
Electric vehicles emit more CO2 than diesel ones, German study shows - kerng
http://brusselstimes.com/business/technology/15050/electric-vehicles-emit-more-co2-than-diesel-ones,-german-study-shows
======
audunw
This study (if you could call it that) has already been shown to be heavily
biased and misleading.

Here’s an article with comments from Norwegian fact checking site:
[https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/NKl/forskere-mener-tysk-
elbi...](https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/NKl/forskere-mener-tysk-elbil-
rapport-er-uvitenskapelig-og-grovt-villedende)

One flaw is that it does not account for energy used and emissions related to
extraction of oil and production and distribution of diesel.

Another flaw is that the estimate for CO2 emissions in the production of the
battery makes assumptions that we know are false in the case of Tesla.

But the whole premise is also bogus. The point of EVs isn’t to cut a few
percent of CO2 emissions. It’s to build towards a future where we cut ALL
emissions. And it’s the only technology (possible alongside fuel cell tech,
which is a branch of EVs as far as I’m concerned) that can plausibly do that
for the land transportation sector. Sure you need to clean up production
emissions and the grid too. But that’s problems we have to solve anyway, and
_are_ improving on every year.

We can’t _just_ go toward whatever leads to the most CO2 decreases at a given
time. We need a long term plan that actually builds towards cutting _all_
emissions. Studies like this completely miss this point, and so does people
thinking their hybrid or EV is personally saving the planet for that matter..
but hey they help drive investments that actually matter so they help even if
they miss the point

~~~
MuffinFlavored
> One flaw is that it does not account for energy used and emissions related
> to extraction of oil and production and distribution of diesel.

If you wanted to go that far, you'd need to account for all of the fuel used
in transporting Tesla parts, right?

~~~
village-idiot
Yes.

This is a standard form of emissions measurement called “wheel to wheel”
measurement. It includes the cost of making the raw material, transport,
manufacturing, and fuel production.

But the trick is that the frame of an EV really isn’t all that different than
the frame of an ICE vehicle from an emissions standpoint. So all that you
really need to measure is the difference in drivetrain production and
operation.

~~~
MuffinFlavored
and when that "wheel to wheel" measurement is made given the similarities and
differences you called out, is a Tesla that much better for the environment
than say... a 40mpg sedan?

~~~
village-idiot
Depends on power generation, and it therefore depends on the state. In a place
like Kentucky or Alabama that uses a lot of coal it will be close. In a place
like California or Iowa the EV will win hands down.

------
jnurmine
"When all these factors are considered, each Tesla emits 156 to 180 grams of
CO2 per kilometre, which is more than a comparable diesel vehicle produced by
the German company Mercedes, for example."

Well, since they are considering all factors, the next step would be to
consider the costs of diesel, too, starting with oil drilling, transport, etc.
culminating in the subsequent burning of diesel in the engine.

~~~
m463
there's always bunker fuel (a few transport vessels pollute more than all the
cars in the world)

~~~
Arnt
Please stop to think when you read such things on Twitter or wherever.

Here's what you should think: If a few map to all the cars in the world, then
one really big vessel maps to the cars in Europe, perhaps? That fuel was
chosen because it's cheap and a tankful can propel a giant loaded ship from
Shanghai to Rotterdam, and that tank is small enough to leave most of the
ship's space for payload. Is it plausible that something that fits in one tank
can pollute as much as all the cars in Europe? Or is there something fishy
about the computation or comparison?

~~~
m463
I believe when I read this, the pollutant was sulfer. So it's not CO2.

------
namlem
The analysis assumes the energy used for battery production is typical grid
energy, whereas in reality the Gigafactory where they are made is mostly
solar-powered.

~~~
reitzensteinm
Do you have a source for this claim? As far as I know, that was just a plan
that was not yet executed, and the building is largely uncovered:

[https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-gigafactory-1-solar-
panels-m...](https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-gigafactory-1-solar-panels-
model-3-battery-production/)

~~~
reitzensteinm
Back of the napkin calculations:

From the photo, I'll assume 5% of the Gigafactory is covered.

5.5 million square feet across 3 floors [1]

=> 151k sqm of footprint

=> 7550 sqm of solar panels

=> 2.3 MW @ 31% capacity factor [2]

=> 20.1 GWh per year

Tesla Model 3 production @ 252k/yr [3]

=> 80 kWh per Model 3 produced

Enough to fill up a high end Model 3 once...

[1]
[https://www.theverge.com/transportation/2018/11/30/18118451/...](https://www.theverge.com/transportation/2018/11/30/18118451/tesla-
gigafactory-nevada-video-elon-musk-jobs-model-3) [2]
[http://energy.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/energynvgov/content/Synap...](http://energy.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/energynvgov/content/Synapse%20Nevada%20RE%20Report%20w%20Disclaimer%20and%20Comments%20112812.pdf)
[3] [https://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-
details/tesl...](https://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-
details/tesla-q1-2019-vehicle-production-deliveries)

------
thenaturalist
In a hurry, so unfortunately I can not translate key arguments, but there were
some German publications which actively criticised this study. Summary article
can be found here: [https://www.electrive.net/2019/04/20/experten-entlarven-
elek...](https://www.electrive.net/2019/04/20/experten-entlarven-elektroauto-
studie-von-hans-werner-sinn-als-unwissenschaftliche-meinungsmache/)

It links to articles [0] and [1]. Most notably, though, this isn't at all a
scientific or peer reviewed publication.

Hans-Werner Sinn is a well known German economist, Christoph Bruchal is a
material physicist and Hans-Dieter Karl seems to be a former employee of
Sinn's economic institute (ifo) who isn't mentioned in any common research
publication platform.

[0]: [https://www.focus.de/auto/elektroauto/studie-zu-klima-
folgen...](https://www.focus.de/auto/elektroauto/studie-zu-klima-folgen-ifo-
institut-rechnet-e-autos-schlecht-und-macht-dabei-viele-
fehler_id_10611851.html)

[1]: [https://www.wiwo.de/technologie/mobilitaet/ist-das-e-auto-
ei...](https://www.wiwo.de/technologie/mobilitaet/ist-das-e-auto-ein-
rueckschritt-was-hans-werner-sinn-bei-seiner-elektroauto-studie-uebersehen-
hat/24237236.html)

------
woadwarrior01
“The CO2 given off to produce the electricity that powers such vehicles also
needs to be factored in”.

They seem to be assuming that electricity production is always going to be
based off of burning fossil fuels. Also, the whole argument reeks of reductio
ad absurdum.

~~~
SigmundA
Even if it is mostly fossil fuels right now, the big win is decoupling fuel
from vehicle so that the source of power can be changed without the vehicles
having to change.

------
malshe
The original study in German is here: [http://www.cesifo-
group.de/DocDL/sd-2019-08-sinn-karl-buchal...](http://www.cesifo-
group.de/DocDL/sd-2019-08-sinn-karl-buchal-motoren-2019-04-25.pdf)

Can anyone with German proficiency please clarify whether they took into
account the carbon footprint of producing and transporting petrol, diesel,
etc.?

~~~
Arnt
They quote someone who else who did, and add a factor of 21% on top of the
vehicle's own fuel use to account for production and transport of the fuel.

They didn't add anything to account for the engine, though. They compute the
carbon footprint of producing an electric engine and silently assume that the
carbon footprint of producing a petrol/diesel engine is zero.

