Nothing people make is without environmental consequences; our challenge is to maximize the benefits while minimizing the damage.
Many people remain skeptical about electric vehicles, questioning their environmental impact. Does the world have enough raw materials? Won’t old batteries generate pollution? Are EVs charged with non-renewable energy just as damaging?
Many of these concerns are strawman arguments spun out by the fossil fuel industry. Oil producers worry that consumers will adopt these new technologies and so do their best to malign them. But for those genuinely curious, here are some facts I have gleaned.
TOMLINSON’S TAKE: New battery tech will pull electric vehicles even with petrol-fueled cars
First, there is the obvious. Electric vehicles have no tailpipe, no dipstick and no radiator. The battery cooling fluid is replaced every 100,000 miles. The car does not produce any emissions during daily operations, while internal combustion engines generate tons of pollution during their working life.
Electricity, though, has to come from somewhere, and many readers have complimented me on my coal-powered Chevy Bolt. Yes, depending on where you live, the electricity used to charge your battery could come from coal-fueled boilers, nuclear reactors or natural gas turbines.
In Texas, though, it’s pretty easy to game the system. Wind turbines generate most of the state’s nighttime electricity, so EV owners who use their mobile phone app to charge at 3 a.m. can feel virtuous.
The more critical issue is that most U.S. carbon dioxide emissions come from the nation’s 276 million tailpipes. If we can shift the burden of cutting emissions from hundreds of millions of mobile sources to tens of thousands of stationary power plants, fighting climate change will be a lot easier.
We already see a positive evolution, with wind and solar projects making up the vast majority of new power plants. Every year dozens of coal and natural gas-powered generators are closing. The grid is getting cleaner through attrition.
The elephant in the room is where manufacturers are obtaining their raw materials for EV batteries and how much pollution their factories are producing. Truth be told, a well-intentioned family in the Texas suburbs can unwittingly support slavery and environmental destruction in poor countries.
The most difficult-to-obtain materials used by current battery technologies are lithium, graphite and cobalt, according to the U.S. International Trade Commission. Those materials primarily come from countries with weak environmental and labor laws.
Chile and Argentina are the largest lithium producers. They evaporate brine of salt lakes, and biologists warn this lightly-regulated process is damaging water supplies, hurting wildlife, and impairing local farmers and shepherds. More study and regulation is needed.
Two-thirds of the world’s graphite currently comes from China, where miners suffer from respiratory issues similar to coal miners due to poor working conditions. The miners also use acid to purify graphite, damaging local water supplies.
While many battery makers are trying to move away from cobalt, they still rely on mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo. I’ve visited Congolese mines, and they are dismal places where child labor and slavery are commonplace with government collusion.
EV defenders will point to similar problems with internal combustion engine supply chains, but two wrongs do not make a right. If EV makers want to stake out the high ground, they must demand more robust environmental and labor codes from their suppliers or face righteous condemnation.
TOMLINSON’S TAKE: General Motor’s CEO betting on ACES, a new vision for transportation
The second big environmental challenge for EVs is still on the horizon: what do we do with the old batteries?
Two weeks ago, I wrote about solid-state batteries coming in 2025 that will last much longer than existing lithium-ion batteries. But Tesla and GM rolled out in June a lithium-iron battery they say will last for 1 million miles. Longer-lasting batteries reduce waste.
Meantime, scientists and entrepreneurs are dreaming up ways to reuse and recycle the tens of millions of EV battery packs that the industry will produce over the next 30 years. Companies in Norway, where EV adoption is highest, have plans to crush old batteries and recover their minerals.
Other companies plan to repackage EV batteries for use in stationary solar power storage sites for the electric grid, where they do not need to recharge as quickly or as often. By using old EV batteries that still have a lot of life in them, these companies will make it easier to adopt more wind and solar power.
Electric vehicles will not completely clean up modern transportation, nor is anyone making that claim. But they will undoubtedly cause less damage than current internal combustion engines in the long run and simultaneously benefit consumers with lower operating costs.
Tomlinson writes commentary about business, economics and policy.
twitter.com/cltomlinson
chris.tomlinson@chron.com
"Electric" - Google News
August 31, 2020 at 12:00PM
https://ift.tt/2EFiOmA
Electric vehicles solve some pollution problems, but not all - Houston Chronicle
"Electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/32kgKqT
https://ift.tt/2YAA2Jj
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Electric vehicles solve some pollution problems, but not all - Houston Chronicle"
Post a Comment