THE SET-UP: Electric vehicles have always been a problematic solution to the problem of climate pollution. In theory, electric cars would plug into revamped grid that distributes energy produced by renewables. It would be a clean, closed circuit that eliminates the need for fossil fuels. Sounds great. And just because it hasn’t happened, doesn’t mean it can’t or will not happen … perhaps someday … when Trump is not actively sabotaging the possibility.
But the story doesn’t end there.
One glaring problem has been EVs’ reliance on “critical minerals” like the now-infamous “rare earths” Trump covets in Ukraine and Greenland. These minerals also end up in the smartphones and other consumer technologies that transformed tech bros into Broligarchs. The mining they relied upon often generated human rights and environmental catastrophes—like cobalt mining in the Congo. And—when it’s not using the equivalent of slave labor—how much of the mining equipment is itself electric? Or is it still diesel?
These details are often cited by EVs’ critics. Unfortunately, they also tend to be critics of climate science, environmental protection and anything that isn’t a full-throated endorsement of coal-rolling in a jacked-up Ford F-350.
Ironically, though, those coal-rolling denialists are now embracing Elon Musk and Tesla. But this apparent flip of Elon Musk from Clean-Green Hero of the Left to the Right’s ultimate Own-The-Libs Antihero isn’t as jarring as it seems. His environmental track record is, much like the EVs that made him rich and famous, at best problematic. Musk has never really been in it for the environment. He identified a market and he exploited it. It’s called carbon credits and he’s used them to pump-up Tesla’s stock price and to create the illusion of car-generated revenue at key moments when the cars were not profitable. As CarbonCredits.com reported:
Tesla’s profits took a hit in 2024, dropping 23%. But one revenue stream kept surging—carbon credit sales. The carmaker reached a new record in selling regulatory credits, recording a 54% jump from 2023. As the EV market evolves and emissions rules tighten, can Tesla keep profiting from carbon credits?
All those emissions Telsa’s car doesn’t produce end up as an allowance they can sell to businesses that are pumping out emissions … and those businesses can claim carbon neutrality by proxy. Musk has benefitted from this scheme for years. He saw a market for a snazzy, environmentally-branded electric car and for the carbon credits that car would produce, and he exploited ‘em.
That, in turn, gave him the money and leverage to turn his attention to polluting the atmosphere with exploding rockets and to fill the skies with his ever-expanding network of low-orbit satellites … that reenter, burn and pollute the atmosphere on almost a daily basis. It also gave him the money he used to help elect the rolling environmental crisis that is Trump. Ironically, that investment is now paying off … for the burgeoning EV industry in China. - jp
TITLE: Tesla Is Trying to Build an Ecological Paradise. Too Bad It Literally Stinks.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a64423522/tesla-gigafactory-environment/
EXCERPTS: Despite using big words like “biodiversity” and “revegetation,” Tesla has a lot of work to do when it comes to supercharging the ecosystems near the Gigafactory. A Wall Street Journal article from last year shows that the factory has already racked up significant pollution violations. The rollout for the Model Y (2022) was a focal point for Giga Texas, as there was no leeway for damaged equipment to be offline while waiting for repair. This meant that a lot of “broken” equipment remained operational to fulfill manufacturing numbers, leading to significant environmental impact on the surrounding area.
The WSJ article mentioned an incident from 2022 in which one of the doors on the 30-foot-tall furnaces—used to melt aluminum for casting car components—stopped closing correctly. Even as car production ramped up, the door to the 1,200-degree oven remained ajar. Interviews with ex-employees demonstrated that the broken seal forced the oven to use considerably more fuel and emit higher pollution levels from the smokestacks. That’s not to mention the amount of heat being expelled into the work area, which was said to reach up to 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
For context, the Wall Street Journal reported that Austin Water regulators did notify Tesla that the company had violated its permit after discharging 9,000 gallons of wastewater (which had not been properly treated) into the Colorado River. And if we thought the infractions in Austin were egregious, let’s not forget about some of Musk’s other companies. Like, for example, SpaceX, which was recently fined $150,000 for dumping 262,000 gallons of wastewater into Texas wetlands without proper permission.
TITLE: Electric vehicles also cause air pollution
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2025/04/11/electric-vehicles-also-cause-air-pollution
EXCERPTS: Electric vehicles (evs) are often preferred because they can be powered by clean, sustainable energy sources and, in contrast to petrol and diesel cars, produce no exhaust fumes. But evs nevertheless emit other pollutants common to all cars: particles originating not from the exhaust, but from brakes, tyres and roads. These can have potentially significant consequences for public health.
The most dangerous particles are those smaller than 2.5 microns in diameter, which get into the lungs and reach other organs via the bloodstream. Such dust can increase the risk of heart disease, stroke, lung disease and cancer. According to British government statistics, 60% of road-traffic particles below 10 microns do not come from the tailpipe, but from the gradual breakdown of tyres, brake pads and roads.
In addition to being less well regulated than exhaust fumes, non-exhaust particles are also less well studied. That is beginning to change. One study published in February by researchers at the University of Southampton found that some brake-pad dust seems to be more damaging to human lung cells grown in a dish than particles from diesel fumes. This was in part because it contained higher levels of copper, which can damage cells and dna.
Though exact figures are elusive, scientists estimate that evs produce more of these non-exhaust particles than other cars. This is because their batteries make them heavier, causing them to generate more friction. (According to Hannah Ritchie, a data scientist at the University of Oxford, in 2023 the mean weight of an ev was 2,133kg, whereas regular cars weighed around 1,500kg in Britain and 1,800kg in America.) As cars continue to get bigger, the risk is that evs become ever more polluting.
Although evs may be dirtier than you think, they are still mostly less polluting than other cars. That is partly because they use an extra braking system called regenerative braking. When the driver removes their foot from the pedal, the continued forward motion of the car is harvested to recharge the battery, thereby slowing the car down. That system works independently of brake pads, potentially eliminating one source of emissions. One study from 2021 estimated that, when regenerative braking was used for all braking, evs produced a total of about 14 milligrams of fine particles per vehicle per kilometre on urban roads, whereas petrol cars produced about 18 and diesel cars 20 (exhaust included).
More radical steps can also be taken. Regulating non-exhaust emissions in a similar way to tailpipe fumes would be one way to minimise harm to human health. Encouraging people to consider smaller cars would be another. Enormous cars are disastrous for road safety and most people will never need the extra range that the largest car batteries provide.
TITLE: Global EV adoption fails to cut CO₂ - study
https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2025/04/09/global-ev-adoption-fails-to-cut-co---study.html
EXCERPTS: There's little point in buying an electric vehicle if you're charging it with electricity generated by fossil fuels. In fact, when it comes to carbon dioxide emissions, your EV may be doing more harm than good.
This is according to a study by researchers from the University of Auckland and Xiamen University in China, published in the journal Energy.
The researchers analysed the environmental impacts of human activity and used a robust statistical approach to investigate what drives a nation's carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions.
Using data from 26 countries over 15 years, they found a surprising trend: higher EV uptake was linked to increased CO₂ emissions. The reason? In a number of countries, EVs are still being powered by electricity generated through burning fossil fuels like coal or oil.
Associate Professor Stephen Poletti and Simon Tao, a doctoral candidate at the Business School's Energy Centre, didn't observe a significant reduction in CO₂ emissions globally due to EV adoption
"On the contrary, EV adoption is positively associated with CO₂ emissions," says Tao. "This finding appears counterintuitive; it challenges the conventional belief that EVs contribute to decarbonisation.
"Our analysis highlights that the environmental benefits of EVs are contingent on the composition of a country's electricity generation mix.”
Take EVs charged using electricity from coal-fired power plants, says Poletti.
“In that case, they may indirectly contribute to higher emissions than modern gasoline or diesel vehicles, especially considering the entire lifecycle from production to disposal."
Eliminating subsidies for fossil fuels and implementing carbon pricing mechanisms could incentivise renewable energy development.
The study results suggest only when the global share of renewable electricity generation reaches approximately 48 percent will electric vehicle adoption contribute to reducing CO₂ emissions.
Renewable energy, mainly wind, solar and hydro, accounted for only a little more than 30 percent of the world's electricity in 2023, so there's a way to go, says Poletti.
"Electric vehicles are often seen as a silver bullet for climate change, but our results show that's not the case if the electricity powering them isn't clean.”
"EVs are only as green as the grid they plug into, and government policies should aim to increase the adoption and integration of renewable energy like solar and hydro. This can be achieved by setting ambitious renewable energy targets and providing adequate subsidies such as tax credits to producers and consumers of renewable energy.”
Poletti says investments in smart grids and transmission networks can boost the efficiency and reliability of renewable energy supply.
Further, the researchers say eliminating subsidies for fossil fuels and implementing carbon pricing mechanisms could also incentivise renewable energy development.
“Electric vehicle uptake can help countries meet climate-related targets, as long as the energy used to power them is clean,” says Tao.