it's implied, but what I'm saying is how much is it worth for a manufacturer to improve gas mileage.  For example, if a nice 35 mpg Corolla costs $22K, what should someone be willing to pay for a nice 50mpg Prius?  What is Toyota's budget to improve mpg to that of the Prius technology 50 mpg?  The answer is $25,969 - $22,000 (base price of nice Corolla if this is too high) = $4,000.

Good luck designing much improved techonology for $4K per car.  I wonder if even the Prius can really do it.  No way the other technologies can do it!!

65mpg listed above should be $28,035

SILVERGEDDON's picture

Save gas. Fart in a jar. 

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Swapping simple gasoline-powered cars, for more complex coal-powered cars, that require batteries to function and a gigantic new supply-chain infrastructure to build and use economically...IS FUCKING RETARDED

Sam Clemons's picture

Not when control is the desire.  You can control everything pretty easily with electric cars.

Utopia Planitia's picture

Didn't you just define the whole libTurd "Regressive" Govt - Industrial complex?  :-)

economessed's picture

Where I live, 56% of electric power is created and made available for consumption through burning coal.  Electric cars are just expensive pollution conduits.

MEFOBILLS's picture

When you said coal powered cars, I thought you meant an actual coal powered engine.

http://cyclonepower.com/

The cyclone can operate on coal dust, hence no conversion losses from electrical grid.

(good luck fixing the water lubricated bearing problem though)

 

 

Dogman57's picture

There are already electic cars, golf carts.

ebworthen's picture

No.  Think about the amount of plastic, mercury containing circuitry, the batteries, the energy burned to produce the electricity to charge the thing, and the likely short life span - and electric cars are not "green" - more like brown.

Looney's picture

 

more like brown

Are you talking about a color or a smell?   ;-)

Looney

LawsofPhysics's picture

don't forget about all those rare earth metals that must be mined for those batteries.

Sonder's picture

That was ominously vague and cartoonish sounding.

Chauncey Gardener's picture

And, for Tesla ownrs in particular, the smug's new status symbol. Read a scathing commentary on Tesla and Elon Musk by car guy Bob Lutz in a brief interview in a current car mag. He said Musk is like a cult leader and like Socialism, Tesla is not sustainable when the government handouts run dry. If you don't know who Bob Lutz is, do a web search.

JohninMK's picture

Maybe not so much in the US but over here in Europe around 80% of the price of petrol or diesel is Government tax yielding billions. If there is a major move to electric then that revenue strean will crash. As Governments are not inclined to cut spending, bad for votes, where will that money come from?

How about those same car users? So, up the tax on electricity which is currently low taxed? More voters use electricity than cars!

Ooops, see the problem?

Then there are the other problems like the increased cost on the road structure. Battery cars are heavier, increasing road wear. In northern climates many cars have to use winter tyres, many of them with steel studs in them for grip on ice. Studs already wear grooves in the road, imagine what that will be like with heavier cars. Norway is currently leading this particular aspect of the electric car experiment and it is not happy.

Thoresen's picture

More electric trains. Fewer cars. The energy infrastructure will never be able to sustain private electric cars at present gas/ diesel numbers.

Utopia Planitia's picture

So now you want door-to-door electric trains? (meaning lots and lots and lots of tracks)  Where will I take my dog for a walk after that gets built?

FringeImaginigs's picture

The one key word that nobody dares say.  "FEWER"  

eclectic syncretist's picture

What a moron! He misses the whole point of "where does the electricity that's used to charge the battery come from?". If it doesn't come directly from the sun or a biological catalyst that uses the suns energy to make hydrogen (like some algae) then it's not eco-friendly, period.

Bastiat's picture

"The whole process requires power, which more often than not is sourced from fossil fuels, not renewables or nuclear energy. This is similar to the issue electric-car charging stations face when evaluating the efficiency of their establishments in eliminating pollution from the environment. In most parts of the U.S., if the stations source their electricity from the grid, they’re just increasing demand for fossil fuels since coal, oil, and natural gas power the majority of the country anyway. Some states, like California, are obvious exceptions because of their heavy investments in green energy, but for the most part, the pattern holds."

 

Read much?

JohnFrodo's picture

even if what you say is absoultly true its better to have pollution at the soucrce a distatnce away from the citizens

who want to live without having a cancer in the driveway

Utopia Planitia's picture

Don't you know? Electricity comes from that wall plug-in thingy!!!  /s

Donald J. Trump's picture

Interesting to note, Lamborghini's latest uses supercapacitors to run the car instead of batteries.  Maybe someone with some expertise in this field shed some light on good/bad.

taketheredpill's picture

Would be interesting to see what happens in an accident  The risk is that there is a short but maybe the worst case then is some melted metal and maybe some temporary blindness from the flash...maybe less risky than Lithium battery chemical fire?

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Supercapacitors are the way forward, battery technology has made only incremental advances over the last century despite absorbing huge amounts of R&D resources, and is basically a dead end.

A short-circuit will set your car on fire though, so it's no improvement on batteries in that respect

JohnFrodo's picture

You are miss informed. The battery solution has been more or less imperfectly solved. Vandium flow and evern lithum offer much more

than the oil change

I Write Code's picture

Supercapacitors are better at dumping charge quickly, but really the difference between current supercapacitors and lithium-ion batteries isn't that great.  I think the batteries still store more energy per cube.  And while batteries can catch fire, the potential failure modes of supercapacitors is closer to explosive.  Also not sure about the comparable lifetimes.  Companies already make larger-size supercapacitors, in truck-battery sizes, rather than the pukey little D-cells that Tesla uses for lithium.

Oh, I left out the biggest difference: you can CHARGE a supercapacitor much, much faster. 

Regenerative braking is pointless when you just have batteries, but the capacitor can take the charge as fast as it comes in.  For a Lambo, maybe that's important.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

Yah non engineers when they talk about electric cars usually believe too much of the hype.

I am an electrical engineer and of course the plus points on an electric car make me wish to high heaven they were practical.  However the negative points more than sink the idea.  Someday.  But not today.  

robertocarlos's picture

We pay CDN$ .08196 per KW hour. Is that low enough to drive a Tesla and mine BTC?

Quivering Lip's picture

Where again does electricity to run these lithium battery cars come from in the US. 

About 65% of this electricity generation was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, petroleum, and other gases), about 20% was from nuclear energy, and about 15% was from renewable energy sources.

Green indeed.

Bwahahahhahahhahhahahhahah.

Sam Clemons's picture

My car is already solar powered.  The sun gave energy to the fossils we're now using for fuel.

ipso_facto's picture

'Green indeed.'

But the governement is forcing us to spend 400% more to produce unreliable 'green' electric capacity.  And since everyone has unlimited cash this method is sure to produce good reults.

taketheredpill's picture

I've done the math a couple of times and even if the power comes from Coal the CO2 produced per mile of travel is around 30% of gasoline.

FWIW.