

Lifestyle
A Tesla is greener than you think and getting greener – a look at manufacturing
An electric vehicle is more than just a new form of technology. It’s part of a shift in our entire way of life. From a consumables based civilization to a renewable one. My last article focused on the environmental benefits of driving an electric vehicle, but what about manufacturing? Is it also sustainable?
One of the main themes from my previous article is that the data surrounding electric vehicles has been quickly changing. Our electricity grid is getting greener, batteries are increasing in energy density, and costs are falling. This rapid advancement is the reason for many misconceptions about electric vehicles and it holds true of manufacturing as well. This article dives into the manufacturing impact, to give you a better feel for its significance, and show how much better it can get.
First though I want to be clear, an electric vehicle is without a doubt the better environmental choice. To get a good snapshot of this just take a look at the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions in the graph below. These emissions include everything from raw material extraction, to vehicle manufacturing, through operation, and finally to end of life. It’s clear that the reductions from driving far exceed any emissions from vehicle production. The savings are huge.

*Based on 180,000 miles of lifetime driving of a large electric sedan (85kWh), batteries manufactured in China, vehicles made in Germany or USA, IPCC median data of lifecycle emissions factors for electricity sources, 2016 electricity source mix from Canada and the USA for EV charging, and EPA data for a 26 mpg vehicle.
But what is the manufacturing based on you say? A fair question. Manufacturing emissions depend on many factors like: which materials are used, the source of those materials, technologies incorporated into the manufacturing processes, material transportation needs, and the type of energy used at each stage of production. The manufacturing data in the graph above is based on batteries produced on a carbon intensive grid (like China) with final vehicle assembly in Germany or the US. For a large 85kWh Tesla battery weighing around 550 kg, the battery would account for 6 tons of greenhouse gas emissions. I’ve seen this as the typical scenario in many research papers but with electricity grids getting cleaner every year the data quickly falls out of date. Still, it serves as a good baseline scenario. You may have seen higher numbers reported elsewhere, but frankly they are based on old data and often use the poor metric of kgCO2e/kWh, which doesn’t hold true as energy density rapidly improves. A better metric is kgCO2e/kg of battery but even that must be continually updated.
What may not be immediately clear from the graph, is that the savings from driving an electric vehicle will very quickly payback the emissions from manufacturing the entire vehicle. In Canada the payback would occur after about 55,000 kms, and the USA at 77,000 kms. So, if you’re already driving, the most environmentally friendly thing you can do is replace your combustion vehicle with an electric vehicle today!
That’s great…..but can we do better?
Remember that the blue bar in the graph assumes batteries are made in China and the vehicles are made in Germany or the USA. Not exactly low carbon electricity grids. It’s also based on studies using electricity data already a few years old and doesn’t account for the specific manufacturing facilities that are already better than the average electricity grids in those countries. Many manufacturers have also incorporated on site renewable energy and better recycling practices.
Manufacturer Highlights
- Tesla currently manufacturers vehicles in California and batteries in Nevada. The Nevada battery Gigafactory will be 100% renewably powered with a 70MW solar array and have on site recycling. The Freemont California grid is actually already very clean with 70% from non-fossil fuels (which partially explains the lack of solar there).
- Chevy’s Bolt is manufactured by GM in Michigan. 54% of the facility’s energy comes from a combination of a 350kW solar array and landfill gas. The batteries are made by LG batteries in Holland Michigan, predominately powered by a natural gas power plant. There is no solar integration in that LG facility but satellite imagery appears to show solar installed on some of their international facilities (oddly this is not mentioned in their sustainability reports). GM also has a plan to use 100% renewable energy by 2050 but that’s almost meaningless because almost everything should be 100% renewably powered by then or we’re going to be in big trouble.
- The Ford Focus EV is also made in Michigan factory which incorporates a 500kW solar array. Their batteries are also made by LG.
- Nissan has a solar array on the Leaf factory in Japan, but they don’t have one on the USA factory. Their batteries are also made by LG.
That’s a good look at today but manufacturers will continue to improve. In fact that’s a recurring theme in all my research, that what was true 5 years ago for electric vehicles is not the reality today and that in turn won’t be representative of the future. Electricity is getting cleaner, cars are getting lighter, recycling is improving, and batteries are becoming more energy dense. All of this makes manufacturing an EV more sustainable. The big question is how quickly and how much can they improve?
There are a variety of papers published on how individual factors can benefit the sustainability of electric vehicle manufacturing. What I’ve done is combine the impacts, as graphed below. The key takeaway from the graph is that Tesla, and possible others, are making EVs with low embodied manufacturing emissions and that this will only improve as time goes on.

The graph compares the emissions from conventional manufacturing practices for a large combustion sedan and a large EV sedan, and then compares that to sustainability leaders like Tesla today, in 2020, and then into the future. Please remember this is representative data based on many research reports, manufacturing practices, battery density forecasts, some estimations of future conditions, and some interpolation of data.
How are these results achieved?
1: Selecting Clean Electricity Sources
Electricity is used extensively to produce both the materials used in vehicles and the assembled vehicles themselves, but there’s a huge variation in how ‘clean’ electricity grids are. China, Germany, and Michigan, are all locations big on vehicle manufacturing. China also has a huge chunk of the world’s battery production and will continue to do so. By 2020, worldwide production capacity is expected to expand five-fold, with China and South Korea producing 75% of world’s batteries.
In China coal use is down but still accounts for over 60% of electricity production, while in the USA it’s been dropping even faster, now at 30%. Germany, South Korea, and Michigan still get about 40% of their electricity from coal. Coal is a dirty fuel and manufacturers should avoid it to improve their sustainability. Then there’s the issue of climate change, driven by greenhouse gas emissions. Even though natural gas is cleaner to burn than coal, it still creates a lot of greenhouse gas and is responsible for significant methane leaks. For comparison purposes I’ve graphed the greenhouse gas emissions factors for relevant electricity grids and highlighted some specific manufacturer information to account for on-site renewable energy. It makes for an interesting comparison, showing that both the Chevy Bolt and Tesla facilities use electricity sources far greener than even their state grids.

Why is coal considered dirty? Consider that natural gas produces approximately 50% less GHG emissions than coal, 99% less SOx, 90% less NOx, and 99% less particulates.

Data uses IPCC median emissions factors for electricity sources, not emission data from the individual plants or regions. It’s important to recognize that many of the components are not made by GM or Tesla at the facilities noted (i.e. airbags, engine blocks, etc). Electricity contributes 29% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the USA and industry is responsible for 21%. That means there’s a lot of room for manufacturing to go green with low-carbon electricity.
Look at the Gigafactory in 2020, what a difference a green electron makes! A recent study from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology found that using renewable electricity could drop production emissions by more than half. That’s for an entire Tesla Model S sized vehicle. With Tesla on the verge of expanding their manufacturing into China, it would be both surprising and disappointing if they didn’t make all new factories 100% renewably powered. It is the new benchmark that they themselves have set for sustainable manufacturing.
2: Light-weighting
You may have noticed a lot of manufacturers using more aluminum in their vehicles. There’s good reason for this. An aluminum body can be 40% lighter than a steel body, according to Audi, and Tesla’s Model S and X use aluminum exclusively in their construction. The push for longer range EVs is resulting in a push for lighter weight vehicles that use less materials. That’s great for the environment.
3: Longer Lasting Cars and Materials
Electric vehicles will last longer than conventional combustion cars today. Aluminum doesn’t rust, electric cars have far fewer moving parts to wear out and few disposable fluids to maintain, and the vehicles get over-the-air updates. But eventually they will wear-out, and this is where recycling comes in.
4: Recycling
Today material recovery rates for steel and aluminum in vehicles are very high, at about 90%. For aluminum this is a big deal because recycled aluminum uses only 5% of the electricity for processing, compared to processing from raw materials. I reached out to Tesla to get information on how much recycled content they use and where their aluminum comes from but they’ve yet to get back to me.
Batteries also benefit from recycling as they are composed mostly of valuable metals like aluminum, copper, nickel, cobalt, and lithium (there’s also the graphite anode to consider). Studies indicate a possible 50% reduction in total battery emissions from recycling. Tesla’s current battery recycler in Europe, Umicore, states that through their recycling they can already recover 70% of the GHG emissions that were produced during the original material extraction and refining stages. Large scale lithium-ion battery recycling won’t be needed for several years. Batteries today are expected to last a decade or more and that is continually improving. Just recently Tesla’s battery research division achieved a doubling of battery lifespans for NMC batteries used in their energy storage (their cars use the NCA chemistry). That was just one year into their work.
Imagine a vehicle that was produced entirely from recycled materials using 100% renewable energy, powered by renewable energy, driving quietly down the road with zero pollution. That’s the future. A truly closed loop, because once the materials are extracted, they can be used again and again. It’s not like gasoline which is used only once.
5: Ethical and local sourcing
The results discussed so far have included the emissions from extracting and processing materials, but what about the ethical and moral considerations? Ensuring that vehicles are produced ethically should be required of every manufacturer. Most of the manufacturers have ethical material sourcing reports, to varying degrees of diligence, and some is mandated of publicly traded companies. Tesla has also reaffirmed their commitment to ethically and locally sourced materials, on a number of occasions.
“Imagine a vehicle that was produced entirely from recycled materials using 100% renewable energy, powered by renewable energy, driving quietly down the road with zero pollution. That’s the future.”
Cobalt and graphite are potentially two of the biggest issues right now. Today 65% of the world’s cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo and most of the flake natural graphite is coming from China. Using less of these contentious materials is a good place to start. The NCA battery chemistry used by Tesla/Panasonic requires far less cobalt than the NMC chemistry commonly used by other manufacturers. They have also committed to sourcing cobalt from non-conflict zones. Canada seems to have a role to play here. Canada sits third in world production of cobalt and third in nickel production. It’s not a coincidence as cobalt is often the byproduct of nickel production. For graphite Tesla has previously stated that artificially produced graphite from Europe may be used and there are other anode materials in development.
Lithium is probably the most discussed material but accounts for ~10% of the battery by weight. It is overwhelmingly extracted from salt brines, pumped from under dried up salt flats in politically stable countries. It’s a pretty clean process but I do have issue with the evaporation process, as it depletes groundwater aquifers. Thankfully there are companies working to create new processes that don’t rely on evaporation to concentrate the minerals. But even with current methods, extracting a recyclable material like lithium has to be better than fracking for a consumable product like oil.
Conclusion:
Manufacturing electric vehicles today is comparable to or better than a combustion vehicle. This will only get better, especially if it’s something customers care about. It’s time to look beyond operational benefits and pay attention to which manufacturers are sustainability leaders. Vote with your dollars and call on manufacturers to make positive changes.
Tesla is undoubtedly one of the leaders. They are using clean electricity in their production today and their massive battery Gigafactory will be 100% renewably powered once complete. Their batteries have a low environmental impact relative to their peers due to the material composition, high energy densities, and clean electricity used in production. They are also have good recycling practices and will improve that with on-site battery recycling in the future. Their cars are long lasting, made of lightweight materials, and they have a good material sourcing strategy. If they can continue to be leaders in this way and push the industry forward, it may just transform all of manufacturing. That’s not to say Tesla is the only one. There are other manufacturers doing some of these good things, but no one seems to be as thorough or have the complete vision of the best possible future like Tesla does. But hey, if those other manufacturers can prove me wrong, all the better.
Lifestyle
Tesla Cybertruck takes a bump from epic failing Dodge Charger
The Cybertruck seemed unharmed by the charging Charger.

There comes a time in a driver’s life when one is faced with one’s limitations. For the driver of a Dodge Charger, this time came when he lost control and crashed into a Tesla Cybertruck–an absolute epic fail.
A video of the rather unfortunate incident was shared on the r/TeslaLounge subreddit.
Charging Charger Fails
As could be seen in the video, which was posted on the subreddit by Model Y owner u/Hammer_of_something, a group of teens in a Dodge Charger decided to do some burnouts at a Tesla Supercharger. Unfortunately, the driver of the Charger failed in his burnout or donut attempt, resulting in the mopar sedan going over a curb and bumping a charging Cybertruck.
Ironically, the Dodge Charger seemed to have been parked at a Supercharger stall before its driver decided to perform the failed stunt. This suggests that the vehicle was likely ICE-ing a charging stall before it had its epic fail moment. Amusingly enough, the subreddit member noted that the Cybertruck did not seem like it took any damage at all despite its bump. The Charger, however, seemed like it ran into some trouble after crashing into the truck.
Alleged Aftermath
As per the the r/TeslaLounge subreddit member, the Cybertruck owner came rushing out to his vehicle after the Dodge Charger crashed into it. The Model Y owner then sent over the full video of the incident, which clearly showed the Charger attempting a burnout, failing, and bumping into the Cybertruck. The Cybertruck owner likely appreciated the video, in part because it showed the driver of the Dodge Charger absolutely freaking out after the incident.
The Cybertruck is not an impregnable vehicle, but it can take bumps pretty well thanks to its thick stainless steel body. Based on this video, it appears that the Cybertruck can even take bumps from a charging Charger, all while chilling and charging at a Supercharger. As for the teens in the Dodge, they likely had to provide a long explanation to authorities after the incident, since the cops were called to the location.
Lifestyle
Anti-Elon Musk group crushes Tesla Model 3 with Sherman tank–with unexpected results
Ironically enough, the group’s video ended up highlighting something very positive for Tesla.

Anti-Elon Musk protesters and critics tend to show their disdain for the CEO in various ways, but a recent video from political action group Led By Donkeys definitely takes the cake when it comes to creativity.
Ironially enough, the group’s video also ended up highlighting something very positive for Tesla.
Tank vs. Tesla
In its video, Led By Donkeys featured Ken Turner, a 98-year-old veteran who served in the British army during World War II. The veteran stated that Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, is “using his immense power to support the far-right in Europe, and his money comes from Tesla cars.”
He also noted that he had a message for the Tesla CEO: “We’ve crushed fascism before and we’ll crush it again.” To emphasize his point, the veteran proceeded to drive a Sherman tank over a blue Tesla Model 3 sedan, which, of course, had a plate that read “Fascism.”
The heavy tank crushed the Model 3’s glass roof and windows, much to the delight of Led By Donkeys’ commenters on its official YouTube channel. But at the end of it all, the aftermath of the anti-Elon Musk demonstration ended up showcasing something positive for the electric vehicle maker.
Tesla Model 3 Tanks the Tank?
As could be seen from the wreckage of the Tesla Model 3 after its Sherman encounter, only the glass roof and windows of the all-electric sedan were crushed. Looking at the wreckage of the Model 3, it seemed like its doors could still be opened, and everything on its lower section looked intact.
Considering that a standard M4 Sherman weighs about 66,800 to 84,000 pounds, the Model 3 actually weathered the tank’s assault really well. Granted, the vehicle’s suspension height before the political action group’s demonstration suggests that the Model 3’s high voltage battery had been removed beforehand. But even if it hadn’t been taken off, it seemed like the vehicle’s battery would have survived the heavy ordeal without much incident.
This was highlighted in comments from users on social media platform X, many of whom noted that a person in the Model 3 could very well have survived the ordeal with the Sherman. And that, ultimately, just speaks to the safety of Tesla’s vehicles. There is a reason why Teslas consistently rank among the safest cars on the road, after all.
Lifestyle
Tesla Model 3 driver is using FSD to travel to Mt. Everest Base Camp
The ambitious, nearly 4,000-kilometer (2,485-mile) Tesla FSD journey is being livestreamed on Chinese social media.

Count on Tesla drivers in China to push Full Self Driving (FSD) as far as it could go. As could be seen in videos posted on Chinese social media, a brave Model 3 owner is currently going on an epic journey from Henan Province to the base camp of Mt. Everest on FSD.
Recent posts from the Model 3 driver suggest that the ambitious destination may be within reach.
Epic FSD Journey
As noted by Tesla owner-enthusiast Aaron Li, the journey from Henan Province to the base camp of Mt. Everest spans almost 4,000 kilometers (2,485 miles). The journey itself is epic, with stunning vistas and roads that require some drivers to bring oxygen canisters with them. The fact that it is being done using FSD makes it extra impressive.
Based on the videos that have been recently shared, the Model 3 running FSD seems to be nearing the Everest Base Camp. There seems to be a good chance that the Tesla Model 3 may reach its destination this Friday.
Previous Everest Trips
This is not the first time that a Tesla has driven to Mt. Everest’s base camp. That would be a Model 3 that was driven in September 2020. That vehicle, which went on a long 5,500 km (3,400-mile) journey, was manually driven to its destination.
In April 2021, Tesla China announced that it has completed the buildout of 11 Supercharger stations in the picturesque route from Chengdu to Tingri. This route would allow drivers to reach the base camp of Mt. Everest. Sure enough, in July 2022, Tesla China shared a video of two Teslas—a Model X and Model Y—reaching the Everest base camp without any issues. Numerous other Tesla drivers have since taken on the long, picturesque journey.
Check out this Tesla Model Y’s journey to the Mt. Everest base camp in the video below.
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Cybertruck Range Extender gets canceled
-
Elon Musk6 days ago
Tesla seems to have fixed one of Full Self-Driving’s most annoying features
-
Lifestyle2 weeks ago
Anti-Elon Musk group crushes Tesla Model 3 with Sherman tank–with unexpected results
-
News2 weeks ago
Starlink to launch on United Airlines planes by May 15
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Semi gets new adoptee in latest sighting
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla launches its most inexpensive trim of new Model Y
-
News2 weeks ago
US’ base Tesla Model Y has an edge vs Shanghai and Berlin’s entry-level Model Ys
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Cybertruck owners get amazing year-long freebie