Connect with us

Lifestyle

A Tesla is greener than you think and getting greener – a look at manufacturing

Published

on

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typical scenario in many research papers but with electricity grids getting cleaner every year the data quickly falls out of date.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

Advertisement
-
  • 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.

Advertisement
-

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.

Tesla Gigafactory flyover March, 2017 [Source: NMGroup]

 

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.

Advertisement
-

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.

Advertisement
-

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.

 

As an engineer working to improve sustainability and energy use, I have a passion for renewables, research, and data analytics. I'm based out of Toronto Ontario and you can contact me on LinkedIn or Twitter.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk says he knows how to save Earth for a billion years

Elon Musk says sentient AI satellites launched from the Moon could keep Earth livable forever.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk spent part of his weekend describing a plan to keep the planet livable for roughly a billion years, and it starts with satellites that can think for themselves.

In a post on X, Musk argued that swapping fossil fuels for solar and wind power will not be enough to protect humanity from what he called extremely severe extinction events, the kind that occur roughly every 100 million years. His fix is what he called sentient satellites, or solar-powered satellites, controlled by AI, that would sit in a fixed spot between Earth and the Sun after being launched off the Moon using a giant electromagnetic catapult instead of rockets.

The satellites’ onboard AI would make continuous, small adjustments rather than waiting on human instructions. The mass driver is Musk’s proposed way of getting the raw material there cheaply by using an electromagnetic launch track built on the Moon, where lower gravity and no atmosphere make it far easier to fling cargo into space than it is from Earth.

Musk shared a Grok generated estimate suggesting roughly 5 percent of Florida’s land, or about 1.68 million acres, could face regular flooding by 2070 under a high sea level rise scenario, and said humanity has about 50 years to act before coastal living looks very different than it does today.

Advertisement
-

This is not the first time Musk has floated the idea. He raised a similar concept in November, describing a solar powered AI satellite constellation that could make tiny adjustments to incoming sunlight to fine tune Earth’s temperature. Musk has also tied planetary risk to his broader vision at SpaceX, where his compensation package is explicitly linked to establishing a self-sustaining Mars colony, one he has described as an insurance policy against the kind of extinction event he referenced this weekend, and where he has said humans could set foot within five to seven years.

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

Police sergeant recounts his Neuralink journey with Elon Musk’s brain chip

Published

on

By

neuralink-patient-registry-volunteers

A former Vancouver police sergeant with ALS accounts his journey to become a patient for Elon Musk’s Neuralink wireless brain-computer interface technology.

“I’m texting you from my brain right now.” That was the first message Lee Marten sent after waking up from Neuralink surgery, five hours and one migraine after dozens of threads were stitched into his motor cortex.

Marten, a former Vancouver police sergeant, is one of the first Canadian ALS patients to receive Neuralink’s N1 brain implant, and the 26th recipient overall. He tells his story in a first-person account published by Maclean’s.

Marten recounts how he was a healthy, athletic Vancouver police sergeant until April 2022 when symptoms of muscle twitching and balance loss, were followed by a bad fall that broke his leg. He would eventually be diagnosed with ALS in early 2025 at the age of 47. ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a fatal neurodegenerative disease that progressively destroys the motor neurons controlling voluntary muscle movement, eventually taking away a patient’s ability to walk, speak, swallow and breathe. There’s no cure, and most patients live two to five years after diagnosis.

He describes the devastation of the diagnosis and how he began preparing for it while connecting with other young ALS patients through a WhatsApp group called Young Guns. Through that group he learned about a Neuralink clinical trial at Toronto Western Hospital and, after a roughly seven-month vetting process (physical assessments, psychiatric evaluation, a final interview with the Neuralink team), was accepted this past April as the trial’s 26th recipient and the first Canadian ALS patient to get the N1 implant. He recounts the May surgery in detail, including the robotic system that stitched 64 threads into his brain, and describes the app, Link, translating his neural signals into cursor control, which he was using within hours of waking up.

Marten walks through what daily use looks like, including weekly “brain training” exercises, a real-time neural-activity display, charging the implant via a beanie-mounted MagSafe charger, and using the implant for emailing, texting, social media, and gaming via a “Magic Box” that connects it to other devices. He also gives brief context on brain-computer interface history and quite candid about Musk, calling him “divisive” but saying he found him “easy to admire.

Advertisement
-

The piece closes on a heavier note, with Marten seeking to pursue medical assistance in dying as his symptoms progressed, noting that he’ll be able to communicate his final words to his family through Neuralink rather than facing a silent decline. He expresses hope the data from his case will help future ALS patients, even without a cure in his own lifetime.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla Robotaxi gets a massive upgrade in Nevada

Nevada regulators just approved a massive expansion of Tesla’s robotaxi fleet across the entire county.

Published

on

By

Concept art of a Tesla Cybercab in Las Vegas Strip as rendered via Grok

Tesla’s robotaxi footprint in Nevada just grew by roughly 500 times in a single regulatory vote.

The Nevada Transportation Authority approved Tesla’s full Autonomous Vehicle Network Company permit on Thursday, clearing the way for the company to deploy up to 5,000 driverless vehicles across Clark County over the next 12 months. The decision came during a four hour general session meeting that Tesla investor Sawyer Merritt watched live and reported on X, noting the vote replaces the interim order that had limited Tesla to just 10 robotaxis on a narrow stretch of the Las Vegas Strip.

That earlier cap, covered here after it surfaced on August 13, came with restrictions that looked stricter than what Tesla runs in Austin: a 45 mph speed ceiling, no airport pickups, and a geofence confined to the Strip corridor. The new approval extends Tesla’s operating authority to all of Clark County, with room to request an even wider geofence across the state.

Advertisement
-

Tesla representatives at the meeting said they have no intention of putting 5,000 cars on the road right away. Commercial rides are expected to start within 30 days, pending vehicle inspections, insurance filings, and fare approval, the standard steps every robotaxi operator in Nevada has had to clear.

Tesla’s own Robotaxi account replied to the news with a short line, The golden future is upon us.

The timing lines up with Tesla’s broader robotaxi push this month. The company is preparing to open Cybercab rides to the public in Austin as soon as this month, and it opened a sweepstakes for riders to win a seat at the launch event. Tesla filed its original application for a 5,000 vehicle Nevada fleet back in June, a request regulators trimmed to 10 vehicles when they issued the interim order in July. Thursday’s vote effectively grants the number Tesla asked for from the start.

Zoox, the Amazon owned robotaxi operator, has run in Nevada since 2025 and was capped at 100 vehicles before Thursday’s decision. Tesla’s new ceiling puts it well ahead of that comparison on paper, though the company has said its actual fleet size will depend on how quickly FSD v15 rolls out, the software update executives have called the gateway to scaling unsupervised robotaxi operations nationwide.

Continue Reading