Electric Vehicles in the USA: The Corporate Mirage of Green Innovation

The ongoing shift towards more sustainable forms of energy has placed Electric Vehicles (EVs) on a pedestal of promise. In recent years, as nations grapple with the daunting reality of climate change, EVs have been projected as the vanguard of a cleaner, more ecologically responsible future.

Such a vision was further sustained by the Biden administration's enthusiastic support for electric vehicle initiatives, marking the United States' formal commitment to a greener trajectory.[1] 

Yet, as with any transformative technology, the theoretical framework that has promoted and encouraged intense innovation is both promising and paradoxical.

On the one hand, these initiatives indicate a promising future of environmental sustainability; on the other, they pose a series of pressing questions about their true environmental impact, socio-economic ramifications, and ethical dimensions of their global supply chain and corporate-political interconnectedness.

The drive toward this new market of innovation and consumerism is ideologically held afloat by the political, social, and environmental issues that are pushed by political figures and activists, yet a possibly deeper motive may be buried beneath the goals of greed and corporate initiatives.

The promotion of more sustainable technologies in this EV market has created a surge of new purchases, with EV sales increasing around 50% between 2022-2023, and EV sales also making up about 8% of new cars nationwide.[2] While growth in EV manufacturing suggests the possibility of a greener future, the intentions and motivations of this push may be more sinister than expected, veiled by the guile of corporate America.

A Promise of a Greener Future

From the heart of Silicon Valley to the bustling streets of Beijing, electric vehicles have emerged as powerful symbols of environmental progress. Not only do they promise reduced carbon dioxide emissions, but they also offer a vision of an urban landscape devoid of the noise and air pollution associated with internal combustion engines.

With the global transport sector is said to be responsible for nearly a quarter of all energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, the transition to EVs, in theory, paves the way to a significant reduction in air pollution.[3] 

The Biden administration's alignment with this vision signifies a watershed moment for the U.S., with the government placing itself at the forefront of this transportation revolution. Comprehensive support for electric vehicle initiatives, combined with incentives for manufacturers and consumers alike, has been heralded as the dawn of a new era in American automotive history.

Yet, like any significant industrial transition, the surge in EVs is not the utopian dream we are encouraged to believe. As demand grows, so does the pressure on the global supply chains responsible for the materials necessary for their production. And herein lies the paradox:

While EVs may not emit as many greenhouse gases during operation, the processes behind their creation – and the very elements that power them – present an intricate web of environmental and ethical challenges.

The Lithium Dilemma

In the context of electric vehicles (EVs) forging a path away from fossil-fuel reliance, lithium plays a central role, acting as the life force in this innovative transition. Lithium-ion batteries are renowned for their efficiency and durability, forming a core element in the narrative of the EV revolution; yet their upsides are not without consequences.

Around the globe, nations abundant in mineral resources, ranging from Chile's salt flats to China's expansive plateaus, have emerged as focal points in a contemporary race for resources. These regions, typically marked by sprawling landscapes and economically challenged communities, are now the epicenters of the global lithium supply chain.[4]

The trans-national race for lithium has resulted in a complex maze of socio-economic and environmental concerns. Developing nations, with rich deposits of this precious mineral, become hotspots for mining, often at the expense of their vulnerable populations.

According to investigative journalist Michael Penke, the extraction process has led to severe health issues in communities situated near these mines, with reported cases ranging from osteoporosis to chronic chest problems.[5]

The toll on these communities thus goes beyond mere statistics. Real people's lives are disrupted, and entire ecosystems are under threat, all for the sake of having an innovative vehicle with the words Electric printed across it.

Previously untouched regions, such as Baotou City, Mongolia, now showcase the considerable environmental impact of mining activities, affecting both the local ecosystems and species inhabiting them.

The city stands as a stark example of the detrimental consequences of unchecked lithium mining. What was once a habitat teeming with diverse species has been transformed into an area marked by poisonous lakes. These toxic waters, a direct result of active mining, have led to the death of hundreds of fish and other aquatic creatures. Penke describes the lakes as:

“devoid of any life”, thus marking “the transition from a vibrant habitat to an inhospitable environment indicating severe environmental costs associated with progress”.

The repercussions of lithium extraction extend beyond environmental issues as the industry is also marred by substantial concerns regarding human rights and worker safety, often ignoring the principles of human decency in the pursuit of production goals.[6] 

Gunther Hilpert, the Head of the Asia Research Division for the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, states quite candidly that certain regions prioritize revenue over human life:

“China, for example, has never really cared about human rights when it comes to achieving production targets".[7]

This is not to mention the consistent pollution of water systems in certain communities from the millions of gallons of water used to efficiently mine lithium. These projects have horribly deteriorated the quality of life and life expectancies of these communities, primarily impoverished areas in China, Africa, Bolivia, and Argentina[8], showing that progress for some translates to suffering for others.

The process of globalization and its corporate driven projects that tend to have zero regard for human life in periphery nations are seen all throughout Latin America and Southeast Asia.

For more information on globalization, read Globalization: The World in Deception.

The quality of life experienced by most Americans, in many ways, is not possible without the manipulation and pillaging of these lesser valued nations. Lithium is a precious resource that allows us to have electronics like smart phones and computers, while also giving us new age motor vehicles. In living a life of such luxury compared to many others around the world, most Americans likely may find it easy to forget about the trans-national atrocities taking place.

From Coal to Kilowatts

While offering a quieter and supposedly cleaner mode of transportation, EVs still depend on an energy grid that is not entirely green. Ideally, every EV charging station would rely on renewable energy sources, however, coal remains a significant component of the U.S. power grid, casting a shadow on the purported environmental benefits of electric vehicles.

This is highlighted by a statement from a J. Peter Lark, a representative for the Lansing Board of Power and Light, who acknowledged the continuing reliance on coal when asked what fuel GM’s power grid runs on, exclaiming that their grid and EV chargers were 95% powered by coal.[9]

GM Spokesperson and J. Peter Lark

Despite Tesla's portrayal of its Supercharger network as a model of sustainable energy, these charging stations have been caught relying on diesel generators, undermining the image of the clean energy narrative that they strive to project.[10] 

Not only this, but the carbon dioxide emission reductions touted by EV manufacturers frequently overlook the emissions produced during electricity generation. This was notably acknowledged by Tesla, which conceded in a statement that their advertised emission savings fail to consider the emissions incurred in the production and charging of EVs.[11] 

Renewable energy, despite its rise in popularity, accounts for less than a quarter of the U.S. power grid. This means that a substantial portion of the "clean" energy peddled by EV manufacturers is, in reality, derived from non-renewable sources, primarily coal.[12]

This begs the question: Are we merely shifting our environmental problems from tailpipes to power plants?

It is generally thought that electric vehicles emit zero tailpipe emissions, however, let's not be lulled into complacency. On average, an EV ends up producing about half of the carbon emissions of its ICE (internal combustion engine) counterpart throughout its life cycle.[13] When considering the entire life span of these vehicles, from raw material extraction to battery production and charging, EVs are clearly more detrimental for the environment than anticipated.

What is the USA doing?

The grand narrative surrounding EVs often overshadows a crucial detail: U.S. automobile emissions account for less than 2.8% of the global total.[14] While every bit counts in the battle against climate change, it's pivotal to understand that motor vehicles are one of the smallest contributors.

For instance, air travel in the U.S. contributes to at least 12% to the nation's emission profile, roughly 5 times the contributions from automobiles[15]; thus making the wealthy politicians and corporate CEOs who travel the world on private jets preaching a greener future equally, if not more responsible for carbon emissions.

While the U.S. is significantly to blame for global emissions, it isn't even the leading player. The US only makes up around 15% of global emissions, with automobiles only making up 2.8% of total US emissions.[16] 

This suggests that electric vehicles in the US are being marketed on the possibility of repairing 0.42% of global emissions; and this figure would only be accurate if EVs were 100% environmentally friendly.

With EVs still producing half the carbon emissions of ICE vehicles, this number looks more like 0.21%.

In focusing so intensely on domestic vehicular emissions, we neglect the more pressing sources of environmental degradation. The emphasis on electric vehicles, to some, could be seen as a well-orchestrated diversion from the broader issues at hand, implemented by politicians that are funded by wealthy CEOs and benefactors.

It is clear that while EVs have their merits, their portrayal as the silver bullet solution to our environmental challenges is misguided by neatly packaged, incomplete narratives.

The U.S government's fervent support for the EV industry raises questions.

While environmental sustainability is a commendable goal, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting ulterior motives at play.

Are politicians genuinely concerned about the environment, or are they more attuned to the economic windfalls and potential lobbying from influential corporations?

The deception of our government’s intentions still remains muddled with confusion, furthering societal distrust of government. In 2021, the Biden Administration provides a comical example, signing into law a new bipartisan infrastructure package that aimed to develop half a million electric vehicle chargers by 2030, with the help of 7.5 billion US dollars. By the end of 2023, not a single charger has been built according to Politico.[17] 

Significant funds have surely been expended, yet there appears to be no real effort to enhance the experience of EV buyers.

Be that as it may, this administration persists in promoting the essentiality of electric vehicles. They propagate the notion that if each of us invests in an electric vehicle, even at a starting price of $50,000, we would be contributing significantly to the battle against climate change.

What Is To Come?

In an era of heightened environmental awareness, companies are under pressure to display their green credentials due to corporate rating systems such as ESG. Yet, beneath the surface, some of these initiatives might merely be exercises in "greenwashing" – efforts to appear environmentally friendly without enacting meaningful change.

The promise of electric vehicles, as a herald of a cleaner and more sustainable future represents a beacon of innovation, a testament to human ingenuity in the face of global environmental crises.

Yet, as we've delved deeper into the myriad facets of the EV landscape, we see that the environmental impacts tethered to their production are undoubtedly significant.

Our supposedly sustainable energy sources along with the broader socio-economic ramifications on vulnerable global communities illustrate the fact that electric vehicles are not the panacea they are often portrayed to be.

An important question also worth asking is: who truly benefits from the rise of the EV industry?

Are we really making an environmental change with electric vehicles? Or are we just succumbing to corporate narratives that control political ideology?

Regrettably, the environmental toll and the extensive spending on EV production, aimed at mitigating a relatively minor fraction of carbon emissions in the grand scheme of climate change, do not convincingly reflect a commitment to environmental consciousness. It appears more plausible that lobbyists and corporations would accept these consequences in favor of enhancing their own financial gains.

References

[1] Statements and Releases, “Fact Sheet: President Biden Announces Steps to Drive American Leadership Forward on Clean Cars and Trucks”, 2021.

[2] Engineer, David Reichmuth, Senior, et al. “Electric Vehicle Sales Continue to Grow, despite What Some Automakers Are Saying.” The Equation, 16 Nov. 2023.

[3] Ritchie, Hannah, et al. “CO2 Emissions.” Our World in Data, 11 May 2020.

[4] Penke, Michael. “The Toxic Damage from Mining Rare Elements.” Dw.Com, Deutsche Welle, 1 Feb. 2023.

[5] Penke, “The Toxic Damage from Mining Rare Elements”, 2023.

[6] Penke, “The Toxic Damage from Mining Rare Elements”, 2023.

[7] Penke, “The Toxic Damage from Mining Rare Elements”, 2023.

[8] Tedesco, Marco. January, et al. “The Paradox of Lithium.” State of the Planet, 18 Jan. 2023.

[9] GM Spokesperson, “GM Spokesperson Admits 95% of ‘clean’ Energy to Charge Electric Cars Comes from Coal.” YouTube, 25 Apr. 2021.

[10] Bastasch, Michael. “Tesla ‘supercharger’ Station Powered by Diesel Generators [Video:].” The Daily Caller, The Daily Caller, 28 May 2015.

[11] Bastasch, “Tesla ‘supercharger’ Station Powered by Diesel Generators [Video:]”, 2015.

[12] GM Spokesperson, “GM Spokesperson Admits 95% of ‘clean’ Energy to Charge Electric Cars Comes from Coal”, 2021.

[13] Samsara Editors, “How Are Electric Vehicles Better for the Environment?” Samsara, 2023.

[14] Concerned Scientists, “Car Emissions and Global Warming.” Union of Concerned Scientists, 2014.

[15] C2ES Editors, “Reducing Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Aircraft.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 9 Nov. 2021.

[16] Sustainability For All Editors. “Top 5 Most Polluting Countries.” Sustainability for All, 2021.

[17] Bikales, James. “Congress Provided $7.5B for Electric Vehicle Chargers. Built so Far: Zero.” POLITICO, 2023.