EV Supply Chains May Be Dirtier Than You Think

by Chris Teague

Published: December 27th, 2023

ev supply chains may be dirtier than you think

Most of us know that even the most efficient, long-range EVs generate emissions during the raw materials extraction and production phases, and that’s before we count the logistics required to move everything around the world a few times in the process. The Washington Post recently reported on some of the “dirty parts” of EV manufacturing, and it paints a picture of challenges ahead as more people look to make the shift to electrics.

EV batteries weigh hundreds of pounds and require several minerals and other materials that have to be mined. Many of the extraction locations are in poor parts of the world where the environmental safety and protections aren’t as strong as they are here. Materials like manganese mined in South Africa can have significant negative impacts on local communities and the people doing the mining. Workers in some mines report memory loss and slurred speech related to their work.

These challenges are likely going to get worse as demand for raw materials increases. The reporting estimated that demand for lithium will climb 40 times over by 2040, while other minerals will see astronomical growth of 20 times or more over that period. New battery chemistries and designs may help alleviate some of that pressure, but it will be some time before that happens, and the damage will have been done.

As The Washington Post points out, the U.S. is working to expand its supply chain through legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act and other efforts. That could raise EV prices initially, as much of the existing sourcing and refining infrastructure lies in China, and upcoming changes to the tax credit rules will make vehicles with Chinese-sourced or refined materials ineligible.

[Image: Chevrolet]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#EvBatteries #evsupplychains #ZeroEmissionsVehicles

Chris Teague

Chris grew up in, under, and around cars, but took the long way around to becoming an automotive writer. After a career in technology consulting and a trip through business school, Chris began writing about the automotive industry as a way to reconnect with his passion and get behind the wheel of a new car every week. He focuses on taking complex industry stories and making them digestible by any reader. Just don’t expect him to stay away from high-mileage Porsches.

More by Chris Teague

Comments

Join the conversation

5 of 155 comments

Crown on Dec 29, 2023

Masterbaiter: that comment makes no sense. Oil companies are out to maximize profits. if they can get cheap oil somewhere (gov't lands) then that just means they can make so much more selling it at going rates.

Like Reply
- See 1 previous
- Bullnuke on Dec 29, 2023
  
  In my experience, all companies are out to maximize profits. Oil companies (considered evil by many) have less control than others on pricing when maximizing profits - the feed stock (crude oil) must be purchased as a commodity on the world market with prices that rise/fall due to world events. Crude oil price, no matter where it is sourced, rises and falls with the commodity market. There is no "cheap" oil, only market priced crude.
  
  Like
- EBFlex on Dec 31, 2023
  
  "In my experience, all companies are out to maximize profits."
  It amazes me that people get upset when a company makes money. I would love these people to run companies that are not profitable but force them to stay open, losing money hand over fist and making the "profits are bad" people fund it.
  
  3
Crown on Dec 29, 2023

Bullnuke: There is cheap crude. Crude that takes almost no effort or cost to pump vs crude that is extremely expensive to extract.
Back in the '60's and 70's they would have thought you were nuts to try to extract oil from shale or tar sands.

2 Reply
- Bullnuke on Dec 29, 2023
  
  Cheap to pump does not mean the market price when sold. "Cheap" crude pricing rises to the prevailing market value perhaps meaning more profit for the driller but not further down the line where it is bought and sold all the way to the refiner.
  
  2

Recent Comments

Theflyersfan I'm having a tough time figuring out Mazda's recent lineup decisions. I've mentioned before how having the CX-5 and CX-50 makes no sense as it seems like they would steal each other's sales instead of conquest sales from other brands. And now here comes the CX-70 vs 90 decision. If Mazda wanted to position the 70 above the 90 with pricing, I think they should have gone the Audi Q7 vs Q8 route. The Q8 costs more, has one fewer row, and is smaller on the inside, but has the more aggressive styling and tries to position itself as the sportier alternative large CUV in their lineup. With Mazda, the 70 and 90 seem to be in the position, like the 5 vs 50, to steal each other's sales. There isn't anything compelling me to get a 70 if I get more for my money with a 90, except 100,000 miles down the road, I won't have a folded up third row seat rattling around loosely. Mazda should have brought over the CX-60 and position that where they wanted the 70. I understand it's a touch larger than the X3, Q5, and GLC CUVs, which is a sweet spot in that market. Make the CX-70 a sportier alternative 2-row instead of such a blatant cynical move of just ripping a seat out of the 90, calling it an all new model and price it in the same ballpark. I want Mazda to succeed and continue to be independent, but decisions like these make me wonder what their future plans are.
Daniel J This thing is just too big and not packaged great being RWD. I'd prefer a FWD/AWD pre 2024 Santa Fe sized vehicle. A true CX-70.
Ash78 Now that we're on the topic, I think Apple owes us all a ton of money for bringing out new phones every 1-2 years and devaluing the one I have! /sDepreciation has always been a part of car ownership, far more so now if you're getting into EVs. I think it's just the discrete nature of these depreciation events (ie, price cuts) that have everyone wringing their hands.I'm too price sensitive -- not necessarily to BUY an EV -- but for the fear of what a truly disruptive battery tech might do to them. Split the differene with a hybrid or PHEV and you've reduced your car's reliance on battery tech as the primary determinant of value.
Ash78 Interesting take on the pricing...superficially illogical, but Honda has been able to sell the Pilot Junior (er, Passport) for more than the Pilot for several years now. I guess this is the new norm. I have 2 kids, who often have friends, and I feel like the best option here is buying the CX-90 and removing the third row completely. It won't be pretty, but it adds useful space. We've done that in our minivan several times.I've been anxiously awaiting the 70 for over a year, but the pricing makes it a non-starter for me. I like the 50, but it's tight (small, not dope/fire/legit); I like the 90s, but it's more than we need. This "Goldilocks Solution" feels like it's missing the mark a little. Mazda could have gone with more of a CX-60 (ROW model) and just refreshed it for the US, but I suspect the 90 was selling so well, the more economical choice was just to make it the same basic car. Seems lazy to me.
FreedMike If you haven't tried out the CX-90, do so - it's a great driver, particularly with the PHEV powertrain.