I recall the first car that caught my attention as a young boy. I was pedaling my bike to school and was passed by a fellow driving a ’66 Ford Mustang. Oh, I’m sure I had seen Mustangs before that. But at maybe nine or ten years of age in 1969, it was the first car that I actually noticed. In ’75, my Dad bought me my first car, a rough ’65 Mustang convertible.
And my love affair with cars was off and running.
Probably one of the most note-worthy development (though it passed me by at as it was occurring) was the true evolution of the Electric Vehicle or EV. I was vaguely aware of the GM EV1 in the mid-nineties, but I didn’t take notice until the Tesla came along. Call it a big blind-spot for me.
So here we are today.
There are approximately 2,442,270 electric vehicles registered in the United States. The data shows that overall EV adoption is fairly low in the United States, Only 0.86% of registered vehicles are electric. 27 automakers sold electric vehicles to US consumers in 2023.
According to Global Market Insights, The US electric vehicle market was valued at $49.1 billion in 2023. The market includes fuel cell electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and hybrid electric vehicles. Passenger cars represent 84.6% of the market, with two-wheel and commercial vehicles making up the remaining 15.4%.
Market experts predict significant growth for EVs in the United States over the next decade. The US electric vehicle market will expand from the $49.1 billion value in 2023. The global electric vehicle (EV) market is estimated to reach $802.81 billion by 2027. At a 15.5% Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR), the market could be worth $215.7 billion by 2032.
At the risk of stating the obvious, the assumption (presumption) that electric cars are ‘greener’ and better for the environment is driving this growth. Battery electric vehicles (BEV) which have held the majority share of the U.S. electric vehicle market, are associated with zero emissions as they operate completely on battery, thereby reducing air pollution.
Hybrid electric vehicles, combining a conventional internal combustion (IC) engine with one or more electric motors, have reduced emissions and extended MPG ratings. Think of the Prius with a 49-57 mpg rating or the Hyundai Sonata Hybrid with 47-52 mpg. But they also offer the extended range with the IC engine.
And fuel cell cars emit only water vapor and warm air. Think of the Toyota Mirai. with a range of 402 miles. You may not have been exposed to this car as it is marketed mainly in Japan, California, and Europe
So, the assumption that electric cars are ‘greener’ and better for the environment seems to be on pretty solid ground. But do they really represent a true panacea with regards the environmental impacts of our vehicles? Yes, I acknowledge nobody has explicitly said that EVs are a panacea, but work with me here.
In order to address the concerns over EVs, the EPA has developed a website to address electric vehicle myths. They list seven such myths.
- Myth #1: Electric vehicles are worse for the climate than gasoline cars because of power plant emissions.
- Myth #2: Electric vehicles are worse for the climate than gasoline cars because of battery manufacturing.
- Myth #3: The increase in electric vehicles entering the market will collapse the U.S. power grid.
- Myth #4: There is nowhere to charge.
- Myth #5: Electric vehicles don’t have enough range to handle daily travel demands.
- Myth #6: Electric vehicles only come as sedans.
- Myth #7: Electric vehicles are not as safe as comparable gasoline vehicles.
Okay, how did Myth #6 make this list? “Electric vehicles only come as sedans?” Really? Looks like padding to me.
Myth #2 about EVs being worse for the climate because of battery manufacturing deserves some additional scrutiny. In part, that site says “…while GHG emissions from EV manufacturing and end-of-life are higher,”…” total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.” Those are acceptable numbers because who can argue with someplace called Argonne National Laboratory.
But note that throughout the “answer” we see continual references to “Green House Gas” emissions. What appears to be happening is that the overall emission figures are being used to mask the cost of manufacturing which I would argue should include the impact of raw material acquisition. And attention needs to be given to environmental cost associated with that.
EV batteries have evolved. But current technology utilizes lithium, cobalt, nickel, and graphite and manganese. In 2022, a typical EV battery weighs one thousand pounds. It contains twenty-five pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic. Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells. To manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth’s crust for just one battery.
What’s this thing about “brine” used in lithium production? There are two ways lithium is extracted: salt flats and hard rock mining. Salt flat processing produces a higher quality output. Salt flats are created when water is pumped underground and returns to the surface with dissolved minerals. This brine is spread across wide pools to evaporate, leaving behind the minerals to be separated and processed via a chemical process and converted into the compounds that are used in rechargeable batteries. Salt flats are common in a triangle overlapping Chile, Argentina, and Bolivia.
When mining companies extract lithium, they pump up the brine and allow the desert’s strong solar radiation to evaporate up to 95 percent of the water. Data from the Chilean government suggests that brine production in the Atacama flats is outpacing the aquifer’s ability to recharge by about 30%. About 65% of the region’s water is used for lithium mining.
The State of Nevada recently saw protests on account of the Lithium Americas Project due to the prophesied use of enormous quantities of groundwater.
The major cost of lithium extraction in salt flats is water usage. Getting exact numbers is challenging, however. Estimates range from 250 gallons of water per pound of lithium, all the way up to a million gallons. Remember the statistic that a typical hundred pound EV battery pack holds 25 pounds of lithium.
On to hard rock mining. As far as hard rock mining of lithium goes, entire mountains are eliminated.
Each mine usually consists of thirty-five to forty humongous 797 Caterpillar haul trucks along with hundreds of other large equipment. Each 797 uses around half a million gallons of diesel a year. So, with an inventory of just thirty-five the haul trucks alone are using 17.5 million gallons of fuel a year for just one lithium site.
When hard ore is mined, it’s broken down, separated, subjected to an acid bath, and eventually, lithium sulfate can be teased out of the mix. This is a very traditional mining method with all of the usual risks of pollutants gathering in tailing ponds. It’s a relatively cheap process compared to salt flat processing but also produces a lower-grade product. (EDITOR: Please take a moment and read this article on American Lithium Mining.)
Cobalt has become a real example of the mineral conundrum at the heart of the renewable energy transition. As a key component of battery materials that power electric vehicles, cobalt is facing a sustained surge in demand as de-carbonization efforts progress. Cobalt mining, however, is associated with dangerous workers’ exploitation and other serious environmental and social issues.
Rather than taking the time and space to tell about workers exploitation, we would refer you to a Washington Post article for reference. The Cobalt Pipeline.
Cobalt is primarily mined out of Congo, which produces roughly half the world’s supply.
According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, “about half of the world’s cobalt production is consumed in the manufacture of cathode material in the fast-growing market of rechargeable LIBs (Lithium-Ion Batteries)
commonly used in electronic devices such as laptops, smart telephones, camcorders, toys, power tools and other technology devices, and in hybrid and electric vehicles “ Just to state the obvious, this percentage (or raw volume) will have to increase as demand for EVs is growing.
Cobalt is toxic to touch and breathe in, and can be found alongside traces of radioactive uranium. Cancers, respiratory illnesses, miscarriages, headaches and painful skin conditions occur among adults who work without protective equipment.
Children in mining communities suffer birth defects, developmental damage, vomiting and seizures from direct and indirect exposure to the heavy metals.
According to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, mining of cobalt is linked to grave human rights abuses, including the exposure of miners to unsafe worksites and reliance on child and forced Congolese labor, as well as environmental degradation.
The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that at least 25,000 children are working in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It is currently estimated that between 140,000-200,000 people work as artisanal miners in the DRC and most earn less than US$10 per day.
As Siddharth Kara, author of Cobalt Red states: “We would not send the children of Cupertino to scrounge for cobalt in toxic pits, so why is it permissible to send the children of the Congo?” In essence, the damaging effects and impacts of this technology are being exported to indigenous peoples.
Satellite analysis in Cuba has shown an area devoid of life in over 1,400 acres of land and contamination of over 6 miles of coastline where nickel and cobalt mines are present. The Philippines had to shut down 23 mines, many producing nickel and cobalt, because of the environmental degradation that it caused.
Mining these materials, however, has a high environmental cost, a factor that inevitably makes the EV manufacturing process more energy intensive than that of an ICE vehicle. The environmental impact of battery production comes from the toxic fumes released during the mining process and the water-intensive nature of the acquisition. Another important consideration relates to the quantity of greenhouse gases released per unit mass of mined material, as some less concentrated mineral deposits require proportionally higher energy usage. While not a direct comparison with cobalt, an example is put forward relating mining a kilogram of diamond produces around 800,000 kg CO2e compared to a kilogram of a highly abundant mineral such as iron which produces only about 2 kg CO2e. I was unable to find a true reference to cobalt or lithium but the reference to concentration of mineral deposits should hold.
Producing an electric vehicle emits almost twice as much greenhouse gas as a conventional one. It takes several years, depending on the annual mileage, to break even. Almost 4 tons of CO2 are released during the production process of a single electric car and, in order to break even, the vehicle must be used for at least 8 years to offset the initial emissions by 0.5 tons of prevented emissions annually.
It’s only fair to acknowledge that while there are hazards of metal extraction, they are not exclusive to EV manufacturing – all portable electronic devices contribute to this. Recycling and reusing batteries can provide some relief to the mining process. But the current methods of recycling EV batteries are still inefficient. Even if most EV components are much the same as those of conventional cars, the big difference is the battery.
While traditional lead-acid batteries are widely recycled, the same can’t be said for the lithium-ion versions used in electric cars.
From a manufacturer’s point of view, recycling old batteries is the safest way to ensure a ready supply of new ones. Batteries differ widely in chemistry and construction, which makes it difficult to create efficient recycling systems. And the cells are often held together with tough glues that make them difficult to take apart.
That has contributed to an economic obstacle: It’s often cheaper for battery makers to buy freshly mined metals than to use recycled materials. Currently, recyclers primarily target metals in the cathode, such as cobalt and nickel, that fetch high prices. (Lithium and graphite are too cheap for recycling to be economical.) But because of the small quantities, the metals are like needles in a haystack: hard to find and recover.
To extract those needles, recyclers rely on two techniques, known as pyrometallurgy and hydrometallurgy. Not to get too far in the weeds, pyrometallurgy involves burning the batteries and hydrometallurgy involves dunking batteries in various acids to separate the component materials. Both processes produce extensive waste and emit greenhouse gases, studies have found.
One solvent that recyclers use to dissolve cathode binders (the epoxy holding the negative plates inside of a battery) is so toxic that the European Union has introduced restrictions on its use, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency determined last year that it poses an “unreasonable risk” to workers.
Oh, and if not safely discharged, these batteries tend to want to explode.
It’s estimated that only 5% of EV batteries are recycled. This is mainly because of the cost and the rather long process required to recycle batteries. Batteries ending up in landfills add to the environmental footprint.
With recycling, there is a recognition that many of these elements are relatively scarce. As stated by the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development, “… It also raises questions on whether there is enough supply of these raw materials to meet rising demand given that available quantities are low for some of the raw materials, they are not widely geographically distributed in high concentrations and they have low substitutability.”
I’m quite intrigued by the prospect of EV development. I believe that the battery itself will continue to evolve in the future. I’m hopeful that this evolution will address the humanitarian and environmental cost being borne today. I can hope that we can accept ALL of the costs of this developing technology.
Still, I’m left looking for that new technology that can spark the same passion that was fired by that old ’65 Mustang convertible.
Ne
Don Alexander has been producing videos since 1982. He has worked with the SAAC, Sierra Nevada Community Access Television, Washoe County, Nevada The City of Reno, Nevada and PBS-Reno. He has also been involved racing cars for over 40 years.
If you want to submit a “Comment to the Editor,” please use the following;