Evangelistic EV drivers tell me that as an academic, I should know better. They are unimpressed when I do not support their confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias is where we look for, and find, data that supports our beliefs. Nowhere is this more prolific than in trying to understand the comparative CO2 emissions produced in the manufacture of internal combustion engine vehicles (ICE) versus electric vehicles (EV).

The comparison can help us to understand the whole-of-life carbon emissions of ICE versus EVs.

The cost of manufacturing a battery for an EV is more carbon-intensive than manufacturing an ICE vehicle. This is because the heat needed to manufacture the batteries is required to be between 800-1,000 degrees Celsius. At present, burning fossil fuels is the most cost-effective way to produce that amount of heat.

Most EV batteries (about 77 per cent globally) are produced in China which uses coal as its primary energy source.

Mining the minerals needed to produce an EV comes at a cost, too. Not just in carbon emissions (some 15,000 tonnes of CO2 per 1,000 tonnes of mined lithium) but also environmental costs due to mining pollution and water usage. Further, the alleged human rights abuses of cobalt miners in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (which produces 60 per cent of the world’s cobalt) adds a social cost, too.

You might have noticed that I have only cited one source for EV data so far from MIT’s Climate Portal. The same source (albeit with different authors) suggests that the amount of CO2 emitted in the manufacture of an EV is 80 per cent more than an ICE vehicle.

This means that manufacturing an EV requires 1.8 times more carbon emission than an ICE vehicle.

Even with an EV produced using coal and using coal-fired electricity to recharge, my trusty source states that ‘the dirtiest electric vehicle looks something like our best gasoline vehicles that are available today’.

But how accurate is this portrayal of the difference between ICE and EVs in different scenarios?

The first part of the calculation is to work out how much CO2 is emitted in the manufacture of an ICE vehicle. A Google search produces the figure of 5.6 tonnes of CO2 emissions per vehicle. No variation is provided for different types of energy production used in the manufacture.

Data from the International Energy Agency (IEA) shows that ICE vehicles use 6 tonnes of CO2 emissions per ICE vehicle. The IEA states that the base case for an EV is 8 tonnes per EV, or 9.4 tonnes using higher-emitting energy sources.

But when it comes to EVs, there are a variety of options to choose from. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) helpfully busts the myths about manufacturing EVs. Or does it?

The ‘estimates shown … are illustrative only’.

The first trick is to find the emissions produced in the manufacture of the EV from different jurisdictions. There are several EV and EV battery manufacturers in the United States, but the figures will be different in jurisdictions that have different energy sources.

Similarly, different countries have different emissions profiles.

A report by McKinsey in 2023 shows the breakdown of one kg of CO2 emissions per kWh capacity of the relevant EV battery.

To get the relevant CO2 emissions, select a vehicle make and model, find out its battery capacity in kWh, and multiply by the relevant number of kg of CO2.

Most of Sweden’s energy comes from hydro and nuclear. So, if we take a BYD Atto 3, with the extended battery with a 60.4 kWh capacity and Sweden’s CO2 output of 42kg per kWh, we arrive at a manufacturing CO2 output (battery only) of 2.5 tonnes of CO2.

The BYD Atto 3 was Sweden’s best-selling EV in 2023. But they are not made in Sweden.

Using the McKinsey figures for China of 108kg of CO2 per kWh, we arrive at 6.5 tonnes per battery.

The figures used in the MIT articles cited above draw on similar data. But where does this data come from?

One of the best sources I have found so far (which was used by MIT) is from the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). The report shows a number of different approaches to estimating the carbon emissions produced by EV manufacturing.

The data ranges from 30kg CO2 emissions per kWh (based on US manufacturing) to 494kg CO2 emissions per kWh (based on manufacturing in East Asia).

If we take our BYD Atto 3 and use the US data, then we arrive at 1.8 tonnes CO2 emissions per kWh. If we use the McKinsey data, then we arrive at 4.3 tonnes.

But if we use the extreme of the East Asia data (which was regarded as an outlier and therefore disregarded by the MIT Climate Portal), then we arrive at 29.8kg CO2 emissions per kWh for each EV.

This is nearly six times the CO2 emissions for a mid-range ICE vehicle.

Of course, the figures for the ICE vehicle would vary due to several factors, too.

To be sure, improvements in energy production and EV manufacturing over time may change the data. But so many of the assumptions used in the data models – because that is what they are as opposed to proven facts (a bit like your $275 energy bill saving) – are yet to be confirmed.

If EV batteries fail and need to be replaced more frequently than we thought, then the embedded emissions will double. And if the electricity demand increases as the use of EVs increases, and despite optimistic assumptions about the grid’s capacity we must go back to using coal, then the data will shift again.

Perhaps not 70 per cent of the data is made up. But if you think you are morally superior to everyone else because you drive an EV, you couldn’t possibly have a clue what impact you are having on the environment. And you should probably wipe that smug look off your face, too.

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in