Electric Vehicles produce substantial toxicity to Humans and Freshwater (2012)

Strong shades of “Merchants of Doubt” here. One wonders where the funding comes from.

> However, it is counterproductive to promote EVs in regions where electricity is produced from oil, coal, and lignite combustion.

The above quoted opinion is naive and simplistic to the point of ridiculousness.

First, it suggests that even if these sources are not the only ones present in the mix, but that if they are merely present as partial sources, there is still no reason for promoting EVs.

Second, it overlooks that building up EV demand creates demand for battery power storage, as EVs can draw power at night. This battery storage can, in turn, start to at first incrementally, and eventually completely, replace the need for the dirtiest sources, as stored power can be used when demand peaks, cutting down use of the dirty sources.

Then as more EVs are added, the demand for batteries at night continues to grow, until eventually most of the dirty sources can be replaced by a mix of low carbon sources and batteries. (Lithium recycling is a problem that is being solved at scale. Other non-lithium power storage solutions exist too.)

Finally it assumes that the mix of energy sources in a given locale is static. That’s hardly assured.

Published in 2012, based on electricity mix at that time and assuming a vehicle life of only 93,000 miles.

I appreciate studies like this, but they end getting misused as ammunition by the anti-EV crowd. Even if EVs actually did represent a negative short-term impact, we should still push forward with the transition since we know the end result is absolutely worth it. Getting all cars converted to electric is the hard part; modernizing the electric grid to be cleaner is comparatively easier.