“Oh my god, look! Another Tesla?!”
Whenever I have out-of-state guests, the number of electric cars in California often impresses them. As a proud Californian and avid car enthusiast, I love discussing cars, going to car-related events and appreciating unique vehicles. My parents even threw me a surprise birthday party at the Marconi Automotive Museum.
So, naturally, I decided to analyze the situation with electric vehicles in my state, which has recently been placed into focus by several proposed legislative measures. This topic allows me to combine my enthusiasm for cars with another issue that I am invested in, sustainability. The state of California is on the road to passing legislation mandating electric cars and it has stirred controversy among many citizens, not just car enthusiasts.
A key point in this discussion is that electric cars are not as sustainable as they are made out to appear. There is no real urgency for drivers to make the switch from a gas-powered car to an electric vehicle, yet some politicians may be promoting these cars for unnecessary and false reasons as California is faced with an important choice regarding electric vehicles. Are they indeed an answer to our sustainable future? If so, then how close are modern electric cars to these ideal futuristic vehicles? Do their creators earnestly work with the state legislators to promote environmental ethics, or do their lobbying efforts create smoke and mirrors in order to hide real problems?
Having only recently become a staple on our roads, electric vehicles nonetheless have a long history. Invented in the late 1800s, they quickly became all the rage. Initially, electric cars gained popularity because they did not have many issues associated with steam or gasoline-powered engines. They were perfect for short trips around the city, and, as more people gained access to electricity in the early 20th century, it became easier to charge electric cars.
However, the drop in popularity of electric vehicles was swifter than their rise, the reasons being mainly financial. By 1912, the cost of a gasoline car was almost three times less than that of an electric car. Later that year, Charles Kettering’s electric starter eliminated the need for the hand crank, leading to even greater sales of gasoline-powered vehicles. When crude oil was discovered in Texas, the prices of gasoline decreased and gas stations began popping up across the country.
Cheap gas and more affordable gasoline-powered automobiles spelled a disaster for the electric vehicle market — as well as for the ecology of the planet, although that “side effect” was hardly recognized back then. In the end, electric cars virtually disappeared by 1935, and their gasoline-powered competitors came to dominate the market.
It is fairly obvious that neither branch of the automobile industry — nor the consumers — were concerned with sustainability issues back in the day and neither can claim to have a spotless, eco-friendly, reputation. With rising concern for climate change in recent decades, electric vehicles have once again gained popularity, being presented as champions of sustainability. However, it’s important to emphasize that, historically, electric vehicles have not been eco-friendly and this “pass” they have been given is based on an assumption, not fact.
Electric cars made a major comeback in the early 2000s with the founding of Tesla, which quickly became a leading EV manufacturer. As of August 2022, the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y were the best-selling vehicles in California, according to Reuters. Perhaps one of the reasons why Teslas are so prevalent in “The Golden State” is because the company was started here, in Silicon Valley. This “support your local business” mentality has been intertwined with an apparent fascination with a cool product as well as the idea of pushing the sustainability envelope even further, an idea dear to the hearts of many Californians.
Though I admire and support my state’s continuing efforts of ecological preservation, I would like to take a closer look at electric vehicles through the prism of sustainability. William Throop, a specialist in environmental ethics and theories of sustainability and resilience, argues that our society is too focused on promoting the wrong virtues: abundance, control, conviction, competition and individualism. In his publication, “Flourishing in the Age of Climate Change: Finding the Heart of Sustainability,” Throop advocates for a shift away from these virtues and towards adopting the following principles: frugality, ability to adapt, humility, collaboration and system-building.
It’s hard to see Tesla cars as symbols of frugality or humility. According to Kristina Zucchi, an investment analyst and financial writer, owning a Tesla allows the consumer to associate with a “perceived elite status.” In fact, Tesla’s own marketing plan states that the company targets wealthy individuals who currently drive gas-powered luxury cars. Giving credit where credit is due, Tesla’s ability to position its brand is its strongest forte — but there, too, lies a concern for sustainability.
Tesla is continuously updating their vehicle lineup, reconfiguring prices and features several times a year. In addition, Tesla already has the highest brand loyalty out of any automobile brand — 64% of owners say they would buy a Tesla again. Tesla is feeding into the problem of “car obsession” and the idea of buying the new shiny thing. It’s rather apparent that Tesla’s marketing strategy is not contributing to the environmental sustainability movement. In fact, to a certain extent, sustainability of electric vehicles is a Potemkin village, a façade meant to hide some serious problems.
Advocates of the electric vehicle industry insist that electric vehicles are good for the environment since carbon dioxide emissions are largely responsible for the looming threat of global warming, and electric vehicles supposedly help reduce CO2 emissions.
In counterargument, Troy R. Hawkins, a senior scientist and group manager of the Fuel and Products Group, along with a group of researchers, published an analysis piece entitled “Comparative Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles.” According to this analysis, the supposed advantages of electric vehicles regarding low CO2 emissions are overstated.
“When a new electric vehicle appears in the showroom, it has already caused 30,000 pounds of carbon-dioxide emission,” the report reads. “The equivalent amount for manufacturing a conventional [gas-powered] car is 14,000 pounds.”
It is evident that the emissions for the production of electric vehicles compare quite unfavorably with regard to the emissions that come from producing gas-powered cars. Because the impact of production is more significant for electric cars than gas-powered vehicles, Hawthorne’s paper also compares vehicle lifetime emissions. About 50% of the lifetime CO2 emissions for an electric car are from the production process, especially in the mining and processing of raw materials for the battery, he found. Only 17% of a gas-powered car’s lifetime CO2 emissions are accounted for by the manufacturer of that car.
Bjorn Lomborg, a visiting fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and a best-selling author, criticizes electric cars by stating, “They still recharge using electricity overwhelmingly produced with fossil fuels.” Due to the way our grids are powered, data shows that for every mile driven, the average electric car indirectly emits about six ounces of carbon dioxide. Although it is still a lot better than a gasoline-powered vehicle (which emits about 12 ounces per mile), the production of one electric car results in the equivalent of 80,000 miles of travel in the vehicle.
In addition, the batteries in electric cars fade over time. Data shows that Tesla battery depreciation begins after only 50,000 miles on the vehicle. In stark contrast, most gas-powered cars start showing issues around the 100,000-mile mark. So, unless that electric car is driven a lot in a short amount of time, it will never get ahead environmentally which disproves the argument that electric cars are better for the environment.
One of the biggest environmental dangers associated with electric cars lies in the lithium mining business that is still largely unsustainable and dirty. Making the lithium-extraction process cleaner is an urgent goal that the industry needs to achieve. Teague Egan, the CEO of Energy Exploration Technologies (EnergyX) who has over fifty patents for lithium-mining technologies, promises sustainable lithium mining in the foreseeable future. According to him, the LiTAS technology, developed by EnergyX is “[c]apable of recovering 90% of a salt brine’s lithium deposits in a matter of days while not needing any freshwater. For comparison’s sake, current extraction methods take 18 months to retrieve 30% of a brine’s lithium while expending 18,000 gallons of water per ton.”
It is crucial that we do not blindly commit to promoting electric cars without accountability on the part of the industry currently employing unsustainable processes. Using the best elements of both electric and gas-powered vehicles, hybrid cars seem to offer a pathway forward. Having a smaller battery, hybrid vehicles do not rely on the lithium-mining industry as heavily as their electric counterparts. In addition, hybrid cars maximize fuel efficiency, thus producing substantially lower emissions than regular gas-powered automobiles do. Moreover, if somebody already has a functioning gas-powered vehicle, then there really is no need to purchase an electric car and contribute to the CO2 emissions created in the production process. This push comes from both the electric automobile industry’s powerful lobby and from the state itself. Contributing significantly to the popularity of electric vehicles, California offers incentives to people who buy them.
For example, the California Air Resources Board offers rebates for the purchase or lease of a new all-electric or plug-in hybrid electric vehicle through the Clean Fuel Reward Program. In addition, Clean Air Vehicles are allowed to use the HOV, or carpool, lane even if there is only one person in the car. It is unsurprising that electric cars are a common presence in “The Golden State” — but do they need to become the only presence in California? When Tesla co-founder and CEO Elon Musk declares that “[w]e will not stop until every car on the road is electric,” it sounds more than just a competitive slogan — it dangerously resembles a monopolistic ambition.
Passed in August 2022, the Light-Duty Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Sales Requirement states that “[a]ll sales of new light-duty passenger vehicles in California must be ZEVs or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) by 2035.” On the other hand, Proposition 30, which would impose a tax to support the purchase of electric vehicles, was overturned during the recent election — and so, the debate continues.
Modern vehicles are not ideal yet, but with commitment, transparency and accountability they might fulfill their potential. Hope lies in the continuous technological developments of sustainable lithium mining and in the spread of awareness on the topic. More time is needed to develop these technologies, though, making California’s adoption of subsidies irresponsible. Perhaps, both the industry and the lawmakers should be listening to Throop and promote collaboration through hybrid vehicles instead of fueling competition. As a result, a more sustainable outcome will benefit us all.