[culi]

Sure but with about 167% as many emissions from production, I'm just saying there's going to be an immediate increase in emissions.

Also one thing missing from this analysis is maintenance. The three factors taken into account are initial production (much higher for EVs), cost of fuel production (also much higher for EVs), and emissions from fuel combustion (0 for EVs). However batteries don't last forever and it still remains to be seen that EVs can reach the maintenance costs of combustion engine vehicles (with Tesla being a notable argument against EVs potential)

[Robotbeat]

Fuel production is much cheaper for EVs, what are you talking about?

The batteries last longer than the 150,000km these studies assume. My 2013 Model S is at 209,000 kilometers and going strong with little (10% or less) range reduction.

I looked at the study a bit, and they use Model S-sized battery size and efficiency assumptions (about 3mi/kWh) to compare to a Camry. More appropriate would be Model 3 assumptions (4mi/kWh). The emissions factors are from a white paper 5 years ago, itself using older data. They assume 525grams of CO2 per kWh for the reference case going down to 345 in 2050, but the US already has emissions of about 375gramsCO2/kWh and falling. Just terrible assumptions. A bunch of stuff like that in the study.

And it compounds! A factor of 1.33 bigger battery (3mi/kWh instead of 4mi/kWh) whose manufacturing emissions are 1.41 times as high (525grams of CO2 per kWh vs 372, if we optimistically assume electricity is the main energy input but pessimistically assume the energy needed to make a kWh of capacity remains the same) means a factor of 1.9 exaggeration in manufacturing emissions. Plus the operating emissions per mile are also exaggerated by a factor of 1.9…

Finally: Batteries in modern EVs last the life of the vehicle. 500,000km or so. Potentially longer with LFP cells.

[culi]

> Fuel production is much cheaper for EVs, what are you talking about?

No it's very much not. Please see chapter 4 of the linked MIT report:

  Fuel production emissions are also
  typically higher for BEVs (and FCEVs) because, on
  average, generating and delivering a megajoule of
  electricity or hydrogen to a vehicle battery or fuel
  cell consumes much more energy than producing
  and delivering a megajoule of gasoline to the fuel
  tank of an ICE

[Robotbeat]

But you said “cheaper,” additionally this ignores the input fossil energy of the gasoline, and it’s per joule of thermal energy, not useful mechanical energy. It’s a weird metric that isn’t very enlightening. It’s mixing low-entropy electrical energy with high-entropy thermal “primary energy.” It’s also not what you actually said. The cost of energy (as well as emissions) per mile traveled is far, FAR less in electric vehicles.

[culi]

Again, you're misunderstanding the point. I really recommend you just check out the first few pages of chapter 4 of the full MIT report. Yes the emissions per mile travelled is less in EVs. Nobody is arguing against that. There's 3 categories here:

1. Emissions from initial production

2. Emissions from fuel production

3. Emissions from fuel consumption

For EVs, emissions from 1 and 2 are higher. But this is more than offset by having 0 emissions from the third category. So yes, the emissions per mile traveled is less in EVs. However the cost of fuel production per mile traveled is still significantly higher (around 192% higher)

PS you're the only one who used the word "cheaper". I only used it when directly quoting you. I presumed we were still measuring by emissions and not by dollar cost, but I see now that you were talking about something else

EDIT: check out figure 4.6 on page 68

[Robotbeat]

On the contrary, you made the false claim about fuel production cost being more expensive for EVs yourself here when not quoting me:

> “cost of fuel production (also much higher for EVs)”