The Tesla Model S Apparently Puts Out More Whole-Life Emissions Than A Petrol Supermini
Oh dear. The electric-powered Tesla Model S has been found to produce more whole-life carbon dioxide than a petrol supermini.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which whom Lamborghini is working on future battery tech, studied a group of cars’ production methods, exhaust emissions, potential for recycling and any emissions produced by power plants for the quantity of electricity required, if any.
While the researchers say that emissions from distant power plants are the lesser of two evils when it comes to city centres, the Model S was responsible for 226g/km of CO2 during its lifetime compared to just 192g/km for the humble Mitsubishi Mirage supermini.
Admittedly, we know which one of the two we’d rather put on our driveways, but 34g/km is a significant difference. It’s fresh evidence to back the theory that electric cars are actually no cleaner overall than small petrol ones, although we’d like to see a fairer-looking comparison between, say, a Nissan Leaf and a Volkswagen Golf.
Against a more comparable car, the BMW 750 xDrive, the Model S was reportedly some 159g/km better for the planet over its entire several hundred thousand kilometre lifetime.
It also matters how the Model S in the study gets its energy. In the American Midwest, it may be coal-fired power stations. Parts of northern Europe, for example, are now heavily supplied by renewables. The argument will rumble on…
Source: Auto Express
Comments
That’s hardly surprising news in a world where most power is still produced using fossil fuel. Many here also need to keep in mind that fact is obviously not Tesla’s fault. The development of EVs evidently calls for the parallel development of greener energy production. That is a problem for the different states to solve tho
This really doesn’t surprise me. Goes to show that instead of paying lots of money for a brand-new shiny car, you should just stick with your old car. Not to mention that the most efficient car is the smallest and lightest car that does the job. If you’re a single person who doesn’t need lots of room, don’t get a Model S - instead, drive your old car into the ground and buy something smaller like an i3.
For some reason I now feel proud to own a Mitsubishi Mirage…
Think about how dirty and polluting the early days of petrol enignes were. We have invested ages in development in petrol engines. In the future the electric power train will get way more efficent than a gasoline engine ever could
Fredrik Lie Larsen you’ve been requested
Anyone who knows how research works, knows it’s possible to make data say almost anything. Look up Last Week Tonight with John Oliver and his segment on Scientific Studies.
First of all, CarThrottle should be ashamed for even posting this. Their source doesn’t even link to the actual paper. SHAME!
Their source also says that it’s based on the cars being located in the worst possible location in US in terms of clean energy. It also says that if you account for the average energy mix in the US, the Model S is actually cleaner. Oh look at that, amateur “journalist” neglects to mention facts and present the research wrong.
We also know that the US is horrible in terms of clean energy, meaning the difference will be even better in Europe for example.
Also another hugely important factor to take into account is the mileage. You could probably get a Hummer to be more eco-friendly than a Model S if you use a low mileage calculation. This isn’t mentioned anywhere, which raises a red flag.
Another point that needs to be adressed even more than the slight mention in the article.
This is a lage, 400hp+ 7 seater car with the worst possible energy mix up against one of the lightest, most environmentally friendly eco-boxes. This is basically the same as saying some random kid beat Beckham in soccer, without mentioning that you chopped Beckhams legs off.
Idiots who don’t understand science and research should not be allowed to summarize it, like Matt Kimberley did here.
This is hardly latest news, there studies from 2012 getting comparable results. Even if the cars aren’t exactly rivals (I liked that Leaf vs Golf suggestion, though), it helps dismiss the (wrong) idea that electric cars are enviromentaly friendly. This study still misses the big point, though: mining. Most battery manufacturers don’t use recycled material, and, at the current rate, we will either have to resort to even more polluting (to the ground and water) techniques to extract the minerals needed (like nikel) or run out of materials to build batteries
Not totally true. Ion lithium barriers are actually fully recyclable. While you’re right in that the mining of the necessary minerals is horrendously polluting, already existing batteries are not a problem in themselves
I would try to explain how this study is terrible and flawed in quite a few ways, but looks like most people want to maintain their cognitive dissonance.
We tried.
😄
The thing is its either fossil fuel power stations or nuclear.
Or solar. Or hydro. Or wind. Or tidal. Or geothermal. Electricity can be made emission free, but the same can never be said of fossil fuel powered ICE vehicles.
I’d rather have the mirage in my driveway than a Tesla