Electric vehicles are not worse for the environment than gas-powered cars because of battery production.

Question

Many claim that electric cars are actually worse than gas-powered vehicles, usually focused on the environmental costs of mining things like lithium, cobalt, and nickel used in EV battery life. Various independent lifecycle studies, however, have concluded EVs produce less overall pollution than gasoline-powered cars, even accounting for producing battery packs and electricity. There is certainly more environmental effect in the production of batteries, but this is regained after a few years of use with zero tailpipe emissions.

Answer 1

The claim that electric vehicles (EVs) are worse for the environment than gas-powered cars due to battery production is deeply misleading. Studies confirm EVs produce less overall pollution than gasoline vehicles, even accounting for battery manufacturing and electricity generation. Mining lithium, cobalt, and nickel for EV batteries has environmental costs, including toxic emissions, which can result in higher initial carbon emissions, which is about 60% more than gas cars. However, EVs offset this initial pollution within 1.4 to 2 years of driving due to zero tailpipe emissions and lower operational emissions, especially with cleaner grids. Over their lifetime, EVs emit roughly 15–25 tons of CO2 compared to 68 tons for gas cars. While battery production poses challenges, innovations in recycling and cobalt-free batteries are reducing impacts. The claim overstates mining concerns and ignores EVs’ long-term environmental benefits.

sources used: https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/23/do-electric-cars-really-produce-fewer-carbon-emissions-than-petrol-or-diesel-vehicles

Answer 2

The outside title of your claim is that electric cars are not worse for the environment. When I read into your claim and look at the article you are claiming the exact opposite. This is very confusing and I think you should fix this before making a claim with this topic becase their are facts to support each side. These cars do have effect to both sides, as they limit true greenhouse gas emersion, but then have longer effects with what the batteries can do to the environment. I overall do not think there is an answer to this question as both types of cars cause their own problems. 

With claims like this:

According to the report, swapping gas vehicles for zero-emission new cars and trucks in the US would lead to 110,000 fewer deaths, 2.8m fewer asthma attacks and avoid 13.4m sick days by 2050.

this is the tip of the iceberg g of what good electric cars can do. Mainly the solution to. helping our global warming issues.

But with that I do agree these batteries have longer affects and people do need to understand these have lasting effects too.

The other side is much more complicated and you have too look into the affects of mining and other human activities to get the required materials to create these batteries. I have a small passage to show the basic idea of how these batteries can be harmful.

Nickel is a major component of EV batteries and is found, among other places, in the rainforests of Indonesia. It resides just below the topsoil and is extracted using a method of horizontal surface mining. Harmful effects include removal of topsoil, extreme environmental degradation, and deforestation. We’re not really saving the planet with this process. Since the rainforests are the lungs of our planet, this is harming the process of removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere.

Overall these batteries have positives and negatives that should be in the light of the public to let them understand the true impacts of the product they are buying. 

Sources:

https://www.silvanfoundation.org/post/electric-vehicles-could-save-over-100-000-lives-by-2050gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=11357115482&gbraid=0AAAAACMdq_AsQLjSlKYMGcfNxvWTZAcmG&gclid=CjwKCAjwuIbBBhBvEiwAsNypvbijZXgYqctSDKq211S5J03yEHfQTRIBx4FyeK0St_3MtLHcvT5S3RoCsOsQAvD_BwE

https://www.greencars.com/greencars-101/environmental-impact-of-ev-batteries?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=gc_merkle_electric%20car_basic_dsa&utm_term=&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=11545231184&gbraid=0AAAAACT24aBzwYsefjC6uZrZnsKtP1ig1&gclid=CjwKCAjwuIbBBhBvEiwAsNypvUdf4UzHmzWuX2O9g8Os3IDmS8afnx_yc7WZI7Cd9xAdtgqaqT06RhoCd0wQAvD_BwE

Answer 3

I agree with this statement. It has been proven that electric vehicles overall are much better for the environment, and “switching to EV undoubtedly represents a good strategy to stop global warming” (Earth.Org). If we were to make a shift to having only electric cars, the global emissions would be cut immensely. Not only does this article have substantial evidence that this claim is true, I also found another article from NPR, they break down the environmental impacts of batteries from electric cars, vs. gas expenditure. Gas has many more long term impacts such as  disrupting habitats, “polluting with runoff or other waste. And people can suffer in other ways: worker poisonings, child labor, indigenous communities' rights violated and more (Domonoske 2024). I appreciate how this article looks at both sizes and analyzes the environmental consequences of batteries and gas, as well as how gas is ultimately worse. 

Answer 4

I found this claim to be true, after looking at the source that was provided I was able to see the information followed the same ideas as I  found when I  looked for my own source for this claim. I  agree with this claim because the information I  found supported the idea that electric cars are not worse for the environment.

 https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths