An analysis of three cases against and three cases for electric vehicles. Cases against include: well to wheel carbon emissions, power station requirements and rare earth metal supply. Cases for include: carbon reduction and facilitation of renewable electricity, reduced reliance on oil and health improvements in urban environments.

1. Electric Vehicles as the Future
of Personal Transportation
– Fact or Fiction
Ben Boycott
Originally published November 2010
Updated December 2017

2. The Case Against
1. electric vehicles produce more carbon emissions than
conventional vehicles
2. their introduction will require the building of hundreds, if not
thousands, of new powerstations.
3. the potential shortfall in the supply of rare-earth ores will limit
the ability to manufacture the batteries needed to make
electric vehicles with an acceptable drivable range

3. The Case Against
1. electric vehicles produce more carbon emissions than
conventional vehicles
2. their introduction will require the building of hundreds, if not
thousands, of new powerstations.
3. the potential shortfall in the supply of rare-earth ores will limit
the ability to manufacture the batteries needed to make
electric vehicles with an acceptable drivable range

4. Electric Vehicles Produce More Carbon
Emissions Than Conventional Vehicles
Carbon reduction potential is a function of:
 The energy consumption of EVs
 The amount of carbon created per unit of energy
Explained by the overall efficiency of EVs
Or
1/3

5. Electric Vehicle Fuel Consumption
 Defined as the energy use per 100 kilometers (in terms of
kWh/100km).
 Accurate drive cycle data is now available, three examples
are as follows:
– Tesla Model 3 – 12.5 kWh/km 1
– BMW i3 – 12.6 kWh/100km 1
– Nissan Leaf – 15.0 kWh/100km 1
 To provide a safe calculation and allow for future efficiency
improvements we use the following:
1. http://pushevs.com/2017/05/23/electric-car-range-efficiency-table-nedc/
2010 0.20 kWh/km
2020 0.15 kWh/km
2030 0.10 kWh/km
1/3

6. Carbon Per Unit Energy
CO2 emissions per unit of power depends on the fuel mix that is used and
the type of power generation
1 Maximising the environmental benefits of Europe's bioenergy potential Copenhagen : European Environmental Agency
2 Eurelectric, 2007; The Role of Electricity, A New Path to Secure, Competitive Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World.
Estimates of life-cycle emissions (i.e., also
including emissions of coal mining and
transport, wind-turbine production, etc. ).
Note, nuclear excludes back end emissions
due to lack of data1
Current and future emissions from
generation only2.
CCS = Carbon Capture and Storage, IGCC =
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle, CCGT =
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine.
1/3

7. Average CO2 per unit of Power
Calculation of the average CO2
emissions per kWh electricity across
the EU25 has been done by various
bodies:
 IEA estimates 380 gCO2/kWh
 EEA estimates between 410
and 443 gCO2/kWh
EU 25 average taken as 411
gCO2/kWh
 Estimate for 2030 is 130 g
CO2/kWh average (EEA)
IEA – International Energy Agency, Key World Energy Statistics 2006
EEA - Environmental impacts and impact on the electricity market of a large-scale introduction of electric cars in Europe
Copenhagen : European Environmental Agency (EEA), 2009
Current and predicted EU25
gCO2/kWh from power generation
1/3
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
gCO2/kWh
2010 average
of 411 g/kWh

8. CO2 Emissions of EVs per Kilometre
 Average EU passenger car emits 184 g/km over the drive cycle (160
g/km direct and 15% indirect due to oil prod. and refining)
 Direct targets are now set at 95 g/km by 2020
1/3
EV fuel comsumption
kWh/km
EU25 average
emissions
gCO2/kWh
Derived
gCO2/km
2010 0.20 411 82.2
2020 0.15 250 37.5
2030 0.10 130 13
 The gCO2/km emisions of EVs can therefore be calculated as:
On the basis of this analysis EVs
would clearly emit much less CO2
than ICE passenger cars.
Data includes indirect emissions; an estimate of 5% was assumed for electricity and 15% for ICE fuels.

9. Well-to-wheel Efficiency
EVs have almost double the efficiency compared to ICEVs
ICEV EV
Well-to-tank 83% 38%
Tank-to-wheel 15–20% 65-80%
Well-to-wheel 12–17% 25-30%
In the analysis of EV use, the following figures have been used:
− Recovery of natural resources and grid transportation – 92% 1,2
− Electricity production – 42% 3
− Drivetrain overall – 81% to 90% 1,4
− Battery charge and discharge – 80% to 88% 1,4
ICEV figures are already well established 1,4
1 G. Kendall Plugged in – the end of the oil age Brussels : WWF European Policy Office, 2008
2 A. Bosselaar en Timo Gerlagh Renewable Energy Monitoring Protocol, Update 2006 : Methodology for calculating and recording amountsof energy
produced from renewable sources in the Netherlands S.l. : SenterNovem, 2006
3 The implications of EU emissions trading for the price of electricity J.P.M. Sijm et al, ECN-C—05-081, September 2005
4 CONCAWE, EURCAR (European Council for Automotive R&D), JRC (EU Joint Research Center) Well-to-wheels analysis of future automotive fuels
and power trains in the European context Brussels : S.l. : European Commission, Directorate-General Joint Research Centre, 2008
1/3
With double the efficiency we
halve the CO2
ICE = 184 g/km EV = 92g/km
Improvements in
efficiency are
directionally
correct

10. The Case Against
1. electric vehicles produce more carbon emissions than
conventional vehicles
2. their introduction will require the building of hundreds, if not
thousands, of new powerstations.
3. the potential shortfall in the supply of rare-earth ores will limit
the ability to manufacture the batteries needed to make
electric vehicles with an acceptable drivable range

11. Their Introduction Will Require the Building of
Hundreds, if not Thousands, of New Powerstations
The energy requirement is a function of:
 The energy consumption of EVs (just covered)
 The penetration rate of EVs
 The annual mileage and usage patterns
 The type of charging methodology used
Or
2/3

12. Penetration Rate
We can consider three potential European scenarios for new vehicle sales in
2020 including EVs and PHEVs (to give the worst case scenario) as follows1:
It should be noted that both the fast uptake and the ultra-fast uptake scenario would require a
great deal of effort on the part of governments and the car industry, as well as breakthroughs in
the technology of the batteries (specifically energy density and hence cost).
1 Green Power for Electric Cars, CE Delft, Kampman et al. January 2010
SCENARIO
EV PHEV
PEN NO. PEN NO.
moderate/medium
uptake scenario
0.4% 0.5m 1.3% 1.5m
fast uptake scenario 11% 5m 24% 15m
ultra-fast EV scenario 40% 25m 7% 5.5m
2/3

13. Penetration Rate
The penetration rate predicted by the literature varies considerably.
1 Environmental impacts and impact on the electricity market of a large scale introduction of electric cars in Europe -
Critical Review of Literature - ETC/ACC Technical Paper 2009/4 July 2009 Florian Hacker, Ralph Harthan, Felix
Matthes, Wiebke Zimmer
2/3
Medium
Fast
Ultra-fast

14. Usage Rates and Assumptions
 Assumed annual mileages: EV = 5,300 miles/year (1 charge/week)
Petrol PHEV = 6,750 miles/year
Diesel PHEV = 9,500 miles/year
 Petrol PHEVs run on electricity for 80% of their total mileage
 Diesel PHEVs run on electricity for 50% of their total mileage (mainly used for
long-distance travel)
 Petrol PHEVs will be more common than PHEVs on diesel - due to cost
 EV fuel consumption is 0.2 kWh/km
 PHEVs 20% more efficient than their conventional ICE counter parts
 The total mileage driven by an ICE vehicle will not be affected by the
introduction of EVs and PHEVs.
 The impact of electric light goods vehicles will be very small
Note: The overall prognosis on the number of vehicles and vehicle kilometers are taken from TREMOVE v. 2.7b. This is
used in conjunction with annual sales data and a vehicle introduction model to calculate the number of EVs and PHEVs
and their annual mileage
1 Green Power for Electric Cars, CE Delft, Kampman et al. January 2010
2/3

15. Overall Electricity Requirements
 For the calculation, the total electricity consumption of the EU-27 was taken
as 2,813,437 GWh (actual figure from 2006)1
 The fast uptake has a higher demand due to the lower number of EVs and
their associated lower mileage
1 Green Power for Electric Cars, CE Delft, Kampman et al. January 2010
2/3
Electricity
needed
(GWh)
No. of vehicles (millions)
EV PHEV
EU 27 Incremental
electricity
requirement
Medium/moderate
uptake scenario
8,333 0.5 1.5 0.3%
Fast uptake
scenario
82,167 5 15 2.9%
Ultra-fast EV
scenario
72,972 25 6 2.6%

16. Additional Power Generation
The additional power generation requirements remain quite limited, even in
the extreme scenarios of the fast and ultra fast models.
1 The coal-fired Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station in the UK has a rated capacity of 2 gigawatts, estimated at 100% for 11 months
2 The Medway Power Station, a combined-cycle power station in Kent, UK with two gas turbines and one steam turbine, is rated
700 megawatts
3 Hinkley Point B at 100% - http://www.british-energy.co.uk
4 The Aswan Dam hydro-electric plant in Egypt has a capacity of 2.1 gigawatts at 100% for 11 months
5 2 MW output at 70% for 12 months
2/3
Typical output per
unit (GW/annum)
Units required
Medium Fast Ultra Fast
Coal / Lignite 15,8931 1 5 5
Gas and CCGT 5,5622 1 15 13
Nuclear 7,4143 1 11 10
Hydro 16,6874 0.5 5 4
Wind 165 687 6,770 6,013

17. Medium
Fast
Ultra-fast
What About the Grid Infrastructure
A study of EV introduction and charging
methodologies showed that:
 11% penetration of EVs is possible
without capital expenditure (although
this is the technical limit)1
 This figure can be increased to 61% by
actively controlling the charging of 50%
of those EVs1
 This strategy is accompanied by major
CO2 benefits by matching charging with
surplus renewable energy (more of this
later!!!)
1 Smart Charging Strategies for Electric Vehicles: Enhancing Grid
Performance and Maximizing the Use of Variable Renewable Energy
Resources J A Pecas Lopes at al EVS24 May 2009.
2/3
Medium
penetration is 2%

18. Will Increase in Power Stations
Affect CO2 Output
Short answer – NO – why? Because of the EU Emissions Trading
Scheme (ETS)
Beginning January 2005 there is a cap on CO2 emissions from the
power sector until 2020 i.e. increases in power generation need
to be carbon free, which can be achieve by:
- efficiency improvements
- carbon free production
- Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) i.e. investment in
carbon reduction programmes in developing countries
Source: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/emission/index_en.htm and Green Power for Electric Cars, CE Delft,
Kampman et al. January 2010
2/3

19. The Case Against
1. electric vehicles produce more carbon emissions than
conventional vehicles
2. their introduction will require the building of hundreds, if not
thousands, of new powerstations.
3. the potential shortfall in the supply of rare-earth ores will limit
the ability to manufacture the batteries needed to make
electric vehicles with an acceptable drivable range

20. Shortfall in Rare Earth Ores Will Limit the Range and
Performance of EVs
The potential of a shortfall depends on the following:
 The penetration rate of EVs (previously discussed)
 The type of materials used
 The requirements per vehicle (to give acceptable range and cost)
 The amount of raw materials available
Or
3/3

21. Type of Materials Used
There are many different battery types currently only Lithium based
chemistry can meet the power and energy density requirements for
EVs and PHEVs
The share of Lithium in the battery is relatively small whilst the
majority of the material is commonplace
1 California Air Resources Board; Kalhammer, F.R. et al.: Status and prospects for zero emissions vehicle technology –
Report of the ARB independent expert panel 2007. Sacramento 2007
3/3
ref.:1 ref.:1

22. Requirement per Vehicle
 Current literature suggests that a range of over 200 km will be required
 Using the consumption figure given before (namely 0.2 kW.h/km) will
indicate a pack size of 40 kW.h (estimate 6 kW.h for PHEV)
 Using a figure of 0.3 kg of lithium metal per kWh 1
 Results in a total amount of about 12 kg lithium per EV (1.8 kg for PHEV)
 Taking in to account the penetration rate scenarios we have the following
result:
1 Tahil, W.: The trouble with lithium. Implications of future PHEV production for lithium demand. Meridian International
Research 2007
3/3
SCENARIO
EV PHEV
TOTAL (Tn)
NO. Tn Li NO. Tn Li
moderate/medium uptake scenario 0.5m 6,000 1.5m 2,700 8,700
fast uptake scenario 5m 60,000 15m 27,000 87,000
ultra-fast EV scenario 25m 300,000 5.5m 9,900 309.900

23. How Much Raw Materials is Available?
 The requirement is between 8,700 tn and 309,900 tn per year – question is
do we have enough
 Unfortunately there is major disagreement amongst experts on:
 The global reserves of lithium
 The reserves that are extractable
 The amount of lithium available for automotive applications
 Estimates of reserves vary between 30,000,000 tn1 and 4,100,000 tn2
 Current global mining amounts to 25,000 tn1
 Current global demand is estimated at 17,500 tn3 (i.e. surplus of 7,500 tn)
 Recycling of batteries can recover 56 to 61 % of the lithium4,5
1 Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.: Electric Cars: Plugged In – Batteries must be included. 2008
2 U.S. Geological Survey 2009
3 Öko-Institut e.V.; Buchert, M. et al.: Critical metals for future sustainable technologies and their recycling. Final report
(in cooperation withUnited Nations Environment Programme). Darmstadt 2009
4 Agence de l’environnement et de la maîtrise de l’énergie (ADEME): Trophées des technologies économes et propres
2007 – quatre entreprise récompensées (Press release). 2007
5 Ecologist; Vaughan, A.: Can electric vehicles overtake competing green car technologies? 2009
3/3

24. What Does This Mean???
Points to remember:
 There is no consensus on the potential penetration rates of EVs
or the estimates of lithium reserves
 This scenario is for just one type of chemistry
3/3
SCENARIO
Years of production possible
Impact on
miningLi High
estimate
Li
Average
estimate
Li Low
estimate
moderate/medium uptake
scenario
1373 453 166 None
fast uptake scenario 780 257 94 High
ultra-fast scenario 188 62 23 V. High

25. The Case Against - Summary
1. electric vehicles produce more carbon emissions than
conventional vehicles
On the basis of our analysis EVs
would clearly emit much less CO2
than ICE passenger cars
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
gCO2/km
ICE EV

26. The Case Against - Summary
1. their introduction will require the building of hundreds, if
not thousands, of new power stations.
Even with the worst case scenario the number of additional
powerstations required can be managed
Units required
Medium Fast Ultra Fast
Coal / Lignite 1 5 5
Gas and CCGT 1 15 13
Nuclear 1 11 10
Hydro 0.5 5 4
Wind 687 6,770 6,013

27. The Case Against - Summary
1. the potential shortfall in the supply of rare-earth ores will limit
the ability to manufacture the batteries needed to make
electric vehicles with an acceptable drivable range
In the worst case scenario the amount of raw material will be
sufficient to meet short term battery demand
A step-change in battery chemistry or usage is likely to disrupt
the market severely
SCENARIO
Years of production possible
Impact on
miningHigh
estimate
Medium
estimate
Low
estimate
moderate/medium uptake
scenario
1373 453 166 None
fast uptake scenario 780 257 94 High
ultra-fast EV scenario 188 62 23 V. High

28. The Case For
1. Electric vehicles have the potential to eliminate carbon
emissions from the passenger car sector and encourage the
increased application of renewable electricity production
2. EVs will reduce a country's reliance on imported oil and help
insulate the economy from the effects of a reduction in global
oil supply
3. Electric vehicle will significantly reduce toxic emissions in
urban environments, improving health and saving money

29. The Case For
1. Electric vehicles have the potential to eliminate carbon
emissions from the passenger car sector and encourage the
increased application of renewable electricity production.
2. EVs will reduce a country's reliance on imported oil and help
insulate the economy from the effects of a reduction in global
oil supply
3. Reduction of toxic emissions in urban environments,
improving health and saving money

30. The Structure of the Power Sector
Base load generation
 Biz-case required continuous
operation at optimum capacity
 Inefficient at less than full output
 Mainly coal and nuclear but can also
include geothermal
 Investment profile typically:
– Coal = £1 to 3 billion
– Nuclear = £3 to 6 billion
1/3
Coal +
Lignite
Nuclear
Crude oil
Nat Gas
Renewable
EU28 energy mix by type, 20091
1 Office of the European Union Eurostat.
For this analysis electricity generation is split in to 3 categories:

31. The Structure of the Power Sector
Intermediate generation
 Follow predicted variation in demand
 Have non-zero minimum output
 Compensate for changes in baseload
due to planned maintenance
 Typically load following nuclear or
hydrocarbon based
 Investment profile £375m to £6 billion
1/3
EU28 energy mix by type, 20091
1 Office of the European Union Eurostat.
For this analysis electricity generation is split in to 3 categories:
Coal +
Lignite
Nuclear
Crude oil
Nat Gas
Renewable

32. The Structure of the Power Sector
Peak generation (10 to 15% run
time)
 Provide power during peak demand
 Compensate for changes in baseload
due to power-outages and accidents
 Can start quickly and vary output
 Normally combined cycle gas turbine
facilities
 Cheap to build but expensive to operate
 Typical investment of £375m to £600m
EU28 energy mix by type, 20091
1 Office of the European Union Eurostat.
For this analysis electricity generation is split in to 3 categories:
1/3
Coal +
Lignite
Nuclear
Crude oil
Nat Gas
Renewable

33. Where Does Renewable Electricity Fit In
 In 2014 renewables produced 25.4% of
total electricity in the EU281
 If current growth rates are maintained
then in 2020 50% of EU electricity will
be from renewables2
 Equivalent to 1.6m GW.h
1/3
1 Office of the European Union Eurostat.
2 Renewable Energy Snapshots 2010 JRCHans Bloem, Fabio Monforti-Ferrario, Marta Szabo and Arnulf Jäger-Waldau
3 http://www.ag-energiebilanzen.de/viewpage.php?idpage=65
Electricity needed
(GWh)
% of renewable electricity
available in 2020
Medium/moderate uptake
scenario
8,333 0.005
Fast uptake scenario 82,167 0.05
Ultra-fast EV scenario 72,972 0.045

34. Total output for 11 wind farms in New Zealand, Tasmania and South Australia for June 2009
The Problems? …. One is Variability
1/3

35. Another is Timing
The timing of the generation may not coincide with the demand
1/3
1 National Grid, ‘Winter Consultation Report 2010/11. A review of winter 2009/10 and preliminary outlook for winter 2010/11.’
Daily Peak Loads and Wind Generation UK Oct 2009 to Mar 20101
Smoothing peaks in demand and generation will put large amounts of
stress on current infrastructure

36. There is a Solution for Renewable
Electricity
 The system is called Vehicle to Grid (V2G) – technology is already
developed and trials have taken place, see nuvve.com.
1/3
+becomes
 Electric Vehicles act as load by charging during peaks in output
then supply electricity back to the grid when needed

37. “If 200,000 V2G electric vehicles had been available the
California electricity crisis in 2000 and 2001 could have been
prevented”2 (cost to California of $45 billion)3
“ In the EU V2G deals could provide revenues of several
hundred Euros per year”1
“ In parts of the US V2G revenues of up to $ 3,000 per year
are estimated”6
“EVs could be used as emergency generators for households
in rural locations”5 (Vehicle to Home (V2H))
1 Wietschel, M. Wirtschaftlichkeit und Systemintegration der Elektromobilität. Berlin 2007
2 CARB; Gage, T.B.: Development and Evaluation of a Plug-in HEV with Vehicle-to-Grid Power Flow
3 http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=270
5 BER; Investigation into the Scope for the Transport Sector to Switch to Electric Vehicles . October 2008
6 Kemption, W., Tomić, J.:V2G power fundamentals: Calculating capacity and net revenue, Journal of Power Sources 2005.
1/3
What Are People Saying About V2G

38. The Case For
1. Electric vehicles have the potential to eliminate carbon
emissions from the passenger car sector and encourage the
increased application of renewable energy production.
2. EVs will reduce a country's reliance on imported oil and help
insulate the economy from the effects of a reduction in global
oil supply
3. Reduction of toxic emissions in urban environments,
improving health and saving money

39. Why is Oil a Problem
 90% of global reserves are un-
audited1
1 Michigan Peak Oil Conference Grand Rapids MI May 2008
2 Oil’s monopoly on transportation sector will hold beyond 2030, EIA June 22, 2009
 96% of the energy we consume
in the transport sector is derived
from oil2
2/3

40. Is There Enough Oil?
Consumption of petroleum is predicted to grow to 118m barrels per day by
20301 whilst global production has NEVER exceeded 86m barrels per day
1 Energy Information Administration (EIA), International Energy Annual 2004 (May-July 2006), web site www.eia.doe.gov/iea.
2 EU Energy Chief Guenther Oettinger Nov 2010
3 The US Joint Operating Environment 2010 report, February 2010
4 Timing and future consequences of the peak of oil production Pedro de Almeida a, Pedro D. Silva b, July 2011
2/3
“The amount of oil
available globally....has
already peaked” 2
"By as early as 2015, the
shortfall in output could
reach 10 MBD."3
Date Interval
Number of
Predictions
2007 or before 2
2008 - 2012 11
2013 - 2017 6
2018 - 2022 4
2023 or later 6

41. • The potential negative consequences of Peak Oil have been
described as follows:
– unprecedented famine. [Goodchild,Dieoff.org]
– rapid increase in poverty [World Bank]
– large population declines [Wikipedia]
– a collapse of global industrial civilization [Bruno, Joe Bel]
• Transport drives oil consumption and it is up to the transport
sector to provide alternatives
"I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a
source of power! I hope we don't have to wait until oil
and coal run out before we tackle that."
What are the Consequences
2/3
Thomas Edison, 1931

42. What's Happening
 In 2006 Sweden declared its intention to be an oil free economy by 2020
without building new nuclear power plants
"A Sweden free of fossil fuels would give us enormous advantages, not
least by reducing the impact from fluctuations in oil prices" Mona Sahlin,
Minister of Sustainable Development
 What about the UK? US? China?
2/3

43. The Case For
1. Electric vehicles have the potential to eliminate carbon
emissions from the passenger car sector and encourage the
increased application of renewable energy production.
2. EVs will reduce a country's reliance on imported oil and help
insulate the economy from the effects of a reduction in global
oil supply
3. Reduction of toxic emissions in urban environments,
improving health and saving money

44.  From the end of 2008 half of the world's population are living in urban
areas1
 The UN predicts this will grow to 60% by 20301
 In the UK, on average 35,000 people die prematurely every year as a
result of exposure to air pollution and thousands more are hospitalised2
 The reduction in life expectancy could be as high as 9 years3
3/3
1 The Associated Press (February 26, 2008). http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/26/news/UN-GEN-UN-Growing-Cities.php.
2 The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) Long-term Exposure to Air Pollution: Effect on Mortality 2009
3 The UK Government's 2007 Air Quality Strategy
4 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/25/london-air-pollution-europe
Why Focus on Urban Environments
London
2010
London's air pollution
worst in Europe,
city faces unlimited
fines from EU4

45. “Urban traffic noise alone is harming the health of almost every third
person in Europe.”1
 Conservative estimates put the benefit of quieter cars to be at least
£40billion, and up to £105billion across Europe2
3/3
1 http://www.euro.who.int/en/what-we-do/health-topics/environmental-health/noise
2 Sandberg, U., Ejsmont, J. A. (2002) Tyre/Road Noise Reference Book (www.informex.info )
Don't Forget the Noise
 Engine noise is the
dominant source at lower
speeds (under 30km/h)2
 Tyre noise dominates
above that2
 Aerodynamic noise
becomes louder as a
function of the vehicle
speed2

46. Carbon
Emissions Power
Stations
Lithium
ReservesRenewable
Electricity
Peak
Oil Urban
Environments
What We Have Discussed

47. Electric Vehicles as the Future
of Personal Transportation
– You Decide