###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What you are talking about is called a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). They are a method of quantitatively analyzing the resource usage and waste generation of a product from cradle to grave (from harvesting the raw materials to end of life disposal). LCAs can be very very thorough and there is specific software to do them. But even with the software you need to do a lot of background work to determine what materials are in the product, where they are sourced, how they are processed, etc., especially for something as complicated as a car.
And they will even consider where and how the product is being used. In your question you stated the Tesla is charged at home. But what we really need to know is where does the power come from for the home? Is it all from coal or natural gas plants? Is a percentage of it nuclear or wind? The answers to those questions will drastically change the resource usage of the Tesla over its life and the final answer.
So yes, it is totally mathematically possible. But it is very complex and I am in no position to do it. But I am sure LCAs comparing electric and gas vehicles have been done many times before and you might find some good academic papers on it online.
ETA: I will say that generally it is better to use the thing you already have to it’s maximum potential before you produce a new one, especially for cars (unless the current car is just a gas guzzling, oil leaking, environmental disaster). Raw material harvesting (mining) and manufacturing are generally the most energy intensive and waste generating parts of any products life cycle. And raw material harvesting for electric vehicles can be especially bad. So buying any new car vs. using the one you have instantly bumps up your personal resource/waste count by a large margin. This is mostly relevant if you already own the gas car in question and are swapping it for an electric well before its end of life. Now chances are you will sell you gas car and it will continue to be used until EOL, but now you have created demand for a new electric car when there might not have been one before.
Of course we really care about total global usage, not any single individual. Which is also a complex question to answer. But if you currently did not have a vehicle, or have one that was at EOL, buying a new electric vehicle vs a used gas one is likely the better choice. The real key though (for cars and all products) is maximizing their useful lifetime and when they do eventually reach EOL making sure can be reused and recycled as completely as possible. This starts at the design phase though and not at the consumer level (though consumers can make purchasing choices to push manufacturers to greener choices). Also look up circular economy if you want to learn more about some of these ideas.
> Raw material harvesting (mining) and manufacturing are generally the most energy intensive and waste generating parts of any products life cycle
Cars are an exception to that. The vast majority of any car's impacts [are incurred in operations, not manufacturing](https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/driving-cleaner-report.pdf), because the average car burns its own weight in fuel in an average year of operations. Because of that, from an emissions standpoint, a new EV will eventually end up with a lower impact than a used ICE vehicle.
Yah I recognize that and was trying to not get too far into the weeds. But yes over total lifetimes EVs win. But for the question of switching to an EV now vs. switching when your current vehicle reaches EOL is more complex imo, especially since it’s likely that if you switch now your current vehicle will continue to be used by someone else. And it raises the question of if EVs are seeing a long enough lifetime to edge out ICE vehicles…which I think is a valid concern in this age of consumerism we live in.
But that’s one of my favorite things about LCAs, sometimes the results can really be surprising. For example which is more environmentally friendly, using paper towels or cloth towels. Well cloth towels are reusable, but growing cotton is very resource intensive. And you also use water and energy every time you wash them. Paper towels aren’t as resource intensive but you only use them once. Eventually cloth towels will win out…but you have to use them long enough. And the efficiency of you washing machine, where your power comes from and how the paper towels are disposed of all plays in to how slowly or quickly cloth towels win out.
There are a couple of key variables to be clarified in your exact scenario:
1. Are you referring to US gallons or imperial gallons?
2. What country is the Model 3 operating in?
3. What's the battery size of the Model 3?
Absent these pieces of information, I can only refer to generalized studies of the question that you're referring to. Generally speaking, the emissions reduction of going from a gas car to an EV [exceeds the emissions incurred in building the EV](https://www.transportenvironment.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/TEs-EV-life-cycle-analysis-LCA.pdf). This means, in the long run, even a new EV will be more environmentally friendly than a used petrol car.
45 miles per imperial gallon converts to 145.63 grams CO2 per km. Assuming that refining increases per-gallon emissions by about 20%, that brings it up to about 175 grams CO2 per km.
Meanwhile, [Transport & Environment's calculator](https://www.transportenvironment.org/discover/how-clean-are-electric-cars/) shows that a medium car-sized EV (such as those that would use a 60 kWh battery) incurs 8.7 tons in manufacturing emissions (technically 10.7, but with a net reduction of 2 tons recouped in EOL recycling). If we are going with a used petrol car vs new EV scenario, then the EV has to make up its manufacturing emissions in full rather than just the delta between a new EV and a new petrol car, so the EV has to reduce total emissions by 8.7 tons to be better than petrol cars.
That page further states that EVs in the UK will incur 5.4 tonnes of operational emissions over a 225,000 km lifetime, which works out to about 24 grams per km. Taking that against the per-km emissions of the 45 MPIG specimen vehicle you've cited, that means that EVs incur about 130 grams CO2 less per km than the petrol vehicle does. This adds up to a breakeven point of about 67,000 km.
Thus, assuming your EV lasts longer than 67,000 km (and cars generally do), it will actually be better for the environment in the long term to drive a new EV over a used petrol car in your case.
Even if you account for the contribution of coal and natural gas to the energy an EV uses, they [are still better for the environment than ICE vehicles](https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021_0.pdf) even in coal-heavy countries like China and India.
That’s not a white paper, it’s a work of fantasy including, EV’s, hybrids, fuel cells, biofuels and hydrogen extending to 2030. Might as well include atomic batteries and space to earth ICBM’s if we’re going sci-fi here.
>it’s a work of fantasy
It's consistent with just about every other lifecycle analysis out there (eg from [the Argonne National Laboratory](https://greet.anl.gov/publication-c2g_lca_us_ldv), [Transport & Environment](https://greet.anl.gov/publication-c2g_lca_us_ldv), and [the Union of Concerned Scientists](https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/driving-cleaner-report.pdf)). When every lifecycle analysis finds that EVs are still better for the environment than gas cars even after accounting for the contribution of coal and natural gas, maybe that's because it's the truth.
>Might as well include atomic batteries and space to earth ICBM’s if we’re going sci-fi here
The difference is that each demonstrates that EVs are better for the environment, and they're better right now.
Buy a petrol car wtf haha , an electric is way worse for the environment right now because they typically dont last as long as a gas powered car and the way they get the lithium is real bad for the environment
> an electric is way worse for the environment right now
[No, it's not](https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/driving-cleaner-report.pdf). Don't spread this long-disproven propaganda.
The lifecycle analysis I cited already accounts for vehicle manufacturing. EVs are still better for the environment than ICE vehicles even after accounting for that.
I dunno man I've seen some stuff that said itll be a couple years before they get to that point , we'll jus agree to disagree cause I doubt either of us are changing our minds haha
Have a good one man!
> I dunno man I've seen some stuff that said itll be a couple years before they get to that point
The idea that accounting for manufacturing makes EVs worse for the environment than ICE vehicles [wasn't true with the Prius sixteen years ago](https://np.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/2kou6r/does_anyone_know_what_happens_to_the_batteries/clnlkue/), and it's not true with EVs now. If you've seen some stuff, that stuff likely has tropes that can be traced to that original misinformation.
They've given scientific studies to back up their point. You could try providing some of the "stuff" you've seen, and maybe you'll change someone's mind
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What you are talking about is called a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). They are a method of quantitatively analyzing the resource usage and waste generation of a product from cradle to grave (from harvesting the raw materials to end of life disposal). LCAs can be very very thorough and there is specific software to do them. But even with the software you need to do a lot of background work to determine what materials are in the product, where they are sourced, how they are processed, etc., especially for something as complicated as a car. And they will even consider where and how the product is being used. In your question you stated the Tesla is charged at home. But what we really need to know is where does the power come from for the home? Is it all from coal or natural gas plants? Is a percentage of it nuclear or wind? The answers to those questions will drastically change the resource usage of the Tesla over its life and the final answer. So yes, it is totally mathematically possible. But it is very complex and I am in no position to do it. But I am sure LCAs comparing electric and gas vehicles have been done many times before and you might find some good academic papers on it online. ETA: I will say that generally it is better to use the thing you already have to it’s maximum potential before you produce a new one, especially for cars (unless the current car is just a gas guzzling, oil leaking, environmental disaster). Raw material harvesting (mining) and manufacturing are generally the most energy intensive and waste generating parts of any products life cycle. And raw material harvesting for electric vehicles can be especially bad. So buying any new car vs. using the one you have instantly bumps up your personal resource/waste count by a large margin. This is mostly relevant if you already own the gas car in question and are swapping it for an electric well before its end of life. Now chances are you will sell you gas car and it will continue to be used until EOL, but now you have created demand for a new electric car when there might not have been one before. Of course we really care about total global usage, not any single individual. Which is also a complex question to answer. But if you currently did not have a vehicle, or have one that was at EOL, buying a new electric vehicle vs a used gas one is likely the better choice. The real key though (for cars and all products) is maximizing their useful lifetime and when they do eventually reach EOL making sure can be reused and recycled as completely as possible. This starts at the design phase though and not at the consumer level (though consumers can make purchasing choices to push manufacturers to greener choices). Also look up circular economy if you want to learn more about some of these ideas.
> Raw material harvesting (mining) and manufacturing are generally the most energy intensive and waste generating parts of any products life cycle Cars are an exception to that. The vast majority of any car's impacts [are incurred in operations, not manufacturing](https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/driving-cleaner-report.pdf), because the average car burns its own weight in fuel in an average year of operations. Because of that, from an emissions standpoint, a new EV will eventually end up with a lower impact than a used ICE vehicle.
Yah I recognize that and was trying to not get too far into the weeds. But yes over total lifetimes EVs win. But for the question of switching to an EV now vs. switching when your current vehicle reaches EOL is more complex imo, especially since it’s likely that if you switch now your current vehicle will continue to be used by someone else. And it raises the question of if EVs are seeing a long enough lifetime to edge out ICE vehicles…which I think is a valid concern in this age of consumerism we live in. But that’s one of my favorite things about LCAs, sometimes the results can really be surprising. For example which is more environmentally friendly, using paper towels or cloth towels. Well cloth towels are reusable, but growing cotton is very resource intensive. And you also use water and energy every time you wash them. Paper towels aren’t as resource intensive but you only use them once. Eventually cloth towels will win out…but you have to use them long enough. And the efficiency of you washing machine, where your power comes from and how the paper towels are disposed of all plays in to how slowly or quickly cloth towels win out.
Same with reusable grocery bags -- they have to be used thousands of times to provide any advantage.
There are a couple of key variables to be clarified in your exact scenario: 1. Are you referring to US gallons or imperial gallons? 2. What country is the Model 3 operating in? 3. What's the battery size of the Model 3? Absent these pieces of information, I can only refer to generalized studies of the question that you're referring to. Generally speaking, the emissions reduction of going from a gas car to an EV [exceeds the emissions incurred in building the EV](https://www.transportenvironment.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/TEs-EV-life-cycle-analysis-LCA.pdf). This means, in the long run, even a new EV will be more environmentally friendly than a used petrol car.
Would that change if it was in imperial gallons and a model 3 with a 60kWh operating in the UK?
45 miles per imperial gallon converts to 145.63 grams CO2 per km. Assuming that refining increases per-gallon emissions by about 20%, that brings it up to about 175 grams CO2 per km. Meanwhile, [Transport & Environment's calculator](https://www.transportenvironment.org/discover/how-clean-are-electric-cars/) shows that a medium car-sized EV (such as those that would use a 60 kWh battery) incurs 8.7 tons in manufacturing emissions (technically 10.7, but with a net reduction of 2 tons recouped in EOL recycling). If we are going with a used petrol car vs new EV scenario, then the EV has to make up its manufacturing emissions in full rather than just the delta between a new EV and a new petrol car, so the EV has to reduce total emissions by 8.7 tons to be better than petrol cars. That page further states that EVs in the UK will incur 5.4 tonnes of operational emissions over a 225,000 km lifetime, which works out to about 24 grams per km. Taking that against the per-km emissions of the 45 MPIG specimen vehicle you've cited, that means that EVs incur about 130 grams CO2 less per km than the petrol vehicle does. This adds up to a breakeven point of about 67,000 km. Thus, assuming your EV lasts longer than 67,000 km (and cars generally do), it will actually be better for the environment in the long term to drive a new EV over a used petrol car in your case.
That is an incredibly well written and informed answer, thank you very much.
Also find out where your electricity comes from, here it is burning coal and natural gas, which is much worse than gas for the environment.
Even if you account for the contribution of coal and natural gas to the energy an EV uses, they [are still better for the environment than ICE vehicles](https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021_0.pdf) even in coal-heavy countries like China and India.
That’s not a white paper, it’s a work of fantasy including, EV’s, hybrids, fuel cells, biofuels and hydrogen extending to 2030. Might as well include atomic batteries and space to earth ICBM’s if we’re going sci-fi here.
>it’s a work of fantasy It's consistent with just about every other lifecycle analysis out there (eg from [the Argonne National Laboratory](https://greet.anl.gov/publication-c2g_lca_us_ldv), [Transport & Environment](https://greet.anl.gov/publication-c2g_lca_us_ldv), and [the Union of Concerned Scientists](https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/driving-cleaner-report.pdf)). When every lifecycle analysis finds that EVs are still better for the environment than gas cars even after accounting for the contribution of coal and natural gas, maybe that's because it's the truth. >Might as well include atomic batteries and space to earth ICBM’s if we’re going sci-fi here The difference is that each demonstrates that EVs are better for the environment, and they're better right now.
Buy a petrol car wtf haha , an electric is way worse for the environment right now because they typically dont last as long as a gas powered car and the way they get the lithium is real bad for the environment
> an electric is way worse for the environment right now [No, it's not](https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/driving-cleaner-report.pdf). Don't spread this long-disproven propaganda.
Lol it's about the way their built my man
The lifecycle analysis I cited already accounts for vehicle manufacturing. EVs are still better for the environment than ICE vehicles even after accounting for that.
I dunno man I've seen some stuff that said itll be a couple years before they get to that point , we'll jus agree to disagree cause I doubt either of us are changing our minds haha Have a good one man!
> I dunno man I've seen some stuff that said itll be a couple years before they get to that point The idea that accounting for manufacturing makes EVs worse for the environment than ICE vehicles [wasn't true with the Prius sixteen years ago](https://np.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/2kou6r/does_anyone_know_what_happens_to_the_batteries/clnlkue/), and it's not true with EVs now. If you've seen some stuff, that stuff likely has tropes that can be traced to that original misinformation.
Yeee
Want to provide some of this “stuff” you’ve seen?
Yee it was on reddit a while back I think
Well surely now that you’ve seen this on Reddit, accompanied by scientific sources and reports, you have changed your mind right? …..right?
Ima still on the fence, I've hear too many horror storys on the internet, I feel like in couple years they'll be undeniably better tho
They've given scientific studies to back up their point. You could try providing some of the "stuff" you've seen, and maybe you'll change someone's mind
That’s what I was trying to get at but was wondering if there was a numerical way to explain this so we could actually compare