"This takes a lot of energy: around five per cent of the electricity generated globally is spent crushing rocks in lithium mining."
"This takes a lot of energy: around five per cent of the electricity generated globally is spent crushing rocks in lithium mining."
Biggest lithium mines don’t even compare to biggest copper/gold/iron ore/zinc mines
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305693765_Energy_Co...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1224214/production-volum...
And if true, wow that’s a chunky carbon footprint on green car batteries!
If you're trading in a car that's less than 5 years old, then it takes a long time to offset the "new car" footprint.
Electric cars also do not care how the power is sourced, and if it's coal then can actually add more carbon to the environment than a petrol car.
Not everything is black and white, electric cars are definitely able to be more green than petrol ones and centralising the power generation will help keep our cities less polluted too.
Seems it would be much better advice to walk or cycle more, instead of lining the pockets of big mining (which is working well for me - my wife's company is making money faster than they can count it. She likes to tell people she works in "Renewables".).
It would be better if we had the funds to rebuild our cities to make them not dependent on vehicles, but our hands our tied.
And transportation technology is partly intended to reduce the power that specific plots of land hold.
I'd really like to run some formula in Python and see the footprint of petrol vs electric cars in terms of CO2, lithium, obsolescence time, other gases, maintenance etc.. (possibly with some parameters such as the composition of the power sources of the grid in your place).
Until I see that I feel I am being scammed by everyone since I don't have a good grasp on the data.
The main source is a 2020 EU report. The hyperlink has changed since I published the above, but you can find it here: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1f4...
For a fairly typical UK car, it's about 25,000 km (15,000 miles).
You can see the calculation and play with the assumptions here: https://www.robinlinacre.com/carbon_electric_car/
The average UK car does about 20k miles in its first year.
If you charge your electric car from that power plant, it's literally better(CO2 wise) to just drive a modern diesel. It's insane how bad that power plant is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be%C5%82chat%C3%B3w_Power_Stat...
Edit: and of course, it's currently being expanded, because Polish government is incapable of resisting the miner unions in this country.
That's a bit unfair to the UK.
Only 1.8% of power in the UK was generated from coal in 2020, down from 40% in 2012. The three remaining plants are all scheduled to close by October 2024:
• Kilroot Power Station is due to be converted to gas in 2023/2024.
• Ratcliffe-on-Soap Power Station is due to close in September 2024, although ¼ of it will close next year.
• West Burton Power Station is to close in September 2022.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/end-to-coal-power-brought...
I'm not an expert, so I won't claim to know who's correct. But the linked video provides lots of numbers, and you didn't, so I lean in favour of that conclusion.
Erm, no. You're absolutely correct about the embodied carbon in the car's production, but an EV consuming pure coal power[0] is less polluting than an (edit) ICE car. And most areas are far from pure coal power. According to the EPA if I bought an EV it would have 1/5th the tailpipe emissions of a gasoline car.
The "EV's are just coal power plants on wheels" is literally oil industry propaganda, FYI.
Edit: I also find the argument about production to be correct, but misguided. A sibling commenter plugged a calculator that they made for lifetime emissions and break even points. Using their assumptions about CO2 cost for the vehicles productions and my car's current mileage (30mpg) and local CO2 production (127g/kWh), the break even point for an EV is ~10,000 miles. This is a bit less than what most Americans drive per year. Given that a lot of people constantly trade up their cars anyways, you'd rather they trade-up to an EV than a ICE vehicle, on the balance.
0 - The EPA has a calculator for tailpipe emissions. Even putting a model Y right next to the largest coal powerplant in the US yielded significantly lower tailpipe emissions than gas; 130g/mi vs 410g/mi. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?year=2021&vehicleId=...
I think you mean it's less polluting than a ICE? Otherwise I don't think I understand this.
Then again, your old car is resold not destroyed and it will probably be bought on the second hand market by someone replacing a more polluting car.
Pretty much all cars will be used until they're not worth the maintenance anymore. It's all good.
The world produces around 25 000 TWh of electricity and 82 000 tonnes of lithium annually.
EDIT: wrongly assumed that 100% of the world's electricity is used for lithium mining. Correct version below:
For this to be true at $30/MWh one gram of lithium would need to cost ~$0.45, so a kWh of li-ion batteries would clock in at around $90 just for the lithium.
Li-ion batteries are already bought and sold for less than that.
5% of the world electricity usage divided by wholesale electricity cost, divided by world lithium production in grams ->
(5% * 2.5e+16 Wh X $30/1e+6 Wh) / 8.2e+10 g = $0.45 per gram (or 15kWh per gram of lithium)
The takeaway is that energy is currently unreasonably cheap.
More fun calculations include "how many solar panels would we need to power one Gigafactory" and "how many wind turbines would we need to manufacture that many solar panels".
Assuming 73kg/CO2e per kWh of EV pack[1], an 85kWh EV pack, an ICE that gets 40mpg (and thus 40 miles per 11kg CO2), grid production of 0.30kg CO2e / kWh (which is far lower than the US grid output), and 3 miles per kWh for the EV, the breakeven point is at 35,000 miles.
[1] https://www.transportenvironment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021...
So 5% isn’t that far off.