Home » New Study Proves EVs Are Better For The Environment Wherever You Live, Even If Your Power Comes From Coal

New Study Proves EVs Are Better For The Environment Wherever You Live, Even If Your Power Comes From Coal

Bevictory Top
ADVERTISEMENT

If you’ve ever been unfortunate enough to be trapped in a tedious argument about whether or not electric vehicles are genuinely, holistically, and completely better for the environment, then I suppose I either have good news or bad news for you, depending on which side you were arguing on.

The basic question has always been this: are EVs actually better for the environment, even in areas where electricity comes from some decidedly non-environmentally-friendly sources like coal? Are EV drivers, as they can be accused of in these debates, actually driving coal-powered cars, just with more steps? Or are EVs actually as good as they purport to be, and, even when factoring in the environmental tolls of sourcing their battery chemicals and rare earth elements and all that, still better, cumulatively?

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

The question seems to have at least a bit more of an answer now, as a study published in Environmental Science & Technology’s annual Swimsuit Issue (I’m kidding, they do that bi-monthly) titled Greenhouse Gas Reductions Driven by Vehicle Electrification across Powertrains, Classes, Locations, and Use Patterns, which is a study that, significantly, created a full womb-to-tomb life-cycle model for light duty vehicles (LDV, which I have to admit, is an initialism I’ve never used before, nor wish to use) including cars of varying sizes and body styles and pickups. The model looked at data that factored in a lot of use case variables, like location, climate variations (both seasonal and regional), charging patterns for the EVs, driver types based on usage (commuting, road trips, hauling up to 2,500 pounds of whatever), and so on, all to get as nuanced and complete a view of just how much greenhouse gas emissions these vehicles produced.

Here’s the abstract of the study, from the authors, who let’s shout out right now: Elizabeth Smith, Maxwell Woody, Timothy J. Wallington, Christian Hitt, Hyung Chul Kim, Alan I. Taub, and Gregory A. Keoleian.

“We assess the cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of current (2025) light-duty vehicles (LDV) across powertrains, vehicle classes, and locations. We create driver archetypes (commuters, occasional long-distance travelers, contractors), simulate different use patterns (drive cycles, utility factors, cargo loads) and characterize GHG emissions using an attributional approach. Driven by grid decarbonization and improved electric vehicle efficiency, we are first to report electric vehicles have lower GHG emissions than gasoline vehicles in every county across the contiguous United States. On average, a 300-mile range battery electric vehicle (BEV) has emissions which are 31–36% lower than a 50-mile range plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), 63–65% lower than a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), and 71–73% lower than an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV). Downsizing also reduces emissions, with a compact ICEV having 34% lower emissions than an ICEV pickup. We present the first evaluation of LDV emissions while hauling cargo, showing that carrying 2500 lbs. in a pickup increases BEV emissions by 13% (134 to 152 g CO2e/mile) compared to 22% (486 to 592 g CO2e/mile) for an ICEV. Emissions maps and vehicle powertrain/class matrices highlight the interplay between vehicle classes, powertrains, locations, and use patterns, and provide insights for consumers, manufacturers, and policymakers.”

In case you’re one of those strange people who doesn’t want to slog through every published study they encounter on the internet, I’ll try to hit some of the big highlights for you here, so, you know, spoiler alert. Here’s the big one:

ADVERTISEMENT

Battery electric vehicles have significantly and consistently less output of greenhouse gas emissions than combustion vehicles or hybrid vehicles (even plug-in ones), even in locations where the electricity comes from filthy, filthy coal. On a county-by-county basis in America, battery-powered EVs outperformed combustion vehicles in every single county. All of them.

Chart 1
Source: Environmental Science & Technology

If we break this down into percentages, we find that BEVs – they specify the average here are ones that have at least a 300 mile range, which definitely isn’t all EVs, though testing factored in 200, 300, and 400-mile range cars – produced 31 to 36% fewer greenhouse emissions than even a plug-in hybrid car, 63 to 65% fewer (I want to say less here so badly) than a conventional hybrid, and a staggering 71 to 73% less than a gasoline-powered combustion car.

The study also notes that smaller combustion cars produce fewer emissions (duh, and 34% less), towing or hauling 2,500 pounds produces more emissions (duh again, 13% more for EVs, 22% more for combustion cars), and while none of these results are exactly shocking, it’s notable to see them so well-supported as in this study.

When it comes to materials, especially battery materials for EVs, and manufacturing emissions, the study used a specific model, which you can learn more about here. Battery replacements were not factored in:

“Vehicle cycle emissions (materials, manufacturing, and endof-life) are calculated using the GREET 2023 model from Argonne National Laboratory. We modified battery size and curb weight for each of the corresponding Car, SUV and Pickup options using vehicle parameters for model year 2025 (SI Note 2). Vehicle cycle emissions include production of components and fluids over the vehicle lifetime along with assembly and disposal of the vehicle. We do not include Li-ion battery replacements during the vehicle lifetime. The latest data shows that for new models, batteries tend to outlast the vehicle’s useful life. We assumed a battery chemistry of NMC811 for BEV, PHEV, and HEV as an example of a high nickel chemistry, the most common chemistry in the current U.S. EV market. For completeness, the impact of assuming NMC111, NMC622, or LFP battery chemistry is also explored and discussed in SI Note 7. The total emissions for vehicles with these other battery chemistries differ by less than 2.5% from those with NMC811.”

Chart 2
Source: Environmental Science & Technology. Also, I can’t recall what this was supposed to be showing, but I like all the color.

There’s a lot of other interesting details in the study; for example, their “use phase” calculations, which give their lifetime mileage estimates for different vehicle classes: sedans are considered to have a lifespan of 191,386 miles (that feels low to me?), SUVs last for 211,197 miles, and trucks at 244,179 miles. I’m not entirely clear how those estimates were calculated, but it’s interesting to see that the baseline amount of lifetime miles for a car has effectively doubled from the roughly 100,000-mile number that seemed to be the accepted standard of the past.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here’s the equations used for calculating emissions for those lifetime miles, for combustion cars/hybrids and for BEVs:

Equations

Look at that, there’s a big sigma there! That’s some real math going on!

The study didn’t go into anything like ease of charging or frequency or made any assessments about the national charging network, or anything like that. It was undertaken just to get an answer to the question of what sort of vehicle drivetrain produces the fewest greenhouse emissions, and, even after factoring in manufacturing, transport, materials, and where and how electricity is produced, it does appear that battery electric vehicles don’t just produce less emissions at their non-existent tailpipes, but also across the board.

I know bringing up coal plants was a satisfying way to get impossibly smug EV-advocates to maybe shut up for five glorious minutes during an argument, but it looks like we’re all going to just have to let that one go. EVs produce fewer emissions, period, across the board. I think if this knowledge is making you feel uncomfortable in some way, perhaps it’s best to just avoid these sorts of tedious debates.

ADVERTISEMENT

I know that’s what I’m going to do.

Top photo:

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
95 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Space
Space
13 minutes ago

sedans are considered to have a lifespan of 191,386 miles?
Honestly this seems high. For us Autopians I’m sure we have many vehicles that routinely exceed that, but for a normie? No way!
Those people dump their car at 50-100k and the 2nd owner doesn’t care as much and the BHPH owner doesn’t care at all.

Parsko
Member
Parsko
4 minutes ago
Reply to  Space

I have 2/4 with over that many, and one at 177k. Crap, my average across all 4 is 174k.

Cheap Bastard
Member
Cheap Bastard
2 hours ago

FWIW a typical US coal plant as of now(ish) emits between 740-1689 g CO2e/kWh. From that we can see a Tesla 3 that uses 26 kWh/100 mi is at best putting out 19.2kg/100 miles and at worst 43.9kg/100 miles using just coal sourced electricity. This does not include the emissions produced in the mining, transporting coal to the plant, transmission and charging losses, cold weather performance, etc which will increase those numbers.

https://www.cowi.com/news-and-press/news/2023/comparing-co2-emissions-from-different-energy-sources/

A Corolla OTOH uses 2.9 gallons of regular to go 100 miles and the hybrid uses 2.1 gallons to go the same distance

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=49154&id=48490&id=48494

If we use 8,887 grams CO2/ gallon that puts the sin of driving a gasser Corolla at 25.7kg/100 miles and a hybrid Corolla at 18.7kg/100 miles.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/greenhouse-gas-emissions-typical-passenger-vehicle

That does not include the emissions of oil pumping, refining, and distribution.

So by these numbers the hybrid Corolla is the winner likely followed by hybrid Corolla with the Tesla BEV last.

Space
Space
5 minutes ago
Reply to  Cheap Bastard

With your math the hybrid Corolla is twice as good as a BEV yet they say the BEV is better. That means oil pumping, refining, and distribution accounts for significantly more half of the emissions of a hybrid.

Or they messed up something in their data, like a sample bias.

1978fiatspyderfan
Member
1978fiatspyderfan
2 hours ago

Blah blah blah seems like they selected a best case scenario for the EV and still used scientific lingo to confuse.
You know the old saying I read on a T-shirt while camping on Asategue island that my parents would not let me have “if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bullshit.” But Jason if you state you understand that survey and believe it is 100% accurate I’m onboard.

Balloondoggle
Member
Balloondoggle
3 hours ago

I’ve avoided the GHG argument by asking which middle east terrorist organizations are supported by the challenger’s gas money. Not really fair, but they stop and think for a second and, especially if they see my veteran license plate, they go away. An EV won’t fit every use case, but there’s no point in either side dunking on the other for their choices.

Last edited 3 hours ago by Balloondoggle
95
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x