Although electric vehicles (EVs) are, in theory, more environmentally sustainable than gasoline-powered vehicles, this is not always the case. An electric vehicle’s overall environmental impact depends on factors beyond tailpipe emissions, including electricity generation, battery production, manufacturing processes, vehicle use, and end-of-life recycling. Under certain circumstances, EVs can produce the same amount of carbon dioxide emissions as traditional hybrid vehicles.
While no current vehicle option is environmentally perfect, hybrid vehicles may represent a more practical alternative than fully electric vehicles in certain contexts. Electric vehicles rely entirely on batteries to power electric motors, whereas hybrid vehicles combine an internal combustion engine with a small battery to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions. This dual system can offer environmental benefits without the challenges associated with large-scale battery production and electricity generation.
EVs have extremely high carbon footprint because of battery production; although EVs are here to help offset the emissions created by gas cars. Therefore, it is difficult to say that they are helping our planet.
The mining of Lithium-Ion, the main ingredient of batteries, is a hugely damaging process. An immense amount of water is used to create the batteries, this can also pollute local water sources. There is the leftover mineral waste, and other mining factors can lead to respiratory problems.
The environmental impact of electric vehicles also depends on how the electricity used to charge their batteries is generated. In regions where electricity comes primarily from coal, the carbon footprint of operating an EV can be comparable to—or even exceed—that of a conventional gasoline vehicle (MIT Climate Portal). For example, drivers in states such as West Virginia, Wyoming, Missouri, and Kentucky rely heavily on coal-fired power plants, which significantly increases the greenhouse gas emissions associated with charging (MIT Climate Portal). Conversely, in countries like Norway, where most electricity is generated from hydroelectric power, EVs can have a much lower operational carbon footprint after accounting for manufacturing emissions (MIT Climate Portal).
This variability illustrates what is known as the “long tailpipe” problem: while EVs have no tailpipe emissions during operation, the indirect emissions from electricity generation can offset the environmental benefits, depending on the local energy mix (MIT Climate Portal). As a result, the sustainability of EVs is highly context-dependent, emphasizing the importance of cleaner energy infrastructure alongside vehicle adoption.
Another reason why hybrids are better, the efficiency of engines and hybrids has grown massively over the past decades, and will continue to grow in the coming years. According to this graph from CAFE (Corporate average fuel economy), a set of standards and regulations in the United States, states in the late 1970s the total fleet fuel economy in America was 20 MPG (Miles Per Gallon of gasoline). Then in the late 2010s the average fuel economy had grown to 34 MPG; that is another 14 MPG.
In addition to the problems with sustainability, here are other reasons why hybrids make sense for the general population. Nissan reports show that even still, running a gasoline car is more expensive per mile than an EV. They report that an EV costs $0.06 per mile and a gas car costs $0.1. These costs however, present themselves in other forms; the cost of replacing batteries for example. The cost of replacing the EV batteries is extremely high; as a result, insurance is higher. The costs of repairs on an EV is usually 22% higher. Another problem that most people discount is the value of your time. Filling a gas tank takes five or so minutes. Recharging an EV battery is much slower, taking nearly an average of 6 or more hours for a full charge, depending on the outlet. This is not desirable in tough situations.
I have an example of this from real life; one year my family, and friends of ours were vacationing in Sonoma County. One day we got an alert on our phones to evacuate because a forest fire had started and was growing in our direction very quickly. One of my family’s friends drove an EV and had very little charge, so as we were fleeing the fire we had to stop and charge as the fire was getting closer. In comparison, our car was low on fuel, but it is a hybrid; we had twice the range.
Another problem is EVs that are not in the budget of the average worker in San Francisco. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the average yearly salary in San Francisco is $82,000. The cost of a Tesla Model 3 is $57,000. Also the yearly maintenance and insurance is $2,000. This is very difficult if you are living on, or under the average salary in San Francisco.
Also, in recent years, 39 states such as: Texas; Vermont; and Hawaii, have started making people driving EVs pay higher registration fees and premiums. Hawaii makes you pay $50 annually and $200 annually in Texas. “As Trump rolls back Biden administration measures to promote electric vehicles, Republicans in Congress are considering imposing a national fee to bolster the fund used to finance roads and bridges, a fund that is in dire shape.” is stated in the New York Times article E.V. Owners Don’t Pay Gas Taxes. So, Many States Are Charging Them Fees.
Drivers don’t have the best choices for cars, and the planet cannot sustain the emissions created by humans, but I believe that hybrids are the best choice for our near future. EVs are just too damaging to the environment for them to offset their emissions.
Edited by Camille Ng
