How green are electric cars

E

Evoman

Member
How green are electric cars?

www.which.co.uk

How green are electric cars? Green NCAP releases first life cycle assessment figures - Which? News

‘Cradle to grave’ life cycle assessment figures show electric cars are responsible for less greenhouse gas emissions than others, but energy from renewable sources plays a pivotal role
www.which.co.uk www.which.co.uk

An article published by Which?

I would like to find the detail of the study itself carried out by Green NCAP. You can see the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Factsheets for the selected vehicles there at least.

But why hasn't this research been carried out before legislation was implemented to force manufacturers into the EV corner?

The LCA is based on 16 years of running a vehicle. Go for something lightweight and run in a country or area without great renewables supply and the ICE car may be better than the EV. Take a lightweight aluminium car and run it beyond those 16 years, how does that LCA stack up against trading it in for a new EV?

That's the kind of question we need answers to...

I'm sticking with the A2
 
Absolutely agree.

This is an interesting video - you need to grit your teeth to get past the first few shock and awe statements though!!

 
Electric cars are green.

A2 is not so also due to the aluminum chassis that require ALOT of energy when made
 
Save the drying peat bogs is the way forward. Just a few of them hold more carbon than rainforest of entire world. All being released as they dry up. Amazing stats check them out, no one talks about them sadly. Just got to keep them wet. They're full of condensed trees over millions of years, all vacuum packed into little bogs. Its the biggest climate disaster on the planet bar America and far east
Google it.
 
Evoman said:
The LCA is based on 16 years of running a vehicle. Go for something lightweight and run in a country or area without great renewables supply and the ICE car may be better than the EV.
Click to expand...
1655889864152.png

Source: US Environmental protection agency https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth5
Based on the US grid which was 60% fossil at the time.

Take a lightweight aluminium car and run it beyond those 16 years, how does that LCA stack up against trading it in for a new EV?
That's the kind of question we need answers to...
Click to expand...
As your ICE car ages the engine becomes less efficient. For a given number of miles, you emit more and more GHG as the car gets older.

As an electric car ages, the grid (hopefully) increases it's share of renewables which means for a given number of miles it emits less than when new.

The electric car needs less maintenance and replacement parts over its life. The battery degredation FUD is just that. Early Leafs and Zoes with little or no battery thermal management created the FUD, but my sis has been running a Tesla since 2013, it has almost 150,000 miles on it and the battery it has lost 5% of it's range. My 21 year old A2 with similar mileage has lost about 10% of it's range

I'm sticking with the A2
Click to expand...
Good for you. The only car more efficient than an A2 is a good EV.
 
Like a few on here i've got an EV and an A2. The A2 is a great wee car and a lot of what was learned and used on the production of the A2 has been invaluable in how EVs are being produced today.

EVs are the future of personal transportation whether we like it or not. The balance of power generation is leaning to renewables more and more every day, with individuals even able to generate their own via solar that can be used to charge their own car in whole, or at least in part.

If I'm honest i went for a model 3 due to the cost to me as a company car, and the cost to run but the more I use it the more I dont get the anti EV sentiment due to prejudice. Its almost becoming political as it appears only "lefties" want to run EVs - crazy stuff.

In the end if an individual wants to hold off on an EV as long as possible then its a personal choice and one which anyone is entitled to make. Using dubious information to justify that decision and then passing this on as fact to others is where I have issues.
 
Imola Yellow said:
Then we are doomed. A fully integrated and comprehensive public transport network is the only rational possibility. But TBH, that's OT in an A2 forum :)
Click to expand...

Of course - which is why I made a point of stating personal transportation. I just dont think a utopian public transport will be a thing we can all use in my lifetime in the way you describe.
 
Evoman said:
How green are electric cars?

www.which.co.uk

How green are electric cars? Green NCAP releases first life cycle assessment figures - Which? News

‘Cradle to grave’ life cycle assessment figures show electric cars are responsible for less greenhouse gas emissions than others, but energy from renewable sources plays a pivotal role
www.which.co.uk www.which.co.uk

An article published by Which?

I would like to find the detail of the study itself carried out by Green NCAP. You can see the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Factsheets for the selected vehicles there at least.

But why hasn't this research been carried out before legislation was implemented to force manufacturers into the EV corner?

The LCA is based on 16 years of running a vehicle. Go for something lightweight and run in a country or area without great renewables supply and the ICE car may be better than the EV. Take a lightweight aluminium car and run it beyond those 16 years, how does that LCA stack up against trading it in for a new EV?

That's the kind of question we need answers to...

I'm sticking with the A2
Click to expand...
Your quoted article is more about power generation than EVs. Clearly it doesn't make much sense to run an EV on electricity generated from coal, or gas for that matter. But the owner can make the choice between electricity suppliers. Why do you think that we are moving towards greener methods of generation? Fashion? If you think that we can keep removing carbon from the ground and putting in the atmosphere, you are in for a nasty surprise.

Once an EV reaches about 30,000 miles the extra carbon cost of an EV is payed off; from there on the carbon emissions of an EV are minimal.

RAB
 
RAB said:
Your quoted article is more about power generation than EVs. Clearly it doesn't make much sense to run an EV on electricity generated from coal, or gas for that matter. But the owner can make the choice between electricity suppliers. Why do you think that we are moving towards greener methods of generation? Fashion? If you think that we can keep removing carbon from the ground and putting in the atmosphere, you are in for a nasty surprise.

Once an EV reaches about 30,000 miles the extra carbon cost of an EV is payed off; from there on the carbon emissions of an EV are minimal.

RAB
Click to expand...
No it's not, it's about the LCA - Life Cycle Assessment, i.e. measuring and comparing the full impact cradle to grave from manufacturing to end of life disposal.

Where and how the power is generated is a large factor to be assessed for sure.

I'm interested where do you get the 30k miles figure from for running an EV before the additional manufacturing carbon cost is offset? That calculation also has to make assumptions on the make up of renewables and non-renewables and can be biased. I have heard 53k miles quoted before but have not seen the workings behind that figure either.

The article which looks at the LCA is based on 16 years of running a car with an average mileage ~9k miles/year.

I'm not against EV cars but I think the full picture of their 'greenness' is not entirely understood by the general public. I also don't think they are the magic wand as often portrayed. I think there should be a balanced approach with further development of synthetic fuels, nitrogen power to name a few.

Most of what man does on planet earth has an impact. Every aspect of our lives and decisions we make in our lifestyles and purchasing have impacts from considering food miles to buying new clothes to the kind of car we drive and how many miles. And indeed how many overseas holidays taking flights.

EVs are brilliant in regards zero tailpipe emissions which has obvious benefits to air quality and human health and environment. But they can't be called green just because of that. This is where the LCA attempts to capture the full picture of the environmental impact (measured for carbon emissions only). There are other aspects not often highlighted such as the massive quantities of water used in mining cobalt used in the batteries.

Sure I'm a petrolhead but I am also very conscious of the environment, I work in this field. I'm aware of the all aspects of our lives that impact the environment and do my bit. As @CrispyEdd pointed out, save the peatbogs is something that not many people talk about or have much awareness.

@Olerype you say EVs are green, A2's are not also due to the energy used to make the aluminium chassis. Well this is where the LCA works. The energy used to manufacture the vehicle, operate it, then dispose of it that is the LCA. One may be 'greener' than the other but by how much and have we considered all environmental impacts other than carbon footprint?
 
donp38 said:
Hydrogen is the future, (not battery) with Aluminium body construction.
Click to expand...

Hydrogen is nowhere at the moment. It costs way more in energy to produce (and is expensive to buy) that it gives back and will likely only be earmarked for HGV / Buses etc not cars. Ironically a lot of what is produced today is via fossill fuels and when you think about it thats mad given you'd likely be more efficient just refining the fuel and putting it directly into the vehicle.

To answer above i've actually heard that EVs overtake ICE cars easily by around 5k miles, and thats without any arguments around localised pollution, particulates / NOX etc.

No ones mentioned the cost to bring oil out of the ground, move it around, refine (with all the energy that needs) then move around again. Its fairly horrendous but people tend to forget this.
 
Evoman said:
@Olerype you say EVs are green, A2's are not also due to the energy used to make the aluminium chassis. Well this is where the LCA works. The energy used to manufacture the vehicle, operate it, then dispose of it that is the LCA. One may be 'greener' than the other but by how much and have we considered all environmental impacts other than carbon footprint?
Click to expand...

Sorry; should have written more green than ICE.
 
donp38 said:
Hydrogen is the future, (not battery) with Aluminium body construction.
Click to expand...

Do not believe that. Even Toyota is finally abandoning hydrogen. Hydrogen to wheel has horrific efficiency. Aluminium is typically because the car manufacturer is forced to use it due to the weight of battery; ref. Tesla S and X. I do not believe aluminium will be used in cars in general since manufacturing aluminium requires enormous amount of energy compared to steel. I believe future batteries will be lighter and more compact instead
 
donp38 said:
Hydrogen is the future, (not battery) with Aluminium body construction.
Click to expand...
It takes six to eight times more electrical energy to drive the same distance in a hydrogen car than one with a battery. That's because of the poor efficiency of electrolysis (50%), the poor efficiency of the fuel cell (55% at best) and the energy required for compression of the hydrogen and its distribution.

RAB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top