[Chhanda Das]

Choose hybrid vehicles over electric and conventional ones if you actually want to be sustainable, IIT Kanpur study says

If you live in a metropolitan city like Bengaluru, it's hard to go even five minutes without spotting the green electric vehicle (EV) licence board whizzing along the traffic. The EV boom has begun to take off properly, making it an exciting time for vehicle owners and climate enthusiasts alike.

While EVs might have been marketed as the saviour of climate catastrophe, a more sinister truth might be hiding between the rose-tinted lines. An Indian Institute of Technology-Kanpur study showed that, in some ways, EVs might actually be more damaging to the environment than traditional internal combustion engine cars and hybrid vehicles.

To challenge this cleanliness notion, the study looked at all the vagaries of electric, hybrid and conventional cars from start to finish, to see what it actually takes to manufacture, own and drive each of them. What they found was a little distressing, to say the least.
According to the study, manufacturing, using and scrapping EVs in India surprisingly produces 15-50% more greenhouse gases than conventional and hybrid cars. Most of this comes from the fact that even clean electricity originates from coal-powered plants in our country (about 75% of India’s total), which spew an exorbitant amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

The study also outlines that if we need to be green, we might be overlooking a crucial area. According to the research, Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV) emit the least amount of greenhouse gases overall, and yet they remain the most taxed and expensive for the common person.

Perhaps the two biggest roadblocks in the transition to an EV for most Indians are the vehicles' relatively high costs and range. However, many are often sold on the promise of never having to buy the increasingly costly petroleum evil ever again.

But here, there are several hidden factors that also need to be accounted for to grasp a clearer picture. For instance, EVs actually cost 15-60% more per kilometre compared to HEVs and conventional vehicles, the researchers found. Considering that HEVs usually boast 1-1.5 times the mileage per litre as traditional engine cars, this is an area that ought to be popularised more.

Overall, the authors stress that if cleantech is the need of the hour, hybrid vehicles need more love, and should be given the same low-tax treatment as EVs.

According to the study, manufacturing, using and scrapping EVs in India surprisingly produces 15-50% more greenhouse gases than conventional and hybrid cars. Most of this comes from the fact that even clean electricity originates from coal-powered plants in our country (about 75% of India’s total), which spew an exorbitant amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

News source : https://www.msn.com/en-in/autos/news...ys/ar-AA1c1gZj

[mohanphadnis]

I want to know who was sponsoring this study. Something tells me it will be two Japanese manufacturers that have been left far behind in the EV race.

[ex-innova-guy]

Originally Posted by mohanphadnis

I want to know who was sponsoring this study. Something tells me it will be two Japanese manufacturers that have been left far behind in the EV race.

Bang on! Your instincts were right. This study was supported by New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO), Japan.

Acknowlegment is given on page 6 of the Research Paper.

[TorqueIndia]

Last time it was IIT kanpur and Saudi ARAMCO, just the sponsor changed to NEDO !

Originally Posted by Chhanda Das

A joint study between Saudi Aramco and IIT Kanpur published in Nature magazine claims that electric vehicles in India are more polluting than petrol/diesel ones.

https://auto.timesofindia.com/news/o...w/92971530.cms

[SKC-auto]

Why create a thread on a study done 8 months ago, from IIT engine development department(obvious conflict of interest).

Only way to stop global climate change is achieving net zero, net zero scenario can only achieved with renewables and EVs.

This is 2023, explaining something this obvious, which Elon Musk understood before 2003(20 years ago) reflects upon our reasoning and critical thinking.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by TorqueIndia

Last time it was IIT kanpur and Saudi ARAMCO, just the sponsor changed to NEDO !

I request you to wait a bit more and there will be a paper saying the non-existent (except in youtube videos) Hydrogen ICE is better than BEV.

[Venky03]

They considered the price of base variant of Grand Vitara but the mileage of strong hybrid, and for EVs they have assumed mandatory cost for battery replacement, how convenient!

[DIY410]

Originally Posted by Venky03

They considered the price of base variant of Grand Vitara but the mileage of strong hybrid, and for EVs they have assumed mandatory cost for battery replacement, how convenient!

Attachment 2533267

These type of articles are for people who don't read past the headlines and this happens far too often.

I don't doubt that it was probably paid by automakers who have no EV line up in their product list.

[The Rationalist]

You can do whatever study, the only thing that is going to decide the future is the customer. Most of us underestimate the collective wisdom of the laymen of our country. They will go with the technology that will be cheaper on their wallet, not the one which produce less environmental damage! You make a vehicle that costs like an ICE and runs cheaper, they will go for it. The moment EV's pricing is at par with ICE, the game is going to be over, even if EV's pollute more!

There's a story about a king who wanted to take bath in milk. He ordered every citizen to bring one bottle of milk by night and pour in to his swimming pool, the next morning he was welcomed with the sight of pristine water, not even a single drop of milk in it. Every citizen was like, if I put one bottle of milk instead of water nobody will notice! As individuals in such a polluted country, most think that me using a polluting/non polluting car won't make a big difference. So whoever wants to convince a customer about the negatives of EV's it better be something other than this pollution drama.

[Aroy]

The article is not very far from truth. You have just not taken into account the pollution load of the whole cycle.

You take into account the pollution load of :

. Electrity generation
. Losses in transmission
. Manufacturing of batteries, including refining and extraction of materials for batteries
. Disposal of batteries

Then you will appreciate the quantum of pollution generated in the whoile life cycle. According to most studies the maximum pollution load is in
a) Electricity generated from fossil fuels
b) Mining and refining of the materials for batteries
c) Disposal of old batteries

Of these the only item that can reduce the pollution load is electricity generated from renewable sources - wind and water. Solar power has its own pollution load while manufacturing solar cells.

The mining and refining materials for batteries is extremely polluting. Just read up the articles on refining of materials that go into batteries and magnets.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by Aroy

The article is not very far from truth. You have just not taken into account the pollution load of the whole cycle.

You take into account the pollution load of :

. Electrity generation
. Losses in transmission
. Manufacturing of batteries, including refining and extraction of materials for batteries
. Disposal of batteries

This has been debunked multiple times

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oVrIHcdxjA

Petrol just rains from heaven that we do not have to do any mining ? Or may be it just flows through the tap ? The study is nonsense if you think through it. If you are interested just look up what is Gas flaring (just one of the sources of emission in oil extraction) and for your information electricity is used a lot in the oil extraction process.

https://www.worldbank.org/en/program...ring-explained

Also the lithium mining pollution. Please note that the battery pack is for the entire life time of the car and not for every run (unlike petrol of course).

[Virtualaman]

I think the study conveniently missed highlighting an important aspect it calls out in the report.

Refer attached screenshot.

For Tata Nexon EV vs Tata Nexon ICE (Set-2), it clearly states that the total emissions from combustion engine vehicles (ICEV) is more than both EVs (BEV) and Hybrids (HEV), for a total lifetime mileage of 33,000 KMs or more (refer graph where both the green and orange lines are lower than the blue line after 33,000 KM).

Given that a majority of Indian consumers will own and use their cars for more than 33,000 KM, the study implies that it is better to own EVs or Hybrids compared to ICE vehicles as they are less polluting across their lifecycle (from cradle to grave).

The study conveniently doesn't adequately highlight this fact in the Exec Summary to supposedly cater to Japanese interests (NEDO backed manufacturers) that lag behind their Indian counterparts in the EV race.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by Virtualaman

I think the study conveniently missed highlighting an important aspects it calls out in the report.


Given that a majority Indian customers will own and use their cars for more than 33,000 KM, the study implies that it is better to own EVs or Hybrids compared to ICE vehicles as they are less polluting across their lifecycle (from cradle to grave).

Good point. But I think even the 33,000 km figures is rigged. I am not sure how did they come up with it. An EV has less parts (not more) than their ICE/Hybrid cousin. It uses lesser consumables (discounting petrol of course which is a consumable) like coolants, engine oil etc. If anything production of Nexon EV would have much less GHG than Nexon ICE. So I might agree with the data that they produced if they prefix the 33 K Kms with a -ve sign .

[The Rationalist]

The fact is that we will run out of oil in this century, same for natural gas and coal also by similar timeline! Our options left are solar, wind sources and maybe nuclear fusion in another 100 years, or some revolutionary new source.

Let's assume that oil won't get depleted, then what will happen? As a Saudi Arabian minister once told, Stone age came to an end, not for lack of stones (bronze was produced) and similarly oil age will end, but not for lack of oil! We must not fall for these short sighted dimwits, we must go ahead with all might to pursue others sources of energy. Nothing will happen to oil producing countries if oil is finished, but we will suffer badly if we don't have alternatives. India is going to be a behemoth in the coming decades and we can't let a billion of next generation Indians suffer because some dimwits have delusions that oil will last forever. The more I read about elite school people, the more petrified I'm of children getting "educated" at such places. Nothing lasts for ever in this world!

PS: If these guys alive when fuel engines vehicles were introduced, they would have come up with a similar study showing how better is the horse/donkey carts for the world!

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by The Rationalist

The fact is that we will run out of oil in this century, same for natural gas and coal also by similar timeline! Our options left are solar, wind sources and maybe nuclear fusion in another 100 years, or some revolutionary new source.

The nuclear fusion story is unfortunately much like the green hydrogen story. Great in theory but difficult in practice. On the other hand we have unfortunately not done justice to fission which has been a working solution for long. Indian should have gone hard on fission technology particularly the so called fast breeder reactors since we have a vast resource of thorium on our beaches.

The fact that the first major "application" of nuclear technology was to kill millions of innocent people has understandably made this technology pariah forever. This unfortunately is the sad truth.