[brt_mhn]

I am pretty sure that at some point, you have come across an ad for an EV where no matter who the manufacturer is, they all try to paint the same picture. "If you buy an EV, you will be green and economical. You will not have to worry about battery recycling. There is also enough range in our EV for you to go road tripping."



With more and more people making the switch to Electric Vehicles, it is time we address something that polarizes opinions. How clean are EVs? How cost effective are EVs? How long will the batteries last? Can you road-trip in an EV? I will attempt to answer all these questions in this post by splitting them into sections.

Are they really cleaner than traditional ICE cars?

The two biggest complaints against EVs are as follows:
1) In a country like India, all the electricity used to run them comes from coal.
2) The mining of alkali metals used in batteries cause significant harm to the environment.
3) The initial amount of CO2 produced during the production of an EV is much higher than that of an ICE.

All these are definitely very true. But as with anything, there is always a catch. And here, the catch is time. See, good things come to those who wait and truthfully so. Over time, an EV will always be cleaner than an ICE.

Let's take an example considering identical cars- the MG Astor and its twin, the MG ZS EV


Emissions caused before the cars even leave the factory

MG Astor: ~7 metric tonnes
MG ZS EV: ~12 metric tonnes (higher due to mining activities for batteries)

Difference= 5 metric tonnes


Emissions caused due to using the car

ICE: 0.000277 metric tonnes per km
EV: 0.000135 metric tonnes per km

Therefore, difference per km = 0.000142 metric tonnes/km

To hit break-even point, you'll need to drive exactly 35,211.26 km

Are they really more cost effective than ICE cars?

While everybody's use case is different here, the best thing I can do is compare the facts and figures which we have obtained from our 2021 ZS EV to that of an Astor.



Considering the following data for this purpose:

On road price of MG Astor Smart Turbo AT: 19.32 lakh
On road price of MG ZS EV Excite (as purchased by us including zero road tax): 22 lakh

Difference= 2.68L

Monthly running: 650 km/mo

MG Astor mileage: 16.5 kmpl
MG ZS EV range: 380 km

The Astor's fuel consumption over a month will be 39.4 liters and will cost 4728/mo
The cost of charging the ZS EV at home @Rs 8/kWh is roughly 605.2/mo

The difference is 4122.8/mo

So, the break-even point here will be 42,252.84 km after which you will save (at the current prices of fuel and electricity) 4122.8/mo

How long will the batteries last?

While we are still treading into unknown waters here, most manufacturers provide a warranty of 8 years/1,60,000 km warranty on their batteries. Also, data from Tesla suggests that their batteries have retained around 90% of their initial capacity after 3,22,000 km. So, there is really no cause for panic or concern.

The only grey area here is battery replacement costs but with localization, I feel the price can only come down.

Can you road-trip in an EV?

The answer to this question is completely up to you. I cannot tell you to switch immediately because of my positive experience. There will definitely be some downers too. The best I can do is link a few posts from our forum here.

Brt_mhn
https://www.team-bhp.com/news/my-mg-...rip-experience

docelectric2020
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/elect...-metros-2.html (BHPians experience on EV Charging Stations across India (especially non-metros))

Rossiter
https://www.team-bhp.com/news/ev-cha...y-hyundai-kona

Kernelmann
https://www.team-bhp.com/news/my-tat...1300-km-2-days

mohanphadnis
https://www.team-bhp.com/news/my-hyu...rip-experience




Conclusion

While the benefits of an EV might not be apparent immediately, over time, they will make their presence felt over the long run.


Limitations of study:
1) Most of the data used comes from the USA due to lack of sufficient information in India
2) Data for amount of greenhouse gases produced by making a C2 SUV was estimated based on a USA subcompact car (The ZS is classified as one in the USA)
3)This study was conducted with an absolute worst case scenario for EVs, namely, the highest possible amount of emission of greenhouse gases during production of batteries. Best case scenario would be around 2.5-3 metric tonnes for a 44.5 kWh battery. It also considers that 100% of the electricity used was produced by burning coal.

References:
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhous...and-references

https://youtu.be/G67i_Z8ukD4

https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM

https://insideevs.com/news/525820/te...%20of%20usage.

Thanks

[DarthVeda]

Originally Posted by brt_mhn

The two biggest complaints against EVs are as follows:
1) In a country like India, all the electricity used to run them comes from coal.

This is not true, this varies from state to state and even then it is not ALL. In a state like Karnataka, we have 60% of electricity coming from renewables. And there is nothing stopping you from having a roof top solar and powering your vehicle with that, the same cannot be said for ICE.

2) The mining of alkali metals used in batteries cause significant harm to the environment.

Guess what, mining is done for Crude Oil too, it doesn't necessarily sprout of taps as petrol or diesel. We have read and seen countless oil spills over the years, causing untold damage to the eco system, it's all washed under the rug by fining a puny amount to these giants.
To refine crude oil, there are minerals used and Cobalt is used more there than in a battery.

All these are definitely very true. But as with anything, there is always a catch. And here, the catch is time. See, good things come to those who wait and truthfully so. Over time, an EV will always be cleaner than an ICE.

There is always a catch with everything, an EV can get a lot greener by switching the battery chemistry itself, there are loads of research happening on this front, the same can never be said for crude and ICE.

[antz.bin]

The basic piece that we need to understand here is that a greener future is not necessarily a cleaner future. It is in fact supposed to be a "low carbon" future.

That is the reason why nuclear power is considered greener even though it isn't necessarily cleaner.

The move to a greener, low carbon future will lead to other problems. Problems related to mining, recycling etc. These are problems that we haven't solved yet.

We have to understand that it is a step by step process and each step we take will come with its pros and cons. The tightrope we need to manage is to ensure that the pros keep outweighing the cons while we keep finding newer solutions to the cons.

[Raghu M]

I think the maximum an EV can do is, be better than ICE. It doesn't mean EVs are fully clean and green. They are only cleaner and greener than ICE vehicles. I don't want to go into all the technical details. We all know how electricity is produced in our country and all the minerals and metals that are needed to create a battery. And the biggest problem is how do you dispose such a huge battery? The short term gains won't necessarily last on the long run I guess.

[brt_mhn]

Originally Posted by DarthVeda

This is not true, this varies from state to state and even then it is not ALL. In a state like Karnataka, we have 60% of electricity coming from renewables. And there is nothing stopping you from having a roof top solar and powering your vehicle with that, the same cannot be said for ICE

I definitely should have phrased that better. I was trying to bust false myths here. I too am aware of the fact that a significant amount of electricity is generated by renewable methods. However, solar panels are a far cry for a majority of the population.

Originally Posted by DarthVeda

Guess what, mining is done for Crude Oil too, it doesn't necessarily sprout of taps as petrol or diesel. We have read and seen countless oil spills over the years, causing untold damage to the eco system, it's all washed under the rug by fining a puny amount to these giants.

Of course mining is done for crude oil too. That is the whole point I am trying to make. Over time, you will hit break even point and then you will be producing less emissions than an ICE.

Thanks

[libranof1987]

I had put together some data long back regarding this, and it looks like it holds true even now:

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/elect...ml#post4043330 (So, just how "green" are Electric Vehicles (specifically in India)?)

In summary:

Electric Vehicles are only as green as the electricity that goes into charging them!

[Gansan]

1) As an immediate measure, EVs push the pollution out from cities to the power generating places which tend to be farther away. Vehicles will not belch smoke on the street where we live. As you mentioned, they will also break even with the pollution of IC cars and start paying FE as well as carbon footprint dividends once they cover a given km.

2) A single power station will definitely burn less coal to charge ten thousand EVs, than ten thousand IC engines burning fuel. If even half of the power comes from renewable sources, even better.

[alpha1]

You need to realize that "environment friendly" has never been the guiding principles of human "progress".

There are emissions and pollution involved in mining metals, and similarly involved for crude oil. There are emissions and pollution involved in running EV (because power is coming from mostly thermal) and running ICE/GTs.

The promise of EVs is convenience, which has always been the guiding principle of technology change among humans. EVs can allow charge from renewable (solar mostly) - which will make is less polluting (Of course there will still be pollution involved in making PV cells from raw sand). The engine characteristic of EV is far superior to ICE. Less noise, less vibrations, less wear and tear (due to less moving parts).

From buyer as well as seller's point of view EVs can be sold as a service. With subscription price remotely allowing change in attributes that suit one's budget and preferences. "Connected vehicle". Good from Gov't (authoritarian) point of view - with master remote control in their hands.

[raktim]

While most of the lead acetate batteries being used in fossil fuel cars are being recycled, recycling lithium ion batteries used in EV is not yet viable due to regulations and lack of appealing market opportunity. So presently while EVs may be greener these are not surely cleaner. However, it is very likely that with time attractive recycling schemes will be figured out.

Again chances are there that these EV batteries be given a second life in uses like storing energy from wind or solar sources. This will actually help to further offset the environmental impacts of the manufacturing process.

[raghupro]

Originally Posted by brt_mhn

Are they really more cost effective than ICE cars?

MG Astor mileage: 16.5 kmpl
MG ZS EV range: 380 km

Would quite disagree with the mileage part of Astor. From the reviews I have read online and from what the sales executive at MG quoted the on-road city conditions mileage of Astor AT Turbo is around 8-9KMPL.

The cost comparison dynamics completely change with this.

[brt_mhn]

Originally Posted by raghupro

Would quite disagree with the mileage part of Astor. From the reviews I have read online and from what the sales executive at MG quoted the on-road city conditions mileage of Astor AT Turbo is around 8-9KMPL.

The cost comparison dynamics completely change with this.

Obviously it will change but I can only speak of what I have experienced. Which is why I had clearly stated that it is different for everyone. My father even manages 400 km of range sometimes which, obviously, will not be the case for everyone. If you bring down the mileage of the Astor to 8-9 kpl, you will obviously have to reduce the range of the ZS EV too to around 280-290 km. I invite everyone to make their own comparisons pertaining to your use case.

[xtremeshock]

I have booked a ZS EV for my daily commute. My Son's daily commute to and fro from School and then Add on Classes average to around 70kms/day driving. Additionally My Dad also does this work commutes which add another 10km/day driving.

So my overall usage of the ZSEV will be around 80kms/day. I have averaged out my monthly requirement to around 2000kms/month.

For this amount of usage I feel it could be worth it, also in the back of my mind when I drop my Son to School is the huge waiting/idling times required - around 15-20mins of waiting time even after I reach School, at this time I could easily sit in the A/C without worrying about emissions in the EV.

Will look to replace my ageing Creta or Rapid for these daily commute.

Currently there is only one variant of ZS EV, I have heard there will be a lower variant being launched, I guess if the lower variant has most of the features and is fairly cheaper will be change my booking.

[ambandla]

While Lithium mining is a concern, there is a straightforward way to get around this 'electricity from coal' point. Get solar charger installed. Even if these EVs use electricity generated by coal power plants, it is far less significant compared to amount of energy used to suck oil from earth, transport oil, refine it, then again transport it to different parts of the world. Here is a video that shows how dirty this whole process is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oVrIHcdxjA

So, do I support EVs over ICE powered vehicles? No. I vouch for Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicles and I am planning to extend the life of my 10 year old Etios till Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicles become mainstream and skip entire Lithium battery EVs.

The Toyota Mirai is getting very good reviews in USA and unlike a Lithium based EV that requires hours to charge, with this one, you just have to refill Hydrogen fuel in the tank like how you fill a petrol tank. Refueling takes minutes and is lot more viable.
Process of extracting Hydrogen is not as dirty as crude oil extraction or Lithium extraction. The resulting energy from fusing H2 and O is so clean that the byproduct is water. The heat generated from this process is converted into electricity and can be used to either charge a battery or power the electric motor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgIj2XTSBuQ

[GTO]

Worst case scenario, even if the electricity going in is "dirty", EVs can still make metropolitan cities more habitable. Example, Mumbai or Delhi. A sizeable EV population will drastically improve the air quality index of these cities. Now, electricity isn't generated in Mumbai or Delhi, its in some small town or rural part of India. Hence, even dirty electricity can relocate (for lack of a better term) the harmful pollution from Mumbai or Delhi to elsewhere, hopefully a place where it won't affect as many people.

Think of it as a tail-pipe that is 100 km in length and drops the smoke outside the city, or the sewage pipes of your home that take the junk elsewhere.

Instead of having garbage all over your house, don't you keep it in one fixed spot?

[prasi55]

Originally Posted by GTO

Worst case scenario, even if the electricity going in is "dirty", EVs can still make metropolitan cities more habitable. Example, Mumbai or Delhi. A sizeable EV population will drastically improve the air quality index of these cities.

Exactly, the lack of tailpipe emissions in my opinion is the biggest benefit of EVs and differentiates it from ICEs.

• Lithium mining and recycling = mining oil, transporting oil (via diesel ships), refining oil, transporting it via diesel tankers I am guessing) to petrol pumps. EV = ICE
• ICEs directly burn non-renewable fossil fuels. Source of electricity does matter for EVs but will get cleaner over time. Also, EVs are over 90% efficient so almost all of the input is converted into useful energy. EV = ICE
• Urban air quality. EV >>> ICE

An example. I recently went to "hill station" Kodaikanal. The winding roads and uphill/downhill terrain meant that almost all the vehicles there were diesel-powered with many pre-BS4 or even BS3, spewing noxious fumes. PM2.5 concentration in Kodaikanal air is currently 6.6 times above[COLOR=#49739a] the WHO annual air quality guideline value[/COLOR]
I recently read a study (will try to provide a link) in which the #of deaths/illness due to air pollution was way higher than from most other sources. If this is the state of a popular hill station, you can imagine that of our more densely populated metros.