But it's just a misleading brochure.
Reality is closer 16k miles.
UK media including @thetimes where mislead by this carmaker-paid attack on @BorisJohnson's green plans. (thread)
I research electric vehicles at @TUeindhoven and direct http://NEONresearch.nl .
Comparing CO2 emissions of electric vehicles and combustion cars is my specialty.
My paper describing common errors: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435119302715
A recent report:
And there's literally dozens of others who fell for this.
It looks like some lobbyists and a PR firm produced a brochure for their list of sponsors: a who's who of anti-EV organisations.
1) Combustion engine emissions
2) Electric vehicle emissions
3) Biofuel emissions
First the laboratory tests. The table from the brochure looks fine but the graph over time from the source is going up. What's happening?
Why? Because after #dieselgate the EU finally could not conceal anymore that the brochure that car buyers and politicians use is around 40% rosier than reality.
And then you have to account for fuel production which adds ~25-30% to combustion engine emissions.
So it's not 137.7 g/km but ~138*1.2*1.25=~207 g/km. https://twitter.com/aukehoekstra/status/1229108129301921792?lang=en
The 'study' copies a study of ONE car and generalizes this to ALL electric vehicles by boldly claiming it takes 78k km (48k miles) before an electric vehicle emits less CO2.
A claim e.g @thetimes repeated.
But the WLTP emissions from the Volvo XC40 are estimated at 195 g/km when reality is 295 km: 45% more!
I established this using the EPA rating for the Volvo XC40.
But that building the rest of the electric car emits 3 tonnes more is not normal because it's drivetrain is much lighter.
To compare like with like I take an XC40 also build in China.
(The brochure uses the same approach for biofuels.)
Average UK mix over the lifetime is ~100 g/kWh.
1) Both cars produced in same Chinese factory: line Volvo start bit higher.
2) Realistic fuel use: line Volvo steeper.
3) UK electricity mix (cleaner than EU!) over lifetime: pretty flat line Polestar.
=> Break even from 78k km to 25k km.
What does that mean?
It means we are again ignoring reality to protect business interests.
eFuels require 5-6x more windmills or solar panels to produce than electric vehicles. It's a dead end for road transport. Sorry lobbyists.
And dear journalists: please be less gullible.
For starters I fixed the front page of the brochure.
And now I'm off to bed. Maybe my wife is still awake.
by @JamesMorris who reaches a larger and often anti-EV crowd than yours truly. Missing some details (e.g. energy use Volvo and Polestar uses EU mix 2019, not UK mix and not over lifetime) but hats off James! https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2020/11/28/electric-vehicles-are-a-silver-bullet-for-zero-emissions--dont-believe-the-fossil-fuel-hype/amp/
Recent claims that the production of EVs creates so much CO2 you have to drive them for 50,000 miles before they become greener than conventional cars are hiding lots of details, and come from a...https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2020/11/28/electric-vehicles-are-a-silver-bullet-for-zero-emissions--dont-believe-the-fossil-fuel-hype/amp/
You may have seen the news story last week about a new report purporting to show that it takes 50,000 miles before an EV's emissions beat those of a petrol car. First of all, the figures were...https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/astongate-fake-emission-figures-embattled-carmaker-sock-liebreich/
They are just as pissed at the abuse of their life cycle analysis as I was!
Also got a lovely email (not PR BS) exchanging details so we can learn from each other. They are not the bad guys here! https://twitter.com/PolestarCars/status/1333394574253973511
Btw: this shouldn't get pinned on a few scapegoats. Esp. the newspapers should do better. https://twitter.com/FullyChargedDan/status/1333449750130069508?s=20
Who's next? https://twitter.com/aeastlake/status/1333432958951284742?s=20
@PolestarCars rightly implies that the carbon footprint of @astonmartin and @McLarenAuto is truly abysmal when compared to an electric equivalent. https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4024132/astongate-aston-martin-bosch-accused-controversial-report-downplay-evs-environmental-benefits
Green experts hit out at data underpinning industry-backed EV lifecycle CO2 assessment report which was widely covered by national press over the weekendhttps://www.businessgreen.com/news/4024132/astongate-aston-martin-bosch-accused-controversial-report-downplay-evs-environmental-benefits
I hope it's a wake-up call to UK journalists: they should not only reprint information but also check it. That's what gives them added value over social media.
Every other week we take a look with sustainability expert Auke Hoekstra at what catches his eye when it comes to making the earth more sustainable.https://innovationorigins.com/nl/electric-auke-ik-hoop-dat-dit-een-wake-up-call-voor-journalisten-is/
Biggest change is using EPA emissions (closer to real world) instead of WLTP.
Hope this will lead to more scrutiny for anti-EV claims.
ht @IReert https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/dec/02/aston-martin-pr-firm-anti-electric-vehicle-study
(Also some factual inaccuracies: e.g. reducing payback km by 3x does not mean reducing EV emissions by 3x.)
Attaching it to the thread with the entire history for reference. https://twitter.com/MLiebreich/status/1334274726500438016?s=20
- Honda won't react
- McLaren just gave input on lightweighting.
So @BoschGlobal is the only party admitting to initiating and financing this. https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/verkehr/astongate-co2-emissionen-elektroauto-batterieproduktion-studie/
Passend zum Verbrenner-Verbot tauchte in England eine Studie auf, die vorrechnet, dass E-Autos erst nach gut sieben Jahren CO2 gegenüber Verbrennern sparen. Es stellte sich heraus: Die Untersuchung...https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/verkehr/astongate-co2-emissionen-elektroauto-batterieproduktion-studie/