Fossil-fuel cars waste hundreds of times more raw material than their battery-powered electric equivalents, according to a new study by the Brussels-based campaign group Transport & Environment (T&E). This adds to evidence that the move away from petrol and diesel cars to all-electric vehicles (EVs) will bring large net environmental benefits.
Only about 30 kilograms of raw material will be lost over the life cycle of a lithium-ion battery used in electric cars once recycling is taken into account, compared with 17,000 litres of oil, says the study “From Dirty Oil to Clean Batteries”. A calculation of the resources for each type of car relative to their weight shows that internal-combustion engines burn 300–400 times more material than that which is lost once an electric car battery is scrapped.
“Our previous analysis has shown that electric vehicles emit 64 per cent less CO2, including all the different stages like electricity generation and fuel production, but this still hasn’t shaken off the argument that electric vehicles use up large amounts of raw materials,” says Lucien Mathieu, a transport analyst at T&E and an author of the report. “Our analysis shows that the raw material needs of EV batteries pale in comparison to the fuel burned by fossil-fuel cars, which, unlike batteries, cannot be recycled.”
Fewer raw materials, less energy
The comparison did not include potential emissions if fossil fuels were burned to create the power for the recharging of car batteries. “We excluded the raw material needed to produce the electricity and the [fossil] fuel because this is contingent on factors such as national electricity mixes and fuel extraction efficiency,” says Mathieu. “In our analysis of upstream energy use” — producing the electricity and making the solar panels and turbines used to produce that electricity — “we have shown that it would only make a five per cent to ten per cent difference in total energy consumption for electric vehicles powered by renewable energy.”
Regarding other aspects of the two vehicle types, T&E says battery-powered electric vehicles are superior to their petrol and diesel counterparts across raw material demand, energy efficiency and cost. In addition, exhaust emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmful gases are eliminated.
The accelerating move to electric vehicles will cause environmental costs. Higher battery production will require more mining of minerals such as lithium, cobalt and nickel. But the T&E report says that the cost of oil extraction for fuel represents a much greater environmental toll. The report points to a “double standard” used when assessing the relative merits of electric and fossil-fuel vehicles, which takes the use of oil for granted.
“When it comes to raw materials, there is simply no comparison,” says Mathieu. “Over its lifetime, an average fossil-fuel car burns the equivalent of a stack of oil barrels 25 storeys high. If you take into account the recycling of battery materials, only around 30 kilograms of metals would be lost — roughly the size of a football.”
Developments in battery technology will reduce the average amount of lithium, nickel and cobalt required for each car, mitigating some of the increased demand for the materials as well as lowering car prices. At the same time, circular economy regulations requiring higher recycling rates could cut demand even further.
Regarding the overall energy efficiency of vehicles, T&E calculations suggest that battery-powered electric cars use 58 per cent less energy than a petrol car over its lifetime and emit 64 per cent less carbon dioxide. Emissions associated with electric cars are mainly produced in the energy-intensive manufacturing of batteries, while the vast majority of emissions associated with internal-combustion-engine cars come from the use of these vehicles.
© Guardian News & Media 2021