Determinants of electric vehicle emissions savings and costs across locations and individuals Marco Miotti and Jessika E Trancik*

Following is in video description by @MoneyShift

The most common argument against electric cars is that once you factor in battery manufacturing and lithium mining, they aren't actually cleaner. MIT tested that directly, and the answer is no longer ambiguous.

Researchers Marco Miotti and Jessika Trancik built a lifecycle model covering thousands of US zip codes, drilling down to individual driver behavior rather than comparing broad regions. They accounted for battery and vehicle manufacturing, fuel extraction and refining, regional electricity mix, local meteorological data, traffic density, trip length and duration, acceleration patterns, gas and electricity prices, and state fees. The study appears in Environmental Research Letters.

The concession first: building a battery is dirtier than building a comparable gas car, and an EV starts life with a larger manufacturing footprint. MIT states that plainly rather than working around it.

The findings: in most US locations, a battery electric vehicle reduces lifetime greenhouse gas emissions by 40 to 60 percent compared to a similar gas vehicle, with larger reductions in urban areas. On cold weather, MIT found that in a climate like North Dakota, efficiency can drop as much as 50 percent on a particularly frigid night, but the effect on annual emissions benefits is minimal. Miotti's own conclusion was that even in the most unfavorable conditions, EVs still reduce emissions substantially.

On cost, EVs are competitive with comparable combustion vehicles in lifetime ownership cost across most of the country, even without clean vehicle tax credits. Where electricity is relatively affordable, battery electrics tend to cost less outright. The study also found that individual driving behavior matters roughly as much as regional electricity mix, with the biggest reductions going to people who drive more, drive larger vehicles, and spend more time in traffic.

MIT also updated their public tool at carboncounter.com, where you can compare lifecycle emissions and ownership costs for nearly any car on the market.

None of this means you have to like electric cars. Dislike the steering feel. Dislike the brake feel. Want a manual. Those are real objections. The emissions one is finished.

Car news the way Doug DeMuro, Jason Cammisa and Chris Harris cover cars, every day

top 92 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 45 points 2 months ago (1 child)

It's so neat that you cite the source when the video author does not lmao

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 70 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    As long as we have the problem of cars, this sounds like the least worse option.

    Thanks for outlining it in the post OP. I never watch videos, but I read the text.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 26 points 2 months ago (15 children)

    Might be an unpopular statement on this community: But I was actually still on the fence if current EVs were a net benefit or not.

    I'm also torn between waiting for newer makes/models to hit the Canadian market, and buying one now before they start putting AI in them.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Get a used EV, you'll save a lot and can get an older model with less AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Definitely buy used. These things drop like rocks during the first year of ownership. I got 50% off MSRP for letting someone else own the car for the first 9000 miles.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I wish this was true where I live... It's more like 30-40% drop for 4 years old car with 150k km (100k miles).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    I guess it's a silver lining of living in a country that is completely captured by oil companies. I catch a lot of flak for having an EV, but the truth is in the odometer readings. We had a 2 car household, and we put 24,000 miles on the EV in a year and a half, and went from 14,000 miles a year on our gas car down to less than 2000. We just sold the ICE because we stopped driving it, and couldn't justify the 400 dollars or so a month to keep it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    This is the way to go. I bought the wife a 2023 VW id4 Pro with 14,000 miles on it. It was $24,000. New is up in the 40s. And to both of us, it’s still a new car. The other one we’ve got is a 16 year old ice car. I did the math, CO2 emissions using my state’s electricity mix worked out to be a quarter of the ICE’s.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    The problem with EVs isn't that they're better than ICE cars, it's that they're the least better alternative.

    If you're forced to own a car, they're the superior option. But also, bikes and buses and carpooling are all even better. Hell, just owning a smaller car can be an enormous improvement.

    buying one now before they start putting AI in them.

    I think we've crossed that bridge about ten years ago. Just about every car has a digital dashboard now. And all those dashboards update remotely. If your vehicle doesn't have some AI bloat in it yet, you're always a forced update away from getting it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    yeah, that's the reasoning for why my "new" car is a 14yo rusty econobox.

    I don't drive much, and I already own a not-terrible-for-emissions vehicle that often gets used to haul and tow stuff. I carpool and bike when possible. I avoid things that require lots of driving.

    my net impact for switching to a comparable EV is much smaller than somebody commuting with a Bronco, I've already taken steps

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    My only issue is winter range. I have a long commute with no charger at the office and in the winter I did the math, and the range on even the newer EVs cuts it too close for comfort especially since the batteries degrade over time.

    I also don't have a good place to charge right now, I'd need to extend my driveway.

    Otherwise I'd have one. At least I wfh most of the time so I don't guzzle a huge amount of gas.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 2 months ago (25 children)

    Batteries are a problem but it doesn't take much napkin math to see that, on an individual level, homecharging an EV for 30-50 years is better than distributing and burning the energy-equivalent gasoline over the same period. It's better if off-peak grid energy is used. Even more efficient if the grid power is generated partially with renewables. Or best of all, homecharge from a home battery system that recharges exclusively from home solar. It is the highest initial cost outlay and highest initial inputs of polluting materials, but then the resulting power approaches being "free" for the life of the system, and creates no further emissions in its generation process.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago*

    don't forget the gigantic inefficiency of digging petroleum out of the ground, loading it on to and off of a boat, shipping it around the world, refining it into gasoline, pumping that into trucks, driving those trucks to a gas station, then pumping it all into the tanks to sit around and degrade until someone pumps it into their tank so they can drive it around for a couple weeks, only for SIXTY FUCKING PERCENT TO BE WASTED AS HEAT.

    instead, my power company gets photons from the sun, turns those into zippyzappy, and that travels down the wire into my fucking battery where it's used by an electric motor. far, far fewer steps, far fewer points of conversion, and every erg goes to pushing the wheels round and round, not heating up a fucking engine block or providing yet another resource chokepoint for the assholes to fight over.

    I'll never understand the neglect these kind of calculations give to the energy storage and distribution required, conversion and losses inherent to combustion engines, it's heinously inefficient and only survives because of nostalgia and legacy idiocy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (23 children)

    Uhhh that napkin math forgets to account that over 30-50 years you'll need multiple batteries/cars. Hard enough keeping a 30 year old ICE going these days and usually those spring cheap failures (but many, since they're more complex). An EV battery is tens of thousands even if the car is old and worth <10k, unless you go used with no warranty. All batteries fail eventually, even if they're getting better these days.

    It's still more efficient than ICE, but at this point we need batteries that reliably last 20-30 years so the people who can't afford to buy new can use the old ones without worrying about a huge ticking time bomb or doing cell replacements on a high voltage battery at home.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    My 11-year old Nissan Leaf, with the oldest and worst battery technology in modern EVs, is now at 80% battery capacity.

    Replacement battery is $6k, installed.

    But 80% is enough for me so I won't need to replace it for a long time. This car will easily last 20 or 30 years.

    "But I can't afford to spend even $5k to replace the battery when it happens!!!!!". Baloney. What I can't afford is paying 4 times the cost per mile for gasoline, FOREVER.

    Set up an monthly automatic transfer in your checking account to a savings account, for the amount you would have spent on gasoline. Call it your battery replacement fund. It will be plenty in no time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    I owned a 2013 leaf and had <80% after three years.

    I currently have a 2014 Tesla S and it's just at 81%.

    Your luck is insane or the numbers aren't right. I agree with your main point though. Replacing a battery is still way cheaper than a new car, even if you factor in other long term maintenance

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    I think it kinda depends on where you live (and maybe if you keep the car in a garage or outdoors). In theory, batteries that stay around the same temp all year should last longer than batteries that experience strong seasonal temperature shifts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

    Replacing a battery is still way cheaper than a new car, even if you factor in other long term maintenance

    Some Tesla's battery cannot be replaced, the frame is cast around it. Exactly what assholes would do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    citation requested for this because.... I don't believe anyone would 'cast' - as in metal casting - framework around something like the battery pack, even the assholes at tesla.

    it may be engineered inconveniently but even they have to replace cells in packs sometimes. please, provide some examples of this in production.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    citation requested for this because… I don’t believe anyone would ‘cast’ - as in metal casting - framework around something like the battery pack

    It's called a structural battery pack.

    Same asshole concept as gluing batteries into phones. Impossible to replace a battery, and in accidents, the forces transmit right into the battery. TSLA sells it to it's stans as weight saving and innovation, and we all know those idiots believe anything.

    https://www.basenor.com/blogs/news/teslas-structural-battery-pack-the-floor-is-the-battery?srsltid=AfmBOoouT_aHAjGSwa2_DLnuwZTnVjf-t6qJ_XoCA_Xat176XpXT7rpD

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

    I think the idea is they use the battery packs as part of the frame: https://www.tesla-mag.com/en/revolutionizing-electric-vehicles-teslas-unconventional-battery-architecture/ but given that this patent is from 2024 I'm not sure if they're actually building cars like this yet. Maybe the truck.

    "Tesla’s patent describes a unit where vertically arranged cells are bonded together with structural adhesive, creating an ultra-rigid honeycomb that can endure road forces comparable to traditional vehicular frames." So basically it sounds like they're dousing 18650 batteries in construction adhesive, building a metal box around that, and then taking those metal boxes and welding them together into the floor of their car frames. I would do more research if I cared, but I don't. Fuck Tesla!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    How long do modern EV batteries last? I'm not sure we have any definitive answer yet but I can tell you as someone who recently purchased a used EV with 60k miles on it, I am amazed at how well the battery still performs. From what I can tell, I've lost maybe 10% of total battery capacity from brand new. I'm now at just over 70k and haven't noticed any material impact of battery degradation. I won't be surprised if I get to 120k or more miles before I need to think about a battery swap or rebuild.

    And battery tech is only getting better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    While anecdotal I do have some real world data on this: My family owns a 2016 Tesla Model S and we just did a professional battery test last month.

    The battery still has 88% of its original capacity left, at currently 305,000 km (~190,000 mi) on the odometer and 10 years of use.

    The only maintenance done on the battery was one cooling fluid change & reseal.

    Keep in mind that this car is running on at least 10 year old tech and I'm sure that we have learned a lot since then.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    It can last 20 years with no problems other than the expected gradual degradation, or it can fail suddenly at any point because a single cell going bad ruins the whole thing until you either get that cell replaced (do NOT attempt at home) or the battery replaced.

    if I get to 120k or more miles before I need to think about a battery swap or rebuild.

    To be comparable to an actually maintained ICE not made by Americans, Koreans or the Fr*nch, it should be more like 300k miles. Which, to be fair, your EV may reach too and if it does you will have saved a ton of money in maintenance costs compared to having to do a ton of fluid changes over that span. But we have poor information on how 20+ year old EV batteries hold up because they don't exist yet. Currently we know the earliest Teslas have had a worryingly high battery failure rate at ~13-14 years of age which is why most EVs still get sold for cheap after 5-6 years, before the battery warranty expires.

    We have projected lifespans which shows new EV batteries lasting essentially forever, but how do we know it's true?

    But my personal issue is the cost more than anything. Mercedes wanted over 40k EUR for an battery, EVClinic repaired it for 4800€ so battery didn't need to be replaced, but even for 4800€ I could buy 3-4 used engines for my car and get them installed by a decent mechanic, or even more engines and install them myself, meaning I essentially could run this car without oil changes for several years by just replacing the engines. Now why did Mercedes ask 41k EUR for a battery that's clearly still in warranty since the model isn't even as old as the battery warranty yet? Nobody knows, but in a forum thread someone said that Mercedes told them the battery warranty only covers up to the vehicle's value, whereas the cars themselves cost much less now than the batteries do. This is probably just Mercedes being shady as fuck because they've realized they'd go bankrupt if they had to honor battery warranties on these.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Modern batteries last 200,000-400,000 miles, depending of how people use and abuse them. Fast charging and 100% charge reduces lifespan.

    Good luck getting 100,000 miles out of modern ICE engines.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Most of my fairly modern ICE cars have had 300k km or more on them and all of them were sold as still running and driving, all with annual safety and emissions inspection still valid. Only reason I kept replacing them like socks in 2024-2025 was that my ex would randomly drive into shit, meaning bent wheels, holes in oil pans, etc. One had almost 600k km and another (before said ex) had been rewound in Lithuania so real mileage was about 700k km but it showed 400k km, no engine trouble on any of those. Mostly Audi, a few Mercedes, one BMW, two Volkswagens, etc. The reality is, tons of Mercedes diesel taxis get over a million kilometers at some point, usually on the original engine and transmission. My current Audi has a notoriously bad transmission that everyone says you should avoid. I pulled out the original filter and fluid at 400k km and after the change it shifts like brand new. Why does everyone say they're bad? Because nobody maintains them and they all have their mileage rewound before being imported from some Western European countries with poor official records availability (like Germany, pretty much impossible to verify real mileage). Same with BMWs with the same transmission (6HP). People buy a 20+ year old car that has "250k km" on the odometer then get surprised that things fail when the real mileage is 500k+ and nobody has given two fucks about changing fluids and filters at a sane interval for years and minor issues get ignored until they snowball.

    The only car I actually did have real engine trouble on was a Chrysler with only 250k km. So maybe don't buy American cars.

    An ICE engine I can also still fix at home if something happens, which is usually like a plastic coolant pipe or something (EVs also have coolant pipes). There's nothing stopping me from replacing parts on an engine or even IN an engine, but I don't want to touch a high voltage battery, ever. They're just not repairable at home.

    Modern batteries last 200,000-400,000 miles

    Early Teslas have had a 15% failure rate to date (perhaps more now, this was from a year ago). Regardless of mileage, you can't trust them anymore. Newer EVs have a lower failure rate but then those are still too new to tell. We'll know in 15 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    But, ICE engines can be built to last a million miles. And, could be made more efficient, and we could stop people from buying wasteful vehicles they don't need, etc.

    All I'm saying is, had we been much more responsible, ICE engines would not currently be such a huge problem. But, we weren't, and they are. I'll blame capitalism, and the forced ignorance that brings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (34 children)
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (15 children)

    Now my regular bike! Mostly because UK laws are dumb and limit ebikes to such a low speed that its pointless for me to get a legal one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (11 children)

    No! If you want an electric motorcycle, then get one and drive on the regular vehicle roads. The limits on ebikes keep them as bikes. I live in a very hilly town and a basic ebike means I can keep on biking now that a regular mountain bike is getting to be too much work. If defacto motorcycles are using the bike lanes and paths, we might as well allow cars and dump trucks on them as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    If I can cycle faster than the legal ebike limit, isn't it a bit low? I overtake legal ones on my way to work, illegal ones zoom past.

    Just want a slightly higher limit. Like leave the motor power limit but drop the speed one?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (9 children)

    No. Lower it. Classify fast ones as motorbikes and ban them from looking like bikes.

    My friend in his 30s got run over whilst jogging by an ebike on a shared pedestrian/cycle path and hasn't been back to work yet. His face had to be reconstructed and his leg and both hips are a mess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (8 children)

    If that was a road legal ebike, a regular bike would have done the same amount of damage given that I am going at a similar or faster speed than legal ebikes already. Then you have road bikes going even faster than I do.

    Then you have sprint speeds which are even higher. For a short distance I can push close to double the ebike speed limit on a smooth path. There is a mile or so coastal path here that works really well for getting up speed. Downhill obviously allows even more speed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    If that's the case, maybe you are going too fast also?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    There isn't a maximum speed a bike is allowed to go and I would be within the speed limit for the road I am on. So no, I am not going too fast.

    Now if I was to go full speed on a crowded shared path, sure, that would be riding dangerously and is illegal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Perhaps there should be a speed limit and all bike paths.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    How would someone on a bike know their speed in the first place? Pretty sure that is a large part of why speed limits don't directly apply to bikes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    I wasn't there and didn't see it, but I can't imagine it was a legal bike, my point is that the fast ones need to look less like bikes so that the police can identify bikes that shouldn't be on cycle paths easily.

    I imagine that you as a keen cyclist have experience and road sense and pay attention to other road or cycle path users in a way that someone who has a lot of experience on the road has to do if they're not going to end up in a crash. You don't become a fast (pedal) cyclist without a bit of experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Police could just see how fast they are going and test the bike if it was going too fast.

    Although they need to learn how to test it. Have heard a few expensive legal bikes being destroyed by the police because they keep using tests that will always produce a fail result. They just take the bike off ground and spin the pedals and if the wheel rotates over 15mph it fails. My bike isn't even an ebike and would fail that test. Its not does the wheel spin, its does the motor provide power.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    Can't you get one with pedal assist for the hills and just go very fast on the flats and downhills with the pedals?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    If it's a diesel bus the ebike is better for sure. Even the ev might be better, depending on a bunch of factors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (3 children)

    All of the new buses in my city are BYD 100% EVs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    E-bike compared to an ICE car or a regular bike?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    surprisingly, the e-bike has lower emissions in both cases

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (1 child)

    No, the emissions from eating extra calories vs charging is a bullshit argument, mainly because a majority of people in the west need to lose weight and are already digesting too much food.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    they're unlikely to lose significant weight simply because they use a bicycle. just like most people who start exercising without putting effort in their diet, any weight loss from exercise would likely be gained again by compensating by eating more. It's a separate issue in any case, regardless of what life of transportation they use, many westerners should eat less and especially eat less meat

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    Some people have families.... maybe a dog, maybe they need to move things around. Some people! Not all people, and e bikes are great, but not an everything solution.

    More cities, more transit, more low carbon personal transit sure, but I don't think it's helpful to treat everyone like a homoegeonous mass of factory outputed needs and wants.

    Like a lot of problems, this needs to be tackled from multiple directions

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    OK, now what's your argument for E-Bikes?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    Some people want to ride alone through city streets, efficiently, the breeze in their hair, a pet squirrel named Thomas atop their shoulder, who laughs in it's way at the dreary drivers in the next lane, cacooned in their steel cages with their stale air. That's not all people though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    EvEn ThE tIrEsSs?

    For a while the right was claiming that evs, being heavier, caused more pollution from wear and tear on roads and tires.

    Glad this article shows it was bs

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    It isn't bullshit, just overblown.

    A lot of microplastics in our environment come from tires. And more heavy vehicles definitely cause more. But the difference in weight between an ICE and EV is too small to really count. Especially compared to a truck.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago* (4 children)

    TLDR: Cars still bad. EVs less so, but still significant CO2 contributers (better in places with more renewable).

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 16 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    I've always been more about electric trains and busses than electric cars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    https://www.carboncounter.com/#

    For anyone who wanted to click the URL in the OP.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›