top of page

Electric Vehicles: A Comprehensive Assessment of Sustainability

Editor: Agnes Sulistya, Sharah Saputra (LCI Team)

ree

The transition to electric vehicles (EVs) is often seen as a solution for reducing global carbon emissions and combating climate change. However, the environmental impacts of EVs are not one-dimensional. While EVs show benefits in some categories, they also have trade-offs in others. It is crucial to assess their full environmental footprint through a comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to understand their multidimension effects, then to conclude if EVs are a better option than the conventional vehicle.


LCA and Its Application to EVs

To truly understand the environmental impacts of EVs, it is essential to look beyond their emissions during operation. This is where LCA becomes crucial. LCA is a comprehensive methodology used to assess the environmental impacts of a product or service over its entire life cycle — from raw material extraction to manufacturing, use, and disposal, as an LCI blog explains.

In the case of EVs, LCA helps provide a holistic view of their environmental impact, including factors such as:

  • Raw Material Extraction: The mining of metals and minerals required for EV batteries, such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, can have significant environmental impacts. These materials must be extracted, refined, and transported, contributing to emissions and resource depletion.

  • Manufacturing: . While overall EV production is simpler than ICEV manufacturing, the production of EV batteries is complex and energy-intensive. This process involves sourcing and refining materials like lithium, cobalt, and nickel, followed by assembling them into high-capacity battery packs. It requires specialized equipment and significant energy, making it the most resource-heavy part of EV manufacturing. However, advancements in battery technology and production efficiency are helping reduce its environmental impact.

  • Use Phase: During their use, electric vehicles produce much lower greenhouse gas  compared to internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs or conventional cars). This is the stage where EVs really stand out in terms of sustainability, especially when they are powered by renewable energy sources. The energy mix used for charging can influence the environmental impact of EVs during this phase.

  • End-of-Life: At the end of their life, EVs, particularly their batteries, must be disposed of or recycled. The end-of-life treatment of used EV components, such as lithium-ion batteries, tires, and aluminum parts, plays an important role in reducing the environmental impact. For instance, used lithium-ion batteries undergo a hydrometallurgical treatment, a process to extract valuable metals for reuse, reducing the need for new raw material extraction.


The Environmental Benefits of Switching from Traditional ICEVs to EVs

The primary environmental benefit of EVs is their reduction in operational emissions when compared to ICEVs. ICEVs are major contributors to air pollution and global warming, emitting harmful gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter. These emissions are a direct result of burning fossil fuels, contributing to climate change and poor air quality, especially in urban areas.


EVs produce zero tailpipe emissions, making them a cleaner alternative for urban mobility. When powered by renewable energy sources like solar or wind, EVs can have an almost negligible carbon footprint during their operation. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), replacing a conventional gasoline car with an EV can reduce its lifetime emissions by up to 70%, depending on the energy mix used to charge the vehicle (IEA, 2021).


The assumptions for this comparison include the use of the BYD Seal (BEV) and Toyota Camry (ICEV) models, both with a functional unit of 280,000 km. The BEV uses a Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery, and the ICEV uses a Lead-acid (Accu) battery. Additionally, the LCA considers the energy mix of China for manufacturing and Indonesia for the use stage. Both models are assumed to have a similar lifetime of 280,000 km, with the data sourced from GREET 2023, Ecoinvent 3.10, and Li, Yang et al. (2020).


However, the environmental impacts of EVs are not uniformly better than those of ICEVs across all categories. The following impact categories show a mixed result when comparing EVs and ICEVs:

  1. Global Warming Potential (GWP): EVs perform better than ICEVs in reducing global warming potential, with a reduction of about 15%.  For EVs, the GWP is mainly driven by the source of electricity and battery manufacturing. In countries like Indonesia, where over 80% of energy comes from fossil fuels, the carbon footprint of EVs can be high. However, in regions with cleaner energy sources, EV emissions are much lower. In contrast, ICEVs' environmental impact is primarily from fuel production and tailpipe emissions, which consistently reflect the carbon cost of fossil fuels.

  2. Potential of Acid Rain (Acidification Potential/AP): In this category, EVs have a significantly 135% higher impact than ICEV. EVs' AP is largely influenced by electricity production and vehicle manufacturing, whereas for ICEVs, it’s primarily caused by fuel production and combustion.

  3. Nutrient Pollution in waterways (Eutrophication Potential/EP): EVs show a dramatic increase of almost 700% in EP. For EVs, EP is mostly driven by electricity production and vehicle manufacturing, while for ICEVs, fuel combustion during use is the major contributor.

  4. Total energy use (Cumulative Energy Demand/CED): While EVs require more energy during the production phase, particularly due to battery manufacturing, they perform better in the long run. BEVs have a lower total energy use  compared to ICEVs, with an approximately 18% reduction. EVs have lower fossil energy demand, with electricity production being the main contributor, while ICEVs rely more on fossil energy for fuel production and combustion.


Conclusion

EVs represent a critical step toward a more sustainable future for transportation. While they significantly reduce tailpipe emissions and operate more efficiently than traditional vehicles, the overall environmental impact of EVs is a complex issue. When evaluated through the lens of LCA, EVs show both advantages and challenges in various impact categories. They perform better than internal combustion engine vehicles in reducing global warming potential and fossil energy demand, but they also have higher impacts in acidification and eutrophication potential due to electricity and vehicle production.


As EV adoption continues to grow, improving the sustainability of their production processes, increasing the share of renewable energy in the electricity mix, and developing better recycling infrastructure will be key to maximizing their environmental benefits. EVs are a step in the right direction, but ongoing innovation and sustainable practices are crucial to their long-term success as a global sustainability effort.


References:

Comments

bottom of page