http://climatechangedispatch.com/st...ses-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-driving-on-gas/
Remember, the batteries don't last forever--that's probably as much CO2 from the batteries as a gas-burner would have released and that's before you count the CO2 from the electricity production.
And yet another article claiming that electric cars are "not green". It's like clockwork. The argument has some problems.
1. It relies on a specific energy mix being used. But if the battery factory uses their own solar power the issue of local power mix is moot. (RVonse already brought that one up). The article also seems to lump all fossil fuels together even though there are big differences in specific emissions between coal and natural gas.
2. It has to be remembered that this is an industry that is still early in its development cycle. Battery technology will become more efficient both in operation and manufacture, and power grid mix will evolve in the next decades. Remember, electric car technology will never become mature if we do not start with development at all. Also to remember is that ICE technology is extremely mature - modern ICE engines have been developed for about 150 years now. Incremental improvements these days require rather complex technology (such as variable valve timing for example). Major improvements are unlikely to come in the future. We need something new.
3. An electric car has a much simpler powertrain than an ICE car. The motor itself is much simpler than an engine, having only one moving part.
As opposed to:
And because an electric motor has excellent torque/power response vs. rpm, most electric cars (including Teslas) have an incredibly simple fixed-ratio single-speed transmission (think fixed gear bikes) as opposed to complex transmissions cars Tesla S competes with have (think 24 speed Shimanos to keep with the bicycle analogy). For example, the automatic transmission in the new Mercedes E-class has whopping 9 gears. It takes a lot more energy to make these more complex components vs. their much simpler EV equivalents.
An electric car can also dispense with the exhaust (including catalytic converter and muffler) and other components. Any serious comparison of CO
2 emissions would have to consider the difference in making non-battery components of the car, and compare like with like, i.e. Tesla with its competitors (performance sedans) and Nissan Leaf with its (compact car).
4. Because it is so much simpler and runs on low temps, EV motors do not need frequent part changes compared to their ICE cousins. In 8 years, an ICE car would have ~24 oil changes, go through one or two lead-acid batteries, and will have to get a few of its sensors (for example oxygen sensors) replaced. A new catalytic converter or some other parts may be needed as well, perhaps even a transmission rebuild (expensive both in terms of money and energy if you have a fancy 9G-Tronic). All these things cost energy and should have been considered vs. the energy cost of the battery.
5. While energy use and CO
2 emissions are certainly important they are not everything. Air pollution is a big deal, as could be seen from the VW diesel cheating scandal. As is pollution of soil and water through fluid leaks and spills. EVs do not use liquid fuels or engine oil or coolant. We should not neglect these advantages.
