471
submitted 1 month ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Everyone knows that electric vehicles are supposed to be better for the planet than gas cars. That's the driving reason behind a global effort to transition toward batteries.

But what about the harms caused by mining for battery minerals? And coal-fired power plants for the electricity to charge the cars? And battery waste? Is it really true that EVs are better?

The answer is yes. But Americans are growing less convinced.

The net benefits of EVs have been frequently fact-checked, including by NPR. "No technology is perfect, but the electric vehicles are going to offer a significant benefit as compared to the internal combustion engine vehicles," Jessika Trancik, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told NPR this spring.

It's important to ask these questions about EVs' hidden costs, Trancik says. But they have been answered "exhaustively"


her word


and a widerange of organizations have confirmed that EVs still beat gas.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 125 points 1 month ago

We're going to run the country into the ground because we have such a large group of people being totally fine with (or even encouraging) their lack of education and the ability to reason properly. They're just proud to be "against" something together, they don't even care what it is they're against.

There are already EV battery recycling plants springing up now that there are enough used EVs to warrant them, there wasn't much point building them when there weren't any battery packs to process.

The renewable energy switch is already happening, because even without subsidies they're still cheaper.

But no... gotta get out there and roll coal.

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

North American auto has lost its mind and handed over any chance at being top-tier in the future. Seems game over to me. Canada is joining in on the 100% tariff game and I'm furious that my government will, this late in the game, try and protect an industry that gambled with the oil and gas industry and lost (not to mention their compete fall into profiteering in five to six digit major life purchases) by passing costs of avoiding Elon and subpar selection onto consumers.

I hope the industry wakes up and goes hard for competitiveness in EVs and stops waiting for elections to decide if climate change is real or if the economy will be affected by their decisions. To stop waiting for elections to decide if people want EVs. To allow manufacturing to flourish regardless of who's fighting for the rights to our money while we briefly have it.

And to your point yeah - just like Asimov said:

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.

[-] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 month ago

Be sure to call a few government reps and speak your mind. Try to do it by asking questions. If you can turn a few aides against the system it can have a snowball effect bc those are people who are young and passionate about politics

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago
[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago

I live in Virginia and the other day I saw a Tesla with a custom license plate for friends of coal. like I don't even...

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 month ago

I must admit this is a big-brain move — being for electric cars in order to have more coal-fired plants rather than burning gasoline.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Even a coal burning EV emits less carbon than a gasoline car. The payback threshold may increase uncomfortably though. A while back I read something doing that analysis per US state. I believe the threshold ranges from 2 year in states with cleaner energy, up to 14 in coal burning West Virginia and Wyoming

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

I just find it funny. It's perfectly logical for someone who really cares about burning more coal to drive an electric car, but I've never seen anyone make that connection before. It's like... I don't know. A vegan lobbying against lactase pills?

[-] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

And 14 years isn't really feasible given battery decay.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Eh, maybe.

If you want to age something artificially, you run it through cycles of use very quickly. To age a wood joint, you run it through cycles of high heat and humidity and then drop it back down to cold and dry, and do it as fast as you can for weeks or months. Aging a CPU is similar; heat it up and then cool it down. For batteries, you hit them with a lot of charge and discharge cycles.

This artificial process may, if anything, be harsher than any real world use. So there's reason to think that manufacturer estimates are pessimistic.

This does appear to be the case; modern EVs have been around long enough now that we can get some real world data, and batteries are lasting longer than expected: https://www.pcmag.com/news/how-long-do-ev-batteries-last-study-says-longer-than-you-think

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

"There are two states that have such shitty electricity production systems that it may take more than the lifetime of an electric car for the carbon emissions to break even. That's how terrible electric cars are!"

🙄

[-] P1nkman@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

But the coal is cleaned, so it's better to burn it for electricity. Duh 🙄

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Wasn't that what Desantis did, put a coal sticker on his Tesla? Then had dealerships write up a bill to restrict people from purchasing vehicles directly from manufactures without going through a dealership, keeping the costs higher for the people. The bill had an exemption for certain vehicles... Like the Tesla he bought.

[-] miraclerandy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

That feels like they’re trolling or making fun of themselves a bit. I know a few people in Kentucky with EVs and they also have “friends of coal” plates.

[-] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

AFAIK it's the only way to get a black plate hence why they do it. Looks cleaner on darker cars.

[-] AtomicHotSauce@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is the bottom line. We all know who these morons are and they’re never going to care what actual repercussions are for their actions. They think it is funny to “own the libs” no matter what the issue may be. If a left-leaning person advocates for one thing, their automatic reaction is to oppose it without question.

It’s truly scary to look around (especially in red states) and to know a good percentage of those around you are that dumb.

[-] Krackalot@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 month ago

I don't consider myself intelligent. One of the scariest moments of my adult life was realizing I'm above average intelligence, maybe by a decent margin.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

They have guns too.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

The end of life battery recycling has been the #1 thing I've been looking at. Glad to see they aren't going to landfill.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Battery upcycling is also becoming a thing. If an old battery is not fit for a car anymore it can still be useful in other contexts; like you could convert it into a battery for home or grid storage with minimal processing.

edit: rephrased to remove double negative

[-] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 7 points 1 month ago

I'm curious to know what you've learned. Would you care to share?

If you've been looking at it, then perhaps you've seen this:

EV Batteries Can Outlast A Vehicle’s Lifetime With Minimal Degradation, Study Finds https://insideevs.com/news/733987/ev-batteries-outlast-vehicle-degradation-study/

"“Batteries in the latest EV models will comfortably outlast the usable life of the vehicle and will likely not need to be replaced.” That’s what David Savage, Vice President for the UK and Ireland at Geotab said in the company’s latest study that looked at how EV batteries degrade over time."

But if not, the article, and research it's based on is worth a gander. EVs require a whole lot less maintenance, too, as it turns.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

So far, the biggest problem with battery recycling is that not enough of it is done locally. Depleted batteries are being shipped to China for recycling.

https://www.npr.org/2024/06/27/nx-s1-5019454/ev-battery-recycling-us

But things are improving here, so that's good!

Ideally what I'd like to see are large, regional, recycling centers and that's just not a thing yet. I'd say a minimum of 6, 2 in the West, 2 in the East and 2 in the center of the country.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Ideally what I’d like to see are large, regional, recycling centers and that’s just not a thing yet. I’d say a minimum of 6, 2 in the West, 2 in the East and 2 in the center of the country.

One of the challenges is, ironically, there aren't enough dead batteries to economically support multiple large domestic battery recyclers. Batteries aren't failing enough.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

The problem with that model is that when they all start failing it will be a crisis without the infrastructure to solve for it.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

What crisis are you foreseeing? It is unlikely its going to be an avalanche of millions of batteries failing at once needing processing. Wear and tear will spread final failure over a long time horizon.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Piles of spent batteries stacking up leaking heavy metals into the envirionment without a large scale plan to deal with them.

A single EV uses a 1,000 pound battery pack (on average):

https://blog.evbox.com/ev-battery-weight

That's a LOT to properly dispose of. x 3.3 million EVs in use in the US?

https://www.edmunds.com/electric-car/articles/how-many-electric-cars-in-us.html

3.3 BILLION pounds of future battery waste. We need to plan for proper recycling now.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Piles of spent batteries stacking up leaking heavy metals into the envirionment without a large scale plan to deal with them.

So again, you're describing an avalanche type event where all this need for recycling appears overnight, and that without it we'll have massive environmental damage. Neither of those is likely to occur like that.

Small numbers of batteries will outright fail or be destroyed in crashes becoming useless immediately. This will increase in a fairly predictable way giving lots of indications about needed recycling infrastructure (of which some exists today). Further, the time horizon for larger numbers of batteries to become unusable is likely decades away. Batteries that degrade from use don't stop working, but rather become uneconomical to continue to use them in cars and they be come stationary energy storage, like this:

Old Nissan LEAF Batteries Being Used For Grid-Scale Storage In California

Your source links don't support your argument well. The first just talks about how much a car battery weighs with no mention of recycling, life span, or disposal, and you even posted an inaccurate number from your article on the weight impact of the battery materials. You said:

A single EV uses a 1,000 pound battery pack (on average)

...but your source says this: "On average, about 60 to 75 percent of a battery’s total weight comes from the cells and the materials they contain, while the remaining 25 to 40 percent is made up of the battery’s metal casing, cables, and thermal and battery management systems (TMS and BMS). "

So the weight of the material you're citing as dangerous is only 600 lbs to 750 lbs, not the 1000lbs you mention.

Your second link also doesn't contain any info on battery usage, degradation, recycling, or disposal, and is just an article talking about the number of cars on the road. It looks like you just took the first sentence from that link which was:

"According to an Experian Automotive Market Trends report from the fourth quarter of 2023, there were about 3.3 million electric cars on the road in the U.S. "

...which you then multiplied by the incorrectly heavy metal battery number from your prior article

A single EV uses a 1,000 pound battery pack (on average)

...to arrive at your statement....

3.3 BILLION pounds of future battery waste.

That's an unnecessary and inaccurate scare tactic.

Yes we will need more capacity for disposing of batteries properly, but the problem at scale is decades away, not tomorrow. Further, the materials themselves are valuable long after any energy storage capacity is exhausted. They are too valuable to throw away. Legislation already passed is working to create a market for this by offering tax incentives in the USA for batteries built from recycled battery material in the USA. This is in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Here's an actual source that talks about EV battery degradation, lifespan, and recycling. source

"Then there’s the Inflation Reduction Act, also passed in 2022, which grants US taxpayers a federal tax credit on the purchase of a new EV. The act stipulates that a certain percentage of the materials used to create those vehicles must be mined or processed in the United States. This puts pressure on EV manufacturers to step up domestic EV battery recycling."

So again, I'm not seeing the crisis you are.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It's basic math, 1,000 pound battery packs x 3.3 million current vehicles.

We do have some local recycling, but nothing at that scale and the batteries have a 15 to 20 year lifespan.

Tesla was around 2008 so by 2028 we need to have a plan for mass recycling. Maybe sooner because I'm sure those 2008 batteries are pushing it by now.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It’s basic math, 1,000 pound battery packs x 3.3 million current vehicles.

Its basic math with incorrect inputs. According to your own source only 600 lbs to 750 lbs of that requires "battery recycling" that needs special battery recycling facilities. You're welcome to hang your hat on that if you want, I suppose, but it makes me question your other assertions.

We do have some local recycling, but nothing at that scale and the batteries have a 15 to 20 year lifespan.

I agree, but that also means its not an imminent problem. All of your language here is suggesting it is, unless I'm hearing you wrong.

Maybe sooner because I’m sure those 2008 batteries are pushing it by now.

This is what I'm talking about when doubting your arguments and urgency. In 2008 the SUM TOTAL of Tesla cars sold was less than 100. How about 2009? About 900 cars. 2010? Only about 400 cars. source

In TOTAL there were only 2,450 Tesla Roadsters ( the first Tesla) made over 4 years and sold in 30 different countries.

Tesla was around 2008 so by 2028 we need to have a plan for mass recycling.

So if 100% of all the Tesla roadsters batteries died and were completely unusable in 2028 we'd need the recycling capacity of 100 batteries, and thats four years from now.

[-] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 3 points 1 month ago

While I was poking around I found this, on Lithium Ion battery recycling:

Pathway decisions for reuse and recycling of retired lithium-ion batteries considering economic and environmental functions https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-52030-0

Abstract Reuse and recycling of retired electric vehicle (EV) batteries offer a sustainable waste management approach but face decision-making challenges. Based on the process-based life cycle assessment method, we present a strategy to optimize pathways of retired battery treatments economically and environmentally. The strategy is applied to various reuse scenarios with capacity configurations, including energy storage systems, communication base stations, and low-speed vehicles. Hydrometallurgical, pyrometallurgical, and direct recycling considering battery residual values are evaluated at the end-of-life stage. For the optimized pathway, lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries improve profits by 58% and reduce emissions by 18% compared to hydrometallurgical recycling without reuse. Lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) batteries boost profit by 19% and reduce emissions by 18%. Despite NMC batteries exhibiting higher immediate recycling returns, LFP batteries provide superior long-term benefits through reuse before recycling. Our strategy features an accessible evaluation framework for pinpointing optimal pathways of retired EV batteries.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Is Redwood Materials shipping things overseas? They seem to be the big car battery recycler the automakers are signing up with.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

They have a very good map on the production end, showing where metals are sourced and refined, then cathodes produced in Japan and sent over, but I'm not seeing anything similar on the recycling side.

https://www.redwoodmaterials.com/#problem

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

That's because there's not yet enough EV installed base to drive demand for recycled batteries.

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
471 points (96.4% liked)

News

23284 readers
3463 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS