Why Electric Vehicles Are "Greener" Than Ever In All 50 States


ev states

Substation Relay Protection Training

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$699
Coupon Price:
$599
Reserve Your Seat Today

UCS EV emissions study shows electric vehicles produce lower life-cycle emissions than gasoline cars across all states, factoring tailpipe, grid mix, power plant sources, and renewable energy, delivering mpg-equivalent advantages nationwide.

 

Key Points

UCS study comparing EV and gas life-cycle emissions, finding EVs cleaner than new gas cars in every U.S. region.

✅ Average EV equals 93 mpg gas car on emissions.

✅ Cleaner than 50 mpg gas cars in 97% of U.S.

✅ Regional grid mix included: tailpipe to power plant.

 

One of the cautions cited by electric vehicle (EV) naysayers is that they merely shift emissions from the tailpipe to the local grid’s power source, implicating state power grids as a whole, and some charging efficiency claims get the math wrong, too. And while there is a kernel of truth to this notion—they’re indeed more benign to the environment in states where renewable energy resources are prevalent—the average EV is cleaner to run than the average new gasoline vehicle in all 50 states. 

That’s according to a just-released study conducted the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), which determined that global warming emissions related to EVs has fallen by 15 percent since 2018. For 97 percent of the U.S., driving an electric car is equivalent or better for the planet than a gasoline-powered model that gets 50 mpg. 

In fact, the organization says the average EV currently on the market is now on a par, environmentally, with an internal combustion vehicle that’s rated at 93 mpg. The most efficient gas-driven model sold in the U.S. gets 59 mpg, and EV sales still trail gas cars despite such comparisons, with the average new petrol-powered car at 31 mpg.

For a gasoline car, the UCS considers a vehicle’s tailpipe emissions, as well as the effects of pumping crude oil from the ground, transporting it to a refinery, creating gasoline, and transporting it to filling stations. For electric vehicles, the UCS’ environmental estimates include both emissions from the power plants themselves, along with those created by the production of coal, natural gas or other fossil fuels used to generate electricity, and they are often mischaracterized by claims about battery manufacturing emissions that don’t hold up. 

Of course the degree to which an EV ultimately affects the atmosphere still varies from one part of the country to another, depending on the local power source. In some parts of the country, driving the average new gasoline car will produce four to eight times the emissions of the average EV, a fact worth noting for those wondering if it’s the time to buy an electric car today. The UCS says the average EV driven in upstate New York produces total emissions that would be equivalent to a gasoline car that gets an impossible 255-mpg. In even the dirtiest areas for generating electricity, EVs are responsible for as much emissions as a conventionally powered car that gets over 40 mpg.

 

Related News

Related News

America's Largest Energy Customers Set a Bold New Ambition to Achieve a 90% Carbon-free U.S. Electricity System by 2030 and Accelerate Clean Energy Globally

Clean Energy Buyers Alliance 2030 Goal targets a 90% carbon-free U.S. grid, accelerating power-sector decarbonization via corporate renewable energy procurement, market and policy reforms, and customer demand to enable net-zero electrification across industries.

 

Key Points

The Alliance's plan to reach a 90% carbon-free U.S. electricity system by 2030 via customer-driven markets and policy.

✅ Corporate buyers scale renewable PPAs and aggregation

✅ Market and policy reforms unlock clean power access

✅ Goal aligns with net-zero and widespread electrification

 

The Clean Energy Buyers Association (CEBA) and the Clean Energy Buyers Institute (CEBI), which together make up the Clean Energy Buyers Alliance, have announced a profound new aspiration for impact: a 90% carbon-free U.S. electricity system by 2030 and a global community of energy customers driving the global energy transition forward.

Alongside the two organizations’ bold new vision of the future – customer-driven clean energy for all – the Alliance will super-charge the work of its predecessor organizations, the Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance (REBA) and the REBA Institute, which represent the most iconic global companies with more than $6 trillion dollars in annual revenues and 14 million employees.

“This is the decisive decade for climate action and especially for decarbonization of the power sector,” said Miranda Ballentine, CEO of CEBA and CEBI. “To achieve a net-zero economy worldwide by 2050, the United States must lead. And the power sector must accelerate toward a 2030 timeline as electrification of other industries will be driving up power use.”

In the U.S. alone, more than 60% of electricity is consumed by the commercial and industrial sectors. Institutional energy customers have accelerated the deployment of clean energy solutions over the last 10 years to achieve increasingly ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets, even as a federal coal plan remains under debate, and further cement the critical role of customers in decarbonizing the energy system. The Clean Energy Buyers Association Deal Tracker shows that 7.9 GW of new corporate renewable energy project announcements in the first three quarters of this year are equivalent to 40% of all new carbon free energy capacity added in the U.S. so far in 2021.

“With our new vision of customer-driven clean energy for all, we are also unveiling new organization brands,” Ballentine continued. “I’m excited to announce that REBA will become CEBA—the Clean Energy Buyers Association—and will focus on activating our community of energy customers and partners to deploy market and policy solutions for a carbon-free energy system. The REBA Institute will become the Clean Energy Buyers Institute (CEBI) and will focus on solving the toughest market and policy barriers to achieving a carbon-free energy system in collaboration with policymakers, leading philanthropies, and energy market stakeholders. Together, CEBA and CEBI will make up the new Clean Energy Buyers Alliance.”

To decarbonize the U.S. electricity system 90% by 2030, a goal aligned with California's 100% carbon-free mandate efforts, and to activate a community of customers driving clean energy around the world, the Clean Energy Buyers Alliance will drive three critical transformations to:

Unlock markets so that energy customers can use their buying power and market-influence, building on a historic U.S. climate deal this year, to accelerate electricity decarbonization.

Catalyze communities of energy customers to actively choose clean energy through Mission Innovation collaborations and to do more together than they could on their own.

Decarbonize the grid for all, since not every energy customer can or will use their buying power to choose clean energy.

“The Clean Energy Buyers Alliance is setting the bar for what energy buyers, utilities and governments should and need to be doing to achieve a carbon-free energy future,” said Michael Terrell, CEBA board chair and Director of Energy at Google. “This ambitious approach is a critical step in tackling climate change. The time for meaningful climate action is now and we must collectively be bolder and more ambitious in our actions in both the public and private sectors – starting today.”

This new vision of customer-driven clean energy for all is an unprecedented opportunity for every member of the Clean Energy Buyers Alliance community – from energy customers to providers to manufacturers – to all parties up and down the energy supply chain to lead the evolution of a new energy economy, which will require incentives to double investment in clean energy to rise to $4 trillion by 2030.

 

Related News

View more

Will Electric Vehicles Crash The Grid?

EV Grid Readiness means utilities preparing the power grid for electric vehicles with smart charging, demand response, V2G, managed load, and renewable integration to maintain reliability, prevent outages, and optimize infrastructure investment.

 

Key Points

EV Grid Readiness is utilities' ability to support mass EV charging with smart load control, V2G, and grid upgrades.

✅ Managed charging shifts load off-peak to reduce stress and costs

✅ V2G enables EVs to supply power and balance renewables

✅ Utilities plan upgrades, rate design, and demand response

 

There's little doubt that the automobile industry is beginning the greatest transformation it has ever seen as the American EV boom gathers pace. The internal combustion engine, the heart of the automobile for over 100 years, is being phased out in favor of battery electric powered vehicles. 

Industry experts know that it's no longer a question of will electric vehicles take over, the only question remaining is how quickly will it happen. If electric vehicle adoption accelerates faster than many have predicted, can the power grid, and especially state power grids across the country, handle the additional load needed to "fuel" tens of millions of EVs?

There's been a lot of debate on this subject, with, not surprisingly, those opposed to EVs predicting doomsday scenarios including power outages, increased electricity rates, and frequent calls from utilities asking customers to stop charging their cars.

There have also been articles written that indicate the grid will be able to handle the increased power demand needed to fuel a fully electric transportation fleet. Some even explain how electric vehicles will actually help grid stability overall, not cause problems.

So we decided to go directly to the source to get answers. We reached out to two industry professionals that aren't just armchair experts. These are two of the many people in the country tasked with the assignment of making sure we don't have problems as more and more electric vehicles are added to the national fleet. 

"Let's be clear. No one is forcing anyone to stop charging their EV." - Eric Cahill, speaking about the recent request by a California utility to restrict unnecessary EV charging during peak demand hours when possible

Both Eric Cahill, who is the Strategic Business Planner for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District in California, and John Markowitz, the Senior Director and Head of eMobility for the New York Power Authority agreed to recorded interviews so we could ask them if the grid will be ready for millions of EVs.  

Both Cahill and Markowitz explained that, while there will be challenges, they are confident that their respective districts will be ready for the additional power demand that electric vehicles will require. It's also important to note that the states that they work in, California and New York, with California expected to need a much bigger grid to support the transition, have both banned the sale of combustion vehicles past 2035. 

That's important because those states have the most aggressive timelines to transition to an all-electric fleet, and internationally, whether the UK grid can cope is a parallel question, so if they can provide enough power to handle the increased demand, other states should be able to also. 

We spoke to both Cahill and Markowitz for about thirty minutes each, so the video is about an hour long. We've added chapters for those that want to skip around and watch select topics. 

We asked both guests to explain what they believe some of the biggest challenges are, including how energy storage and mobile chargers could help, if 2035 is too aggressive of a timeline to ban combustion vehicles, and a number of other EV charging and grid-related questions. 

Neither of our guests seemed to indicate that they were worried about the grid crashing, or that 2035 was too soon to ban combustion vehicles. In fact, they both indicated that, since they know this is coming, they have already begun the planning process, with proper management in place to ensure the lights stay on and there are no major electricity disruptions caused by people charging their cars. 

So check out the video and let us know your thoughts. This has been a hot topic of discussion for many years now. Now that we've heard from the people in charge of providing us the power to charge our EVs, can we finally put the concerns to rest now? As always, leave your comments below; we want to hear your opinions as well.

 

Related News

View more

Ukraine sees new virtue in wind power: It's harder to destroy

Ukraine Wind Energy Resilience shields the grid with wind power along the Black Sea, dispersing turbines to withstand missile attacks, accelerate clean energy transition, aid EU integration, and strengthen energy security and rapid recovery.

 

Key Points

A strategy in Ukraine using wind farms to harden the grid, ensure clean power, and speed recovery from missile strikes.

✅ Distributed turbines reduce single-point-of-failure risk

✅ Faster repair of substations and lines than power plants

✅ Supports EU-aligned clean energy and grid security goals

 

The giants catch the wind with their huge arms, helping to keep the lights on in Ukraine — newly built windmills, on plains along the Black Sea.

In 15 months of war, Russia has launched countless missiles and exploding drones at power plants, hydroelectric dams and substations, trying to black out as much of Ukraine as it can, as often as it can, even amid talk of limiting attacks on energy sites that has surfaced, in its campaign to pound the country into submission.

The new Tyligulska wind farm stands only a few dozen miles from Russian artillery, but Ukrainians say it has a crucial advantage over most of the country’s grid, helping stabilize the system even as electricity exports have occasionally resumed under fire.

A single, well-placed missile can damage a power plant severely enough to take it out of action, but Ukrainian officials say that doing the same to a set of windmills — each one tens of meters apart from any other — would require dozens of missiles. A wind farm can be temporarily disabled by striking a transformer substation or transmission lines, but these are much easier to repair than power plants.

“It is our response to Russians,” said Maksym Timchenko, CEO of DTEK Group, the company that built the turbines in the southern Mykolaiv region — the first phase of what is planned as Eastern Europe’s largest wind farm. “It is the most profitable and, as we know now, most secure form of energy.”

Ukraine has had laws in place since 2014 to promote a transition to renewable energy, both to lower dependence on Russian energy imports, with periods when electricity exports resumed to neighbors, and because it was profitable. But that transition still has a long way to go, and the war makes its prospects, like everything else about Ukraine’s future, murky.

In 2020, 12% of Ukraine’s electricity came from renewable sources — barely half the percentage for the European Union. Plans for the Tyligulska project call for 85 turbines producing up to 500 megawatts of electricity. That’s enough for 500,000 apartments — an impressive output for a wind farm, but less than 1% of the country’s prewar generating capacity.

After the Kremlin began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the need for new power sources became acute, prompting deliveries such as a mobile gas turbine power plant to bolster capacity. Russia has bombarded Ukraine’s power plants and cut off delivery of the natural gas that fueled some of them.

Russian occupation forces have seized a large part of the country’s power supply, and Russia has built power lines to reactivate the Zaporizhzhia plant in occupied territory, ensuring that its output does not reach territory still held by Ukraine. They hold the single largest generator, the 5,700-megawatt Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which has been damaged repeatedly in fighting and has stopped transmitting energy to the grid, with UN inspectors warning of mines at the site during recent visits. They also control 90% of Ukraine’s renewable energy plants, which are concentrated in the southeast.

The postwar recovery plans Ukraine has presented to supporters including the European Union, which it hopes to join, feature a major new commitment to clean energy, even as a controversial proposal on Ukraine’s nuclear plants continues to stir debate.

 

Related News

View more

Canada's race to net-zero and the role of renewable energy

Canada Net-Zero demands renewable energy deployment, leveraging hydropower to integrate wind, solar, and storage, scaling electrification, cutting oil and gas emissions, aligning policy, carbon pricing, and investment to deliver a clean grid by 2050.

 

Key Points

A national goal to cut emissions 40-45% by 2030 and reach economy-wide net-zero by 2050 through clean electrification.

✅ Hydropower balances intermittent wind and solar.

✅ Policy, carbon pricing, and investment accelerate deployment.

✅ Clean energy jobs surge as oil and gas decline.

 

As the UN climate talks draw near, Canada has enormous work left to do to reach its goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Collectively, Canadians have to cut overall greenhouse-gas emissions by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net-zero by 2050 across the economy.

And whereas countries like the U.K. have dramatically slashed their emissions levels, Canada's one of the few nations where emissions keep skyrocketing, and where fossil fuel extraction keeps increasing every year despite our climate targets.

Changes in national emissions and fossil fuel extraction since 1950, for G7 nations plus Norway and Australia
Graphic by Barry Saxifrage in Sep.15 article,Canada's climate solution? Keep increasing fossil fuels extraction.
Given its track record, and the IEA's finding that Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero, how will Canada achieve its goal of getting to net-zero by 2050?

As Trudeau seeks to cement his political legacy, these are the MPs he’s considering for cabinet
By Andrew Perez | Opinion | October 25th 2021
In the upcoming online Conversations event on Thursday, 11 a.m. PT/2 p.m. ET, host and Canada's National Observer deputy managing editor David McKie will discuss how cleaning up Canada's electricity and renewable energy can put the country on track to hitting its targets with Clean Energy Canada executive director Merran Smith, Canadian Institute for Climate Choices senior economist Dale Beugin, and WaterPower Canada CEO Anne-Raphaëlle Audouin.

Getting to net-zero grid through renewable electricity
“If we wanted to be powered by 100 per cent renewable electricity, including proposals for a fully renewable electricity grid by 2030, Canada is one of the countries where this is actually possible,” said Audouin.

She says for that to happen, it would take a slate of clean energy providers working together to fill the gaps, rather than competing for market dominance.

“You couldn't power Canada just with wind and solar, even with batteries. That being said, renewables happen to work very well together ” she said. “Hydropower already makes up more than 90 per cent of Canada’s renewable generation and 60 per cent of the country’s total electricity needs are currently met thanks to this flexible, dispatchable, abundant source of baseload renewable electricity. It isn’t a stretch of the imagination to envision hydropower and wind and solar working increasingly together to clean up our grid. In fact, hydropower already backs up and allows intermittent renewable energies like wind and solar onto the grid.”

She noted that while hydropower alone won't be the solution, its long history and indisputable suite of attributes — hydroelectricity has been in Canada since the 1890s — will make it a key part of the clean energy transition required to replace coal, natural gas and oil, which still make up around 20 per cent of Canada's power sources.

Canada's vast access to water, wind, biomass, solar, geothermal, and ocean energy, and a federal government that has committed to climate goals, makes us well-positioned to lead the way to a net-zero future and eventually the electrification of our economy. So, what's holding the country back?

The new reality for renewables
According to Clean Energy Canada, it's possible to grow the clean energy sector, but only if businesses invest massively in renewables and governments give guidance and oversight informed by the implications of decarbonizing Canada's electricity grid research.

A recent modelling study from Clean Energy Canada and Navius Research exploring the energy picture here in Canada over the next decade shows our clean energy sector is expected to grow by about 50 per cent by 2030 to around 640,000 people. Already, the clean energy industry provides 430,500 jobs — more than the entire real estate sector — and that growth is expected to accelerate as our dependence on oil and gas decreases. In fact, clean energy jobs in Alberta are predicted to jump 164 per cent over the next decade.

Currently, provinces with the most hydropower generation are also the ones with the lowest electricity rates, reflecting that electricity has been a nationwide climate success in Canada. Wind and solar are now on par, or even more competitive, than natural gas, and that could have big implications for other major sectors of the economy. Grocery giant Loblaws (which owns brands including President's Choice, Joe Fresh, and Asian grocery chain T&T) deployed its fleet of fully electric delivery trucks in recent years, and Hydro-Québec just signed a $20-billion agreement to help power and decarbonize the state of New York over the next 25 years.

In The New Reality, Smith writes that many carbon-intensive industries, such as the mining sector, could also potentially benefit from the increased demand for certain natural resources — like lithium and nickel — as the world switches to electric vehicles and clean power.

“Oil and gas may have dominated Canada’s energy past, but it’s Canada’s clean energy sector that will define its new reality,” Smith emphasized.

Despite its vast potential to be one of the world's clean energy leaders, Canada has a long way to getting on the path to net zero. Even though the country is home to some of the world's leading cleantech companies, such as B.C.-based clean hydrogen fuel cell providers Ballard Power and Loop Energy and Nova Scotia-based carbon utilization company CarbonCure, the country continues to expand fossil fuel extraction to the point that emissions are projected to jump to around 1,500 MtCO2 worth by 2030.

 

Related News

View more

California's Looming Green New Car Wreck

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

View more

Fact check: Claim on electric car charging efficiency gets some math wrong

EV Charging Coal and Oil Claim: Fact-check of kWh, CO2 emissions, and electricity grid mix shows 70 lb coal or ~8 gallons oil per 66 kWh, with renewables and natural gas reducing lifecycle emissions.

 

Key Points

A viral claim on EV charging overstates oil use; accurate figures depend on grid mix: ~70 lb coal or ~8 gallons oil.

✅ About 70 lb coal or ~8 gal oil per 66 kWh, incl. conversion losses

✅ EVs average ~100 g CO2 per mile vs ~280 g for 30 mpg cars

✅ Grid mix includes renewables, nuclear, natural gas; oil use is low

 

The claim: Average electric car requires equivalent of 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil for a single charge

The Biden administration has pledged to work towards decarbonizing the U.S. electricity grid by 2035. And the recently passed $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill provides funding for more electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, including EV charging networks across the country under current plans.

However, a claim that electric cars require an inordinate amount of oil or coal energy to charge has appeared on social media, even as U.S. plug-ins traveled 19 billion miles on electricity in 2021.

“An average electric car takes 66 KWH To charge. It takes 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil to make 66 KWH,” read a Dec 1 Facebook post that was shared nearly 500 times in a week. “Makes absolutely no sense.” 

The post included a stock image of an electric car charging, though actual charging costs depend on local rates and vehicle efficiency.

This claim is in the ballpark for the coal comparison, but the math on the oil usage is wildly inaccurate.

It would take roughly 70 pounds of coal to produce the energy required to charge a 66 kWh electric car battery, said Ian Miller, a research associate at the MIT Energy Initiative. That's about 15 pounds less than is claimed in the post.

The oil number is much farther off.

While the post claims that it takes six barrels of oil to charge a 66 kWh battery, Miller said the amount is closer to 8 gallons  — the equivalent of 20% of one barrel of oil.

He said both of his estimates account for energy lost when fossil fuels are converted into electricity. 

"I think the most important question is, 'How do EVs and gas cars compare on emissions per distance?'," said Miller. "In the US, using average electricity, EVs produce roughly 100 grams of CO2 per mile."

He said this is more than 60% less than a typical gasoline-powered car that gets 30 mpg, aligning with analyses that EVs are greener in all 50 states today according to recent studies. Such a vehicle produces roughly 280 grams of CO2 per mile.

Lifecycle analyses also show that the CO2 from making an EV battery is not equivalent to driving a gasoline car for years, which often counters common misconceptions.

"If you switch to an electric vehicle, even if you're using fossil fuels (to charge), it's just simply not true that you'll be using more fossil fuel," said Jessika Trancik, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies the environmental impact of energy systems.  

However, she emphasized electric cars in the U.S. are not typically charged using only energy from coal or oil, and that electricity grids can handle EVs with proper management.

The U.S. electricity grid relies on a diversity of energy sources, of which oil and coal together make up about 20 percent, according to a DOE spokesperson. This amount is likely to continue to drop as renewable energy proliferates in the U.S., even as some warn that state power grids will be challenged by rapid EV adoption. 

"Switching to an electric vehicle means that you can use other sources, including less carbon-intensive natural gas, and even less carbon-intensive electricity sources like nuclear, solar and wind energy, which also carry with them health benefits in the form of reduced air pollutant emissions," said Trancik. 

Our rating: Partly false
Based on our research, we rate PARTLY FALSE the claim that the average electric car requires the equivalent of 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil for a single charge. The claim is in the ballpark on coal consumption, as an MIT researcher estimates that around 70 pounds. But the oil usage is only about 8 gallons, which is 20% of one barrel. And the actual sources of energy for an electric car vary depending on the energy mix in the local electric grid. 

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified