[BigJohn043]

I'm reluctant to get into this because here Musk was being used as a metaphor for our own fearless leader (Shaw) [other mods, feel free to shut this thread down].

Musk is a complicated person, and we can acknowledge that he's done some great things and some not so great things.  I think it really stretches the imagination to think that bringing a new car company into being the first to really mass produce electric cars isn't a major accomplishment.

Saying that electric batteries are flammable (they are) is true but not relevant.  You know what else is flammable?  Gasoline (https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-e...car-fires/).  It is kind of inherent to the system that any stored source of energy, whether it is in a battery or a hydrocarbon or some other mechanism, has the potential to release that energy in an uncontrolled way.  It turns out that ICE cars are more likely to catch fire but that battery electric cars that do catch fire are harder to put out.

You are correct that manufacturing electric cars takes more energy than manufacturing ICE cars.  However, over the course of the car's lifecycle, battery electrics release fewer greenhouse gases than ICE cars: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/...ce-vehicle

You can see that the actual emissions building the vehicle itself are comparable, but there are additional emissions from mining and assembling the batteries that are incurred by battery electric vehicles and not ICE vehicles.  But the emissions generated from electricity generation, which vary greatly, generally fall enough below the GHG generated by burning fossil fuels so that over the entire lifecycle, BEV's emit fewer greenhouse gases.  That difference depends a lot on how dirty the electricity generated is, but even in the worst case (top of the bar, where the emissions from generating electricity are 800 gCO2-eq/kWh) it is less than burning gasoline over the life of the car (200,000 km, 125,000 mi).

BC

Thanks for sending your source.  As usual, the answer depends on your assumptions.  Some thoughts:

This analysis assumes EV and ICE vehicles have the same carbon footprint to manufacture.  This is just factually wrong.  EVs are 25-50% heavier due to the battery pack, regenerative braking systems and the extra steel due to the first two.  All of that steel is pretty carbon intense.

This analysis assumes you drive the EV 200K.  ICE vehicles in Europe and the US are driven on average 133K.  And EV vehicles are generally believed to be driven less than ICE vehicles.  Here is some data:  https://www.greencarcongress.com/2021/02...-nber.html  There are some studies that show different numbers.  Finally, as batteries decay their range will go down so it seems less likely that these cars will be kept as long or you need all new battery packs which have big carbon footprints.

Note the errors bars in the analysis you cited.  The high end of those bars is the current carbon intensity of electricity generation.  And given the time it takes to shift electrical generation it won't get even close to the low or even the median case over the life of cars produced today.

Some of this could change over time.  We can get less carbon intense in generating electricity.  We can get less carbon intense in producing battery packs.  But EV vehicles produced today will not have significant impacts on GHG generation.

The sad thing is that Hybrid vehicles have a brobdingnagian impact.  Hybrid drives aren't that much more expensive than ICE.  They don't have brobdingnagian battery packs.  And they can double your fuel millage with no investment needed in a whole new infrastructure.....

[BigJohn043]

I'm reluctant to get into this because here Musk was being used as a metaphor for our own fearless leader (Shaw) [other mods, feel free to shut this thread down].

Musk is a complicated person, and we can acknowledge that he's done some great things and some not so great things.  I think it really stretches the imagination to think that bringing a new car company into being the first to really mass produce electric cars isn't a major accomplishment.

Saying that electric batteries are flammable (they are) is true but not relevant.  You know what else is flammable?  Gasoline (https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-e...car-fires/).  It is kind of inherent to the system that any stored source of energy, whether it is in a battery or a hydrocarbon or some other mechanism, has the potential to release that energy in an uncontrolled way.  It turns out that ICE cars are more likely to catch fire but that battery electric cars that do catch fire are harder to put out.

You are correct that manufacturing electric cars takes more energy than manufacturing ICE cars.  However, over the course of the car's lifecycle, battery electrics release fewer greenhouse gases than ICE cars: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/...ce-vehicle

You can see that the actual emissions building the vehicle itself are comparable, but there are additional emissions from mining and assembling the batteries that are incurred by battery electric vehicles and not ICE vehicles.  But the emissions generated from electricity generation, which vary greatly, generally fall enough below the GHG generated by burning fossil fuels so that over the entire lifecycle, BEV's emit fewer greenhouse gases.  That difference depends a lot on how dirty the electricity generated is, but even in the worst case (top of the bar, where the emissions from generating electricity are 800 gCO2-eq/kWh) it is less than burning gasoline over the life of the car (200,000 km, 125,000 mi).

BC

Thanks for sending your source.  As usual, the answer depends on your assumptions.  Some thoughts:

This analysis assumes EV and ICE vehicles have the same carbon footprint to manufacture.  This is just factually wrong.  EVs are 25-50% heavier due to the battery pack, regenerative braking systems and the extra steel due to the first two.  All of that steel is pretty carbon intense.

This analysis assumes you drive the EV 200K.  ICE vehicles in Europe and the US are driven on average 133K.  And EV vehicles are generally believed to be driven less than ICE vehicles.  Here is some data:  https://www.greencarcongress.com/2021/02...-nber.html  There are some studies that show different numbers.  Finally, as batteries decay their range will go down so it seems less likely that these cars will be kept as long or you need all new battery packs which have big carbon footprints.

Note the errors bars in the analysis you cited.  The high end of those bars is the current carbon intensity of electricity generation.  And given the time it takes to shift electrical generation it won't get even close to the low or even the median case over the life of cars produced today.

Some of this could change over time.  We can get less carbon intense in generating electricity.  We can get less carbon intense in producing battery packs.  But EV vehicles produced today will not have significant impacts on GHG generation.

The sad thing is that Hybrid vehicles have a brobdingnagian impact.  Hybrid drives aren't that much more expensive than ICE.  They don't have brobdingnagian battery packs.  And they can double your fuel millage with no investment needed in a whole new infrastructure.....