I read and hear all sorts of things about the relevance of electric vehicles. There is even a professional video circulating on Facebook where a credible-looking lady methodically demolishes them, claiming that they pollute much more than gasoline vehicles…
It is time to set the record straight, in the context of the development of the electric battery industry in Quebec.
First, serious studies all come to the same conclusions: electric vehicles (EVs) emit much less GHG greenhouse gases over their lifespan than gasoline vehicles, taking everything into account.
GHGs in Quebec
The best-known study in Quebec was carried out in 2016 by the International Reference Center for Life Cycle Analysis and Sustainable Transition (CIRAIG), affiliated in particular with Polytechnique Montréal.
His conclusion: although EVs consume a little more resources during construction, particularly metals, they clearly gain on indicators of climate change, human health and ecosystem quality, among others.
After traveling 150,000 km, EVs generate 65% less GHGs than gasoline vehicles in Quebec, according to the study. The proportion rises to 80% after 300,000 km, which is the equivalent of 5 times less GHG!
This gap will become even greater, since the study did not take into account the recycling of battery components. However, the technology has developed a lot since 2016 and few projects are launched today without planning for recycling. This is particularly the case for the Northvolt project, recently announced1.
GHGs around the world
EVs are obviously much greener in places where the main source of charging energy is renewable, such as Quebec, Norway or France, with its nuclear power.
At the time of the CIRAIG study, EVs were not winning in countries like India, Australia or South Africa – where electricity comes largely from coal – or less advantaged in countries like the United States, which depend on fossil fuels.
However, with recent changes, other serious studies find that EVs are now winning almost everywhere on the planet. The GHG savings over the full life cycle of a vehicle in 2021 was some 68% in Europe, 64% in the United States, 41% in China and 27% in India, according to a study by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT).
This gap will increase by another 5 to 16 percentage points by 2030, the study predicts, with the decarbonization of energy production2.
African child labor
It is true that the electric battery still has a black mark on its record. One of the components of many lithium-ion batteries is cobalt (NMC or nickel manganese cobalt batteries). However, two thirds of this ore comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where working conditions are highly criticized.
In this very poor country, many children work in mines, owned mainly by Chinese companies. The most miserable conditions come from artisanal production (12 to 20% of production), bought mainly by the Chinese, according to Amnesty International.
That said, electric vehicles are not the only users of Congolese cobalt. The vast majority of our cordless electronic devices are also equipped with NMC batteries made with cobalt (telephones, drills, etc.).
And according to what Manuele Margni, co-head of CIRAIG, told me, “the vast majority of cobalt comes from mines where there is no child labor and where human rights are respected”.
There is no doubt that we must put pressure on these deplorable conditions to change and demand that the corrupt government of the DRC bring the mines up to standard. However, stopping buying cobalt there would deprive the country and its people of the electric vehicle boom, leaving them destitute.
Some manufacturers like Tesla are also starting to do so, for ethical and technological issues, focusing more on a cobalt-free battery composed of lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP). This battery now equips the popular Tesla Model 3.
The consortium made up of Ford, EcoProBM and SKOn also intends to reserve one of its 5 cathode production lines in Bécancour for LFP batteries, I learned.
Turning our back on the DRC would also delay the global shift towards electric vehicles, which are essential to achieving our climate objectives, since the sole use of public transport by our populations is illusory, like the total deprivation of cars.
Moreover, “Amnesty International recognizes the crucial importance of rechargeable batteries in the energy transition to end dependence on fossil fuels”, but the organization rightly demands a just transition and an end to the violation of rights of the person in the DRC.
The oil sector, by the way, also has a history of human rights violations.
Knowing all this, we must ask ourselves who benefits from these denunciations of electric vehicles, often anonymous, like those in the Facebook video, which provoke a series of anti-electric vehicle comments from Internet users. I have a suspicion, it seems…
Reducing the number or use of cars is certainly the first transport solution to achieve our climate goals. But to claim that electric vehicles pollute as much as gasoline vehicles, that they are useless and are not part of the solution is simply heresy.
1. Experts believe that the resources used to produce electric batteries, particularly lithium, are more than sufficient to supply demand for hundreds of years. The pollution produced by the development of new deposits, however, requires that we focus on recycling.
2. Another study, this time from the firm T&E, finds that even in a coal-fired country like Poland and with batteries produced in China, EVs are around 37% cleaner than gasoline cars.