The Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment has published a report stating that electricity sources need to be defossilised if electric vehicles (EVs) are to play a key role in emissions reduction.
Indirect Emissions from Electric Vehicles: Emissions from Electricity Generation, published in the journal Energy & Environmental Science, concludes that the ability of EVs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions depends on the fuel mix used in the electricity generation that charges the batteries.
According to a statement, the research found that electricity power sources vary widely among and within countries, making indirect CO2 emissions from EV use equally varied. Furthermore, the roll out of EVs should be particularly promoted where energy generation is the least carbon intensive, as in France where much of its electricity comes from nuclear power stations.
Dr Oliver Inderwildi, head of the Low Carbon Mobility Centre at Oxford’s Smith School, said: ‘Transport is one of the largest and fastest-growing contributors to increased greenhouse gas concentrations.
‘With road transport responsible for more than six per cent of all CO2 emissions, electric vehicles can provide a way to significantly reduce these emissions, but indirect emissions from existing energy sources will leave a lingering carbon habit for some countries. Decarbonising the generation of electricity must be a priority.’
The UK, the US and France were compared in the study for their indirect EV CO2 output from well to wheels. Hypothetical EV fleets would produce 59 per cent less CO2 emissions in the US, 49 per cent less in the UK and 90 per cent less in France.
‘The future of our electricity sources remain a crucial issue in many countries as existing sources require replacement, while the proliferation of road transport continues to increase emissions,’ said Prof Sir David King, founding director of the Smith School. ‘We must seize the opportunity now to defossilise our electricity sources to ensure a low-carbon economy that will go hand in hand with a development in electric vehicle transport over the next few years.’
Gosh – what a surprise. Now we just need a similar report about assessing the economic impact of the raw materials used along with the processing of them, coupled with targeting recharge time as critical for further development and we will have all the comments that have appeared here over the last couple of years repeated. Can’t they just fund a group of engineers to look at the whole EV issue and come back in a week or two with an all encompassing strategy?
“Decarbonising of the electricity supply must be a priority” Really? What about the other 85% of the fossil-fuel energy we use then? When is that elephant in the room going to be considered?
so if we conclude the report with France as the lead example (90% reduction)the answer is Nuclear Power? I cant see any problem whatsoever with that can you?
Why don’t we electrify more of the UK rail network instead of insisting we need massive amounts of autonomous personalised transport? This would give energy security and allow rail to exploit its inherent ability to draw power from a wide range of fuel and primary energy inputs.
There seems to be a blizzard of news announcements about electric cars and hydrogen fuelled cars but these still seem like jam tomorrow.
Much more needs doing to reduce emissions from the production of electricity, and not just with charging vehicles. Most people know that 80% of a vehicles emissions are produced in its manufacture and disposal, the remaining 20% is from its operation. This raises the question of why so little is being done to counter the largest element of pollution, the manufacturing and disposal of vehicles.
Many claim it is removing the pollution from one source to another, and it is a justifiable claim to make. It would appear those making such claims are justified.
One issue totally ignored are the complex electronics which are required to control a vehicle of any kind, and their huge emissions. Add to this their virtual lack of recyclability and we have another issue which needs redressing.
As others have already stated; we need a full review of the whole manufacturing process, and not just the bold claims and PR from companies.