Within A Decade, We Will All Be Driving Electric Cars

California Gas Car Ban 2035 signals a shift to electric vehicles, raising grid reliability concerns, charging demand, and renewable energy challenges across solar, wind, and storage, amid rolling blackouts and carbon-free power mandates.

Key Points

An order ending new gasoline car sales by 2035 in California, accelerating EV adoption and pressuring the power grid.

✅ 25% EV fleet could add 232.5 GWh/day charging demand by 2040

✅ Solar and wind intermittency strains nighttime home charging

✅ Grid upgrades, storage, and load management become critical

On September 23, California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order that will ban the sale of gasoline-powered cars in the Golden State by 2035. Ignoring the hard lessons of this past summer, when California’s solar- and wind-reliant electric grid underwent rolling blackouts, Newsom now adds a huge new burden to the grid in the form of electric vehicle charging, underscoring the need for a much bigger grid to meet demand. If California officials follow through and enforce Newsom’s order, the result will be a green new car version of a train wreck.

In parallel, the state is moving on fleet transitions, allowing electric school buses only from 2035, which further adds to charging demand.

Let’s run some numbers. According to Statista, there are more than 15 million vehicles registered in California. Per the U.S. Department of Energy, there are only 256,000 electric vehicles registered in the state—just 1.7 percent of all vehicles, a share that will challenge state power grids as adoption grows.

Using the Tesla Model3 mid-range model as a baseline for an electric car, you’ll need to use about 62 kilowatt-hours (KWh) of power to charge a standard range Model 3 battery to full capacity. It will take about eight hours to fully charge it at home using the standard Tesla NEMA 14-50 charger, a routine that has prompted questions about whether EVs could crash the grid by households statewide.

Now, let’s assume that by 2040, five years after the mandate takes effect, also assuming no major increase in the number of total vehicles, California manages to increase the number of electric vehicles to 25 percent of the total vehicles in the state. If each vehicle needs an average of 62 kilowatt-hours for a full charge, then the total charging power required daily would be 3,750,000 x 62 KWh, which equals 232,500,000 KWh, or 232.5 gigawatt-hours (GWh) daily.

Utility-scale California solar electric generation according to the energy.ca.gov puts utility-scale solar generation at about 30,000 GWh per year currently. Divide that by 365 days and we get 80 GWh/day, predicted to double, to 160 GWh /day. Even if we add homeowner rooftop solar, and falling prices for solar and home batteries in the wake of blackouts, about half the utility-scale, at 40 GWh/day we come up to 200 GW/h per day, still 32 GWh short of the charging demand for a 25% electric car fleet in California. Even if rooftop solar doubles by 2040, we are at break-even, with 240GWh of production during the day.

Bottom-line, under the most optimistic best-case scenario, where solar operates at 100% of rated capacity (it seldom does), it would take every single bit of the 2040 utility-scale solar and rooftop capacity just to charge the cars during the day. That leaves nothing left for air conditioning, appliances, lighting, etc. It would all go to charging the cars, and that’s during the day when solar production peaks.

But there’s a much bigger problem. Even a grade-schooler can figure out that solar energy doesn’t work at night, when most electric vehicles will be charging at homes, even as some officials look to EVs for grid stability through vehicle-to-grid strategies. So, where does Newsom think all this extra electric power is going to come from?

The wind? Wind power lags even further behind solar power. According to energy.gov, as of 2019, California had installed just 5.9 gigawatts of wind power generating capacity. This is because you need large amounts of land for wind farms, and not every place is suitable for high-return wind power.

In 2040, to keep the lights on with 25 percent of all vehicles in California being electric, while maintaining the state mandate requiring all the state’s electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045, California would have to blanket the entire state with solar and wind farms. It’s an impossible scenario. And the problem of intermittent power and rolling blackouts would become much worse.

And it isn’t just me saying this. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees. In a letter sent by EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler to Gavin Newsom on September 28, Wheeler wrote:

“[It] begs the question of how you expect to run an electric car fleet that will come with significant increases in electricity demand, when you can’t even keep the lights on today.

“The truth is that if the state were driving 100 percent electric vehicles today, the state would be dealing with even worse power shortages than the ones that have already caused a series of otherwise preventable environmental and public health consequences.”

California’s green new car wreck looms large on the horizon. Worse, can you imagine electric car owners’ nightmares when California power companies shut off the power for safety reasons during fire season? Try evacuating in your electric car when it has a dead battery.

Gavin Newsom’s “no more gasoline cars sold by 2035” edict isn’t practical, sustainable, or sensible, much like the 2035 EV mandate in Canada has been criticized by some observers. But isn’t that what we’ve come to expect with any and all of these Green New Deal-lite schemes?

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Electric Vehicles Lower Electricity Rates by boosting demand, enabling fixed-cost recovery, and encouraging off-peak charging that balances the grid, reduces peaker plant use, and funds utility upgrades, with V2G poised to expand system benefits.

Key Points

By boosting off-peak demand and utility revenue, EVs spread fixed costs, cut peaker use, and stabilize the grid.

✅ Off-peak charging flattens load, reducing peaker plant reliance

✅ Higher kWh sales spread fixed grid costs across more users

✅ V2G can supply power during peaks and emergencies

Electric vehicles (EVs) are gaining popularity, and it appears they might be offering an unexpected benefit to everyone – including those who don't own an EV.  A new study by the non-profit research group Synapse Energy Economics suggests that the growth of electric cars is actually contributing to lower electricity rates for all ratepayers.

How EVs Contribute to Lower Rates

The study explains several factors driving this surprising trend:

• Increased Electricity Demand: Electric vehicles require additional electricity, boosting rising electricity demand on the grid.
• Optimal Charging Times: Many EV owners take advantage of off-peak charging discounts. Charging cars overnight, when electricity demand is typically low, helps to balance state power grids and reduce the need for expensive "peaker" power plants, which are only used to meet occasional spikes in demand.
• Revenue for Utilities: Electric car charging can generate substantial revenue for utilities, potentially supporting investment in grid improvements, energy storage solutions and renewable energy projects that can bring long-term benefits to all customers.

A Significant Impact

The Synapse Energy Economics study analyzed data from 2011 to 2021 and concluded that EV drivers already contributed over $3 billion more to the grid than their associated costs. That, in turn, reduced monthly electricity bills for all customers.

Benefits May Grow

While the impact on electricity rates has been modest so far, experts anticipate the benefits to grow as EV adoption rates increase. Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology, which allows EVs to feed stored power back into the grid during emergencies or high-demand periods, has the potential to further optimize electricity usage patterns and create additional benefits for electric utilities and customers.

National Implications

The findings of this study offer hope to other regions seeking to increase electric vehicle adoption rates and support California's grid stability efforts, which is a key step towards reducing transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions. This news may alleviate concerns about potential electricity rate hikes driven by EV adoption and suggests that the benefits will be broadly shared.

More than Just Environmental Benefits

Electric vehicles bring a clear environmental advantage by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. However, this unexpected economic benefit could further strengthen the case for accelerating the adoption of electric vehicles. This news might encourage policymakers and the public to consider additional incentives or policies, including vehicle-to-building charging approaches, to promote the transition to this cleaner mode of transportation knowing it can yield benefits beyond environmental goals.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

U.S. Renewable Energy Forecast 2024 will see wind and solar power surpass one-fourth of electricity generation, EIA projects, as coal declines, natural gas dips, and clean energy capacity, grid integration, and policy incentives expand.

Key Points

EIA outlook: renewables at 26% of U.S. power in 2024, led by wind and solar as coal declines and gas share dips.

✅ Wind and solar hit 18% combined, surpassing coal's 17%.

✅ Natural gas dips to 37% as demand rebounds modestly.

✅ Coal plant closures accelerate amid costs, emissions, and age.

Renewable energy is poised to reach a milestone, after a record 28% in April this year, as a new government report projects that wind, solar and other renewable sources will exceed one-fourth of the country’s electricity generation for the first time, in 2024.

This is one of the many takeaways from the federal government’s Short Term Energy Outlook, a monthly report whose new edition is the first to include a forecast for 2024. The report’s authors in the Energy Information Administration are expecting renewables to increase in market share, while natural gas and coal would both decrease.

From 2023 to 2024, renewables would rise from 24 percent to 26 percent of U.S. electricity generation; coal’s share would drop from 18 percent to 17 percent; gas would remain the leader but drop from 38 percent to 37 percent; and nuclear would be unchanged at 19 percent.

It was a big deal in 2020 when generation from renewables passed coal for the first time in 130 years over a full year. Coal made a comeback in 2021 and then retreated again in 2022 as renewables surpassed coal in generation. The ups and downs were largely the result of fluctuations in electricity demand during and then after the Covid-19 pandemic.

The new report indicates that coal doesn’t have another comeback in the works. This fuel, which was the country’s leading electricity source less than a decade ago, is declining as many coal-fired power plants are old and economically uncompetitive. Coal plants continue to close, and developers aren’t building new ones because of concerns about high costs and emissions, a trend underscored when renewables became the second-most prevalent source in 2020 across the U.S.

The growth in renewable energy is coming from wind and solar power, with wind responsible for about one-third of the growth and solar accounting for two-thirds, the report says, and combined output from wind and solar has already exceeded nuclear for the first time in the U.S. Other renewable sources, like hydropower and biomass, would be flat.

In fact, the growth of wind and solar is projected to be so swift that the combination of just those two sources would be 18 percent of the U.S. total by 2024, which would surpass coal’s 17 percent.

A key variable is overall electricity consumption. EIA is projecting that this will fall 1 percent in 2023 compared to 2022, due a mild summer. Then, consumption will increase 1 percent in 2024.

If demand was rising more, then natural gas power would likely gain market share because of gas power plants’ ability to vary their output as needed to respond to changes in demand.

I asked Eric Gimon, a senior fellow at the think tank Energy Innovation, what he thinks of these latest numbers.

He said wind and solar have gotten so big that it almost makes sense to track them as their own categories as opposed to lumping them into the larger category of renewables. He expects that the government will do this sometime soon.

Also, he thinks the projected increases for wind and solar, while substantial, are still smaller than those resources are likely to grow.

“My experience over the last 10 years is that the EIA tends to have flattish forecasts,” he said, meaning the federal office has underestimated the actual growth.

Some energy analysts have criticized EIA for being slow to recognize the growth of renewables. But much of the criticism is about the Annual Energy Outlook, which has numbers going out to mid-century, even as the U.S. is moving toward 30% from wind and solar by the end of the decade. The Short Term Energy Outlook, with numbers going one year into the future, has been more reliable.

Gimon said EIA is “kind of like your conservative uncle” in its forecasts, so it’s notable that the office expects to see a significant uptick in wind and solar.

Even so, he thinks the latest Short Term Energy Outlook should be read as the lower end of the range of potential increase for wind and solar.

For him to be right, the wind and solar industries will need to figure out solutions to the challenges they’ve been having in obtaining parts; they will need to make progress in dealing with local opposition to many projects and in having enough interstate power lines to deliver the electricity. And, new policies like the Inflation Reduction Act will need to have their desired effect of encouraging projects through the use of tax incentives.

It’s not much of a stretch to imagine that clean energy industries will make some progress on all of those fronts.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Condo EV charging retrofits face strata approval thresholds, installation costs, and limited electrical capacity, but government rebates, subsidies, and smart billing systems can improve ROI, property value, and feasibility amid electrician shortages and infrastructure constraints.

Key Points

Condo EV charging retrofits equip multiunit parking with EV chargers, balancing costs, bylaws, capacity, and rebates.

✅ Requires owner approval (e.g., 75% in B.C.) and clear bylaws

✅ Leverage rebates, subsidies, and load management to cut costs

✅ Plan billing, capacity, and phased installation to increase ROI

Retrofitting an existing multiunit residential building with electric vehicle charging stations is a complex and costly exercise, as high-rise EV charging challenges in MURBs demonstrate, even after subsidies, but the biggest hurdle to adoption may be getting enough condo owners on board.

British Columbia, for example, offers a range of provincial government subsidies to help condo corporations (referred to in B.C. as stratas) with everything from the initial research to installing the chargers. But according to provincial strata law, three-quarters of owners must support the plan before it is implemented, though new strata EV legislation could make approvals easier in some jurisdictions.

“The largest challenge is getting that 75-per-cent majority approval to go ahead,” says EV charging specialist Patrick Breuer with ChargeFwd Ltd., a Vancouver-based sustainable transport consultancy.

Chris Brunner, a strata president in Vancouver, recently upgraded all the building’s parking stalls for EV charging. His biggest challenge was getting the strata’s investment owners, who don’t live in the building and were not interested in spending money, to support the project.

“We had to sell it in two ways,” Mr. Brunner says. “First, that there’s going to be a return on investment, including vehicle-to-building benefits that support savings and grid stability, and second, that there will come a time when this will be required. And if we do it now, taking advantage of the generous rebates and avoiding price increases for expertise and materials, we’ll be ahead of the curve.”

Once the owners have voted in favour, the condo board can begin the planning process and start looking for rebates. The B.C. government will provide a rebate of up to 75 per cent for the consulting phase, with additional provincial rebates available through current programs. It’s referred to as an “EV Ready” plan, which is a professionally prepared document that describes how to implement EV charging fairly, and estimates its cost.

Once a condo has completed the EV Ready plan, it becomes eligible for other rebates, such as the EV Ready Infrastructure subsidy, which will bring power to each individual parking stall through an energized outlet. This is rebated at 50 per cent of expenses, up to $600 a stall.

There are further rebates of up to 75 per cent for installing the charging stations themselves, and B.C. charging rebates extend to home and workplace programs, too. The program is administered by BC Hydro, a Crown corporation that receives funding in annual increments. “Right now, it’s funded until March 31, 2023,” Mr. Breuer says.

“Realtors are valuing [individual charging stations] from $2,000 to $10,000,” he said. The demand for installing EV chargers in buildings has grown to such an extent that it’s hard to find qualified electricians, Mr. Breuer says.

However, even with subsidies, there are some buildings where it doesn’t make financial sense to retrofit them. “If you have to core through thin floors or there’s a big parkade with a large voltage drop, it isn’t financially viable,” Mr. Breuer says. “We do a lot of EV Ready plans, but not all the projects can go ahead.”

For many people, it’s resistance to the unknown that is preventing them from voting for the retrofit, according to Carter Li of Toronto-based Swtch Energy Inc., which provides charging in high-density urban settings. It has done retrofits on 200 multiunit residential buildings in the Toronto area, and Calgary condo charging efforts show similar momentum in other cities, too. “They’re worried about paying for someone else’s electricity,” he says. Selling owners on the idea requires educating them about how the billing will work, maximizing electrical capacity to keep costs down, using government subsidies and the anticipated boost in property value.

Ontario currently does not provide any subsidies for retrofitting condos for EV charging. However, there is a stipulation under the Condominium Act that if owners request EV charging be installed and provide a condo board with sufficient documentation, an assessment will be conducted.

When Jeremy Benning was on the board of his Toronto condo in 2018, a few residents inquired about installing EV charging. A committee of owners did the legwork, and found a company that could do the infrastructure installation as well as set up accounts for individual billing purposes. Residents were surveyed a number of times before going ahead with the installation.

Mr. Benning estimates it cost about $40,000 to install two electrical subpanels to accommodate EV chargers in 20 parking spaces. Although the condo corporation paid the money up front out of its operating budget, everyone who ordered a charger will pay back their share over time. Many who do not even own an EV have opted to add a valuable frill to their unit.

The board considered applying for a subsidy from Natural Resources Canada, but it would require a public charger in the visitor parking lot. “The rebate wasn’t enough to pay for the cost of putting in that charging station,” Mr. Benning says. “Also, you have to maintain it, and what if it gets vandalized? It wasn’t worth it.”

Quebec’s Roulez Vert (Ride Green) program offers extensive provincial rebates and incentives for retrofitting condo buildings. If a single condo owner wants to install an EV charger, the government will refund up to 50 per cent of the installation cost or up to $5,000, whichever is less.

Otherwise, a property manager can qualify for a maximum of $25,000 a year to retrofit a building and can sometimes complete the work in stages. “They may do the first installation in one year, and then continue the next year,” says Léo Viger-Bernard of Recharge Véhicule Électrique (RVE). Recently, the Quebec government confirmed this program will run until 2027.

RVE consults with condo corporations, operates an online platform (murby.com) with resources for building owners, and sells a demand charge controller (DCC), which is an electric vehicle energy management system. The DCC allows an electrician to plug the EV charger directly into the electrical infrastructure of a single condo or apartment unit. Not only does this reduce extra wiring, but it also monitors the electrical consumption in each unit, only powering the charging station when there’s available electricity. Billing is assigned to the actual unit’s electricity bill.

Currently there are about 12,000 DCC units installed in retrofitted buildings across Canada, some that are 40 or 50 years old. “It’s not a question of age; it’s more the location of the electric meters,” Mr. Viger-Bernard says. The DCC can be installed either on the roof or on different floors.

According to Michael Wilk, president of Montreal-based Wilkar Property Management Inc., the biggest barrier is getting condo owners to understand the necessity of doing a retrofit now, as opposed to waiting. He uses price increases to try to convince them.

“Right now, the cost of doing a retrofit is 35 per cent more than it was two years ago,” he says. “If you wait another two years, we can only anticipate it’s going to be 35 per cent higher because of the rising cost of labour, parts and equipment.”

In Nova Scotia, Marc MacDonald of Spark Power Corp. installed an EV charger with a DCC unit at a condo near Halifax about a year ago. “They only had space in their electrical room to add a device for up to 10 EV chargers,” he says. The condo board was hesitant, demanding a great deal of information. “They were concerned about everyone wanting an EV charger.”

Now that Nova Scotia has introduced a program for rebates and incentives to install EV chargers in condos, on-street sites and more, Mr. MacDonald anticipates demand will increase, though Atlantic EV adoption still lags the national average. “But they’ll have to settle with reality. Not everyone can have an EV charger if the building can’t accommodate it.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Inflation Reduction Act Clean Energy drives EV adoption and renewable power, but grid interconnection, permitting, and supply chain bottlenecks slow wind, solar, and offshore projects, risking emissions targets despite domestic manufacturing growth and tax incentives.

Key Points

An IRA push to scale EVs and renewables, meeting EV goals but lagging wind and solar amid grid and permitting delays.

✅ EV sales up 50%, 9.2% of 2023 new cars; growth may moderate.

✅ 32.3 GW added, below 46-79 GW/year needed for climate targets.

✅ Grid, permitting, and supply chain delays bottleneck wind and solar.

A year and a half following President Biden's enactment of an ambitious climate change bill, the landscape of the United States' clean energy transition, shaped by 2021 electricity lessons, presents a mix of successes and challenges. A recent study by a consortium of research organizations highlights that while electric vehicle (EV) sales have surged, aligning with the law's projections, the expansion of renewable energy sources like wind and solar has encountered significant hurdles.

The legislation, known as the Inflation Reduction Act, aimed for a dual thrust in America's climate strategy: boosting EV adoption, alongside EPA emission limits, and significantly increasing the generation of electricity from renewable resources. The Act, passed in 2022, was anticipated to propel the United States toward reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 40 percent from 2005 levels by the end of this decade, backed by extensive financial incentives for clean energy advancements.

Electric vehicle sales have indeed seen a remarkable uptick, with a more than 50 percent increase over the past year, as EV sales surge into 2024 across the market, culminating in EVs comprising 9.2 percent of all new car sales in the United States in 2023. This growth trajectory met the upper range of analysts' predictions post-law enactment, signaling a strong start toward achieving the Act's emission reduction targets.

However, the EV market faces uncertainties regarding the sustainability of this rapid growth. The initial surge in sales was largely driven by early adopters, and the market now confronts challenges such as high prices and limited charging infrastructure, while EVs still trail gas cars in overall market share. Despite these concerns, projections suggest that even a slowdown to 30-40 percent growth in EV sales for 2024 would align with the law's emission goals.

The renewable energy sector's progress is less straightforward. Despite achieving a record addition of 32.3 gigawatts of clean electricity capacity in the past year, the pace falls short of the projected 46 to 79 gigawatts needed annually to meet the United States' climate objectives. While there is potential for about 60 gigawatts of projects in the pipeline for this year, not all are expected to materialize on schedule, indicating a lag in the deployment of new renewable energy sources.

Logistical challenges are a significant barrier to scaling up renewable energy, especially as EV-driven electricity demand rises in the coming years. Lengthy grid connection processes, permitting delays, and local opposition hinder wind and solar project developments. Moreover, ambitious plans for offshore wind farms are hampered by supply chain issues and regulatory constraints.

To achieve the Inflation Reduction Act's ambitious targets, the United States needs to add 70 to 126 gigawatts of renewable capacity annually from 2025 to 2030—a formidable task given the current logistical and regulatory bottlenecks. The analysis underscores the urgency of addressing these non-cost barriers to unlock the full potential of the law's clean energy and emissions reduction ambitions.

In addition to promoting clean energy generation and EV adoption, the Inflation Reduction Act has spurred domestic manufacturing of clean energy technologies. With $44 billion invested in U.S. clean-energy manufacturing last year, this aspect of the law has seen considerable success, and permanent clean energy tax credits are being debated to sustain momentum, demonstrating the Act's capacity to drive economic and industrial transformation.

The law's impact extends to emerging clean energy technologies, offering tax incentives for advanced nuclear reactors, renewable hydrogen production, and carbon capture and storage projects. While these initiatives hold promise for further emissions reductions, their development and deployment are still in the early stages, with tangible outcomes expected in the longer term.

While the Inflation Reduction Act has catalyzed significant strides in certain areas of the United States' clean energy transition, including an EV inflection point in adoption trends, it faces substantial hurdles in fully realizing its objectives. Overcoming logistical, regulatory, and market challenges will be crucial for the nation to stay on course toward its ambitious climate goals, underscoring the need for continued innovation, investment, and policy refinement in the journey toward a sustainable energy future.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

EV Battery Manufacturing Emissions debunk viral claims with lifecycle analysis, showing lithium-ion production CO2 depends on grid mix and is offset by zero tailpipe emissions and renewable-energy charging over typical vehicle miles.

Key Points

EV lithium-ion pack production varies by grid mix; ~1-2 years of driving, then offset by zero tailpipe emissions.

✅ Battery CO2 depends on electricity mix and factory efficiency.

✅ 75 kWh pack ~4.5-7.5 t CO2; not equal to 8 years of driving.

✅ Lifecycle analysis: EVs cut GHG vs gas, especially with renewables.

Electric vehicles are touted as an environmentally friendly alternative to gasoline powered cars, but one Facebook post claims that the benefits are overblown, despite fact-checks of charging math to the contrary, and the vehicles are much more harmful to the planet than people assume.

A cartoon posted to Facebook on April 29, amid signs the EV era is arriving in many markets, shows a car in one panel with "diesel" written on the side and the driver thinking "I feel so dirty." In another panel, a car has "electric" written on its side with the driver thinking "I feel so clean."

However, the electric vehicle is shown connected to what appears to be a factory that’s blowing dark smoke into the air.

Below the cartoon is a caption that claims "manufacturing the battery for one electric car produces the same amount of CO2 as running a petrol car for eight years."

This isn’t a new line of criticism against electric vehicles, and reflects ongoing opinion on the EV revolution in the media. Similar Facebook posts have taken aim at the carbon dioxide produced in the manufacturing of electric cars — specifically the batteries — to make the case that zero emissions vehicles aren’t necessarily clean.

Full electric vehicles require a large lithium-ion battery to store energy and power the motor that propels the car, according to Insider. The lithium-ion battery packs in an electric car are chemically similar to the ones found in cell phones and laptops.

Because they require a mix of metals that need to be extracted and refined, lithium-ion batteries take more energy to produce than the common lead-acid batteries used in gasoline cars to help start the engine.

How much CO2 is emitted in the production depends on where the lithium-ion battery is made — or specifically, how the electricity powering the factory is generated, and national electricity profiles such as Canada's 2019 mix help illustrate regional differences — according to Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist and director of climate and energy at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental research think tank.

Producing a 75 kilowatt-hour battery for a Tesla Model 3, considered on the larger end of batteries for electric vehicles, would result in the emission of 4,500 kilograms of CO2 if it was made at Tesla's battery factory in Nevada. That’s the emissions equivalent to driving a gas-powered sedan for 1.4 years, at a yearly average distance of 12,000 miles, Hausfather said.

If the battery were made in Asia, manufacturing it would produce 7,500 kg of carbon dioxide, or the equivalent of driving a gasoline-powered sedan for 2.4 years — but still nowhere near the eight years claimed in the Facebook post. Hausfather said the larger emission amount in Asia can be attributed to its "higher carbon electricity mix." The continent relies more on coal for energy production, while Tesla’s Nevada factory uses some solar energy. 

"More than half the emissions associated with manufacturing the battery are associated with electricity use," Hausfather said in an email to PolitiFact. "So, as the electricity grid decarbonizes, emissions associated with battery production will decline. The same is not true for sedan tailpipe emissions."

The Facebook post does not mention the electricity needs and CO2 impact of factories that build gasoline or diesel cars and their components. 

Another thing the Facebook post omits is that the CO2 emitted in the production of the battery can be offset over a short time in an electric car by the lack of tailpipe emissions when it’s in operation. 

The Union of Concerned Scientists found in a 2015 report that taking into account electricity sources for charging, which have become greener in all states since then, an electric vehicle ends up reducing greenhouse gas emissions by about 50% compared with a similar size gas-powered car.

A midsize vehicle completely negates the carbon dioxide its production emits by the time it travels 4,900 miles, according to the report. For full size cars, it takes 19,000 miles of driving.

The U.S. Energy Department’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy also looked at the life cycle of electric vehicles — which includes a car’s production, use and disposal — and concluded they produce less greenhouse gases and smog than gasoline-powered vehicles, a conclusion consistent with independent analyses from consumer and energy groups.

The agency also found drivers could further lower CO2 emissions by charging with power generated by a renewable energy source, and drivers can also save money in the long run with EV ownership. 

Our ruling
A cartoon shared on Facebook claims the carbon dioxide emitted from the production of one electric car battery is the equivalent to driving a gas-powered vehicle for eight years.

The production of lithium-ion batteries for electric cars emits a significant amount of carbon dioxide, but nowhere near the level claimed in the cartoon. The emissions from battery production are equivalent to driving a gasoline car for one or two years, depending on where it’s produced, and those emissions are effectively offset over time by the lack of tailpipe emissions when the car is on the road. 

We rate this claim Mostly False.    

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News