Dylan Reyes Commented [CE1]: @Reyes, Dylan

Hi Dylan,
Dr. Cash
Is the portfolio draft not ready?

Writing 106

April 7th, 2023

Electric Vehicles: The Future?

Abstract: In this paper I explore the ways in which electric vehicles are often misunderstood and

perhaps misrepresented. The government is strongly rallying behind this new technology and

incentivizing its adoption, but the average person must understand how their needs and our

environmental needs would be met. Through a variety of sources, the same conclusions were

drawn with sets of data that agreed with each other. Electric vehicles do have the potential to

decrease emissions significantly, but that cannot happen before drastic changes are made to the

way they are made and the charging structures behind them. This paper uses a variety of

websites, peer-reviewed articles, and independent studies to provide numbers on the matter. The

goal was not to pick a side but rather to provide the reader with a baseline to compare numbers.

Everyone has seen a Tesla stranded on the road at least once. If anyone has ever been the

person stuck in the vehicle, the looks you get from people passing by are undoubtedly

embarrassing. Battery life leaving you stranded is not the only problem these vehicles may pose

though. Electric vehicles are an ambitious jump in technology which may not be the best option
in the near future. The multiple cons they present are often overlooked from their initial

production to the final sale. With the government pushing them harder than ever, it is important Commented [CE2]: Good, I can start to see in this
sentence where your intervention will most likely intersect.
to understand how they fit our everyday needs and environmental goals.

The history of electric vehicles is modest with them repeatedly being unable to break into

the car market within the 20th century. They simply were not up to the standards that gas

powered vehicles could achieve. It wasn’t until the Toyota Prius was released in 1997

(internationally in 2000) that the idea of moving forward with the idea was very viable

(Matulka). It was heavily embraced by the public and is still one of the most popular cars to this

day. It used a nickel metal hydride battery, a technology supported by the United States Energy

Department, to power its electric motor (Matulka). To many it was, and still is, the perfect

middle ground: offering substantial emissions reductions over a traditional vehicle.

The leading party in this switch to electric vehicles is undeniably the United States

Government which aims to have over 50% of car sales be electric by 2030. They continue to

proudly present advances in the EV field and outline steps they will continue to take. Below is an

excerpt from the fact sheet provided on February 15, 2023:

Today’s announcements are evidence of the President’s successful industrial

strategy, ensuring that federal funds are attracting private investment to ensure the

clean energy transition is powered by American manufacturing and good-paying

union jobs. Combined with investments in battery manufacturing and tax credits Commented [CE3]: Paraphrase the facts, quote the most
hard-hitting persuasive attempts and then analyze to show
how the government is trying to get consumers invested in
for electric vehicle purchases and charging infrastructure driven by the Inflation
buying these cars by using different persuasive modes and
tapping to beliefs and values.
Reduction Act, these programs are key to achieving the Administration’s climate

goals. (Whitehouse.gov)
Electric vehicles and their takeover are very clearly endorsed by the government which has

done its part in supporting it. They like the highlight the money that was invested in

infrastructure by the private sector. They also proudly proclaim that the sales of EVs have

tripled since Biden took office. This combined with them stating that the number of

available charging ports has gone up 40% shows that they are proud of the advancements

made (Whitehouse.gov). On top of this, the government also offers significant tax

incentives to try to get people to buy an EV. According to the IRS, a person can earn up to

a $7,500 tax credit when purchasing a qualifying EV. A credit means that a person’s tax

bill will be reduced by that dollar amount (or their refund icnreased by the same amount).

It is essentially free money for people who buy them. The fact sheet states that these

advancements are “key” to making progress towards the country’s climate goals which is

another way that they try to influence people. They tell the people that if they were to

purchase an EV, they would be helping the country and the world. They do not present

numbers to show the exact projected benefit: they only promise that it will help.

Just a few years later in 2006, the Tesla Motors startup was announced. They promised

an ambitious jump from what the Prius had managed to achieve. Many startups like Tesla have

appeared quickly and failed just as quickly but Tesla was able to get off the ground thanks to a

“$465 million loan from the Department of Energy’s Loan Program Office” (Matulka). Despite

Tesla delivering on its promises of increased range for an electric vehicle, it still faced the huge

problem that was charging: more specifically, the lack of infrastructure. In 2014, the United

States Energy Department invested over $115 million to help establish 18,000 charging stations

in the country (totaling just over 20,000) (Matulka). Although this may seem like a lot, it is

nothing compared to the 111,600 gas stations present in the country at the same time (US Census
Bureau). According to the Department of Energy, gas stations have been on a steady decrease

since the 1970s. Considering that some people still struggle to find a gas station, the presence of

charging stations being just around 19% of gas stations is a clear problem. Tesla has created at

home chargers to try to aid this problem but as many users have reported, it is not a very viable

option with charging taking several hours. For example, with Tesla’s home chargers plugged in

to a standard 120V outlet, users reported around 32 miles worth of charging overnight (NRDC).

Forgetting to plug in your car at night can be an even bigger problem than forgetting to plug in

your phone. In a nation where everything has its cost, many will be turned away by the addition

to their electricity bill every month. The group which Tesla and other electric startups cater to is

undeniably the younger generations such as the millennials and Gen Z, but they are arguably the

most frugal when it comes to things like spending money on bills. This is an even bigger caveat

when we consider the price of electricity in the places that are most pushing EVs, such as

California. The average price of electricity in the state is $0.30 per kWh which is 47% higher

than the national average (EnergySage). Moreover, a viable home charger requires an upgraded

outlet system: adding even more cost to an already pricy investment.

The best option to charge your Tesla when outside of your home is Tesla’s very own

superchargers. As the name implies, it is the fastest way to charge the vehicle, taking around an

hour to fully charge most of their vehicles: much longer than the 5 minutes it takes to fill up a car

with gas. Tesla charging is essentially an event you need to schedule and people who run on a

very busy schedule are likely to skip out on purchasing. According to the white house, there are

now over 130,000 charging stations in the country and over 3 million EVs on the roads. This

shows that the infrastructure is capable of growing but whether it can grow quickly enough to

accommodate a complete switch to EVs is still unknown. Despite the inconvenience that
charging may present, it is still not free. The price to charge one’s car can vary depending on

location, but it costs, on average, $15.52 to use a supercharger. Some Teslas are still

grandfathered into the free charging system, but it was once available for all cars. Although

$15.52 is a lot less than an average fill up at a gas station, there is no saying that this number will

not continue to increase as time and demand increases. Even despite this clear offset in cost of

refueling, companies such as Shell are still seeing a rise in revenue since the pandemic. In 2022

they reported $381.3 billion in revenue which shows that despite high gas prices, people are not

making the switch (Statistica).

This hesitation to switch is likely due in part to the upfront cost associated with EVs.

Although people will save money over time with EVs, the average American is not able to

sacrifice upfront cost for the long term. According to NRDC (a leading group of environmental

activists) EVs cost, on average, $10,000 more than the industry average for traditional vehicles.

This is a notable gap in price especially when comparing the price of operating each vehicle. A

study done by the University of Michigan shows that on average, it costs $485 to fuel an EV for

a year while a gas-powered vehicle costs $1,117 to fuel for a year. A difference of under $700 a

year means that it would take over 14 years to break even. Most Americans don’t even keep their

vehicle for that amount of time. Additionally, it can be argued that EVs discourage driving since

one must always keep track of battery life. In situations such as road trips, people are unlikely to

want to add hours to their trips to charge their vehicles. They are more likely to rent a vehicle or

fly to their location. Although it is true that the cost of maintaining an electric vehicle is

significantly less than a gas-powered vehicle, an EV presents many more unexpected problems

(Stolze). They still have not been extensively tested in the extreme weather conditions that we

see around the country. Gas-powered vehicles are also a lot easier to plan for since most of the
maintenance they require can be outlined in advance. While they are a lot lighter on wearables

than a traditional vehicle, the battery that powers them can still prove to be a liability along with

their complicated electrical systems. Many papers outline this potential with Hawkins

specifically saying, “the treatment of maintenance and parts replacement is rather rough

considering the potential importance of battery replacement or increased maintenance associated

with the complex control systems and regenerative braking systems”. A replacement of the

battery module can cost well over $15,000, as quoted by multiple Tesla Service Centers.

Although Elon Musk States that the power modules should last well over 300,000 miles, Tesla’s Commented [CE4]: Since a lot of the research does seem
very Tesla focused, it might make sense at some points to
show that other manufacturers do have cheaper options,
warranty does not reflect that. Their limited warranty covers only up to 120,000 miles in their but that doesn't necessarily eliminate the other issues
involved in the process of maintaining and purchasing and
long-range models with the added stipulation that the battery capacity still exceeds 70% (Tesla EV.

Motors Website). This means that when it is time to replace the battery, many owners will opt to

purchase a new vehicle since the price of a new battery is essentially a down-payment.

With the problem of battery life also comes the question of recycling. Most EVs will

need their battery replaced within their lifetime. A new 4,000 tax incentive when buying used

EVs will likely open up a new market for people to try them second hand (NRDC). This means it

will be more likely that the vehicles will reach the point where they produce significantly less

emissions, but battery replacements could prove to be detrimental to the mission. A battery is

considered “end of life” when it is under 80% of its original capacity (Richa) meaning its

replacement is recommended. As Hawking states in his paper, “Not all materials in batteries, for

example, can be reused in batteries given current material prices. In many cases, materials are

downcycled into other applications for which the environmental impacts of producing materials

are significantly less than those for the EV system” (Hawkins). The production of batteries is the

most environmentally and economically demanding part of EVs: especially when considering the
United States only possesses about 0.3% of the world’s lithium reserves (USGS). Production of

the average EV creates about 20% more emissions than a gas-powered vehicle (Wang). The

complicated nature of lithium mining means that it is difficult to measure the indirect emissions

of EVs, as Hawkins points out, meaning it is easy to over-endorse them, like the media may be

doing. As Wang points out, “there is a lack of research investigating electric vehicle batteries

recycling network design at the enterprise level, which impedes the sustainable development of

electric vehicles”. Many professionals agree that this is the weak point of EVs, and Wang creates

a plan for optimizing recycling. Even in his most hopeful projection, Wang states that current EV

produced emissions can only be reduced by up to 21.8%.

Tax incentives and the promise of better infrastructure is not enough for Americans to

fully adopt Electric Vehicles. Despite endorsement by the government, media, and even

celebrities, Americans are hesitant to adopt the new technology. There is a high amount of

variability when it comes to the viability of EVs and a lack of information scares many away.

General statements hold little value so it would be wise for representatives of the movement to

provide real life values to show how EVs fit people’s needs. They are promising in terms of

reaching our environmental goals, but the upfront cost of materials means the result we desire

would be significantly delayed. Things such as an increase of public transportation and the

reduction of aviation would result in quicker, drastic changes. Electric vehicles are not the one

simple answer when it comes to solving our climate problems despite being painted as such.

Technology is constantly evolving and the new developments in fueling, such as hydrogen and

Porsche’s E-fuel, mean the future of EVs is still uncertain.

 Works Cited

Dost, Philip Karl-Heinz, et al. “Charging Behavior of Users Utilizing Battery Electric Vehicles
and Extended Range Electric Vehicles Within the Scope of a Field Test.” IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 54, no. 1, 2018, pp. 580–90,
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2017.2758753.
The biggest problem most people have with electric vehicles is the limited use they allow
due to range. Higher end models include options with included range but many still believe it is
not enough. The inconvenience that charging presents vs. a simple gas station fill-up is enough to
turn many away.
This article will help my paper because it presents us with an actual study of people with
different driving habits and shows how electric vehicles would serve them.
“Electricity Cost in California: 2023 Electric Rates.” EnergySage, www.energysage.com/local-
data/electricity-
cost/ca/#:~:text=Monthly%20electric%20bills%20are%20a,kWh%20*%2030%20%C2%A
2%2FkWh. Accessed 12 May 2023.
I used this website to show how in very urban areas like California, the cost of electrivity is
significantly higher which measn the cost of owning an EV would be higher.
Hawkins, Troy R., Ola M. Gausen, and Anders H. Strømman. "Environmental Impacts of Hybrid
and Electric Vehicles--a Review." The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, vol.
17, no. 8, 2012, pp. 997-1014. ProQuest,
http://access.library.miami.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-
journals/environmental-impacts-hybrid-electric-vehicles/docview/1031260982/se-2,
doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0440-9.
 In his Article, Hawkins and Strømman analyze the part of electric vehicle emissions
which are often overlooked, indirect emissions. The cost of producing batteries is much higher
up-front and the electricity produced for them in coal power plants must also be further
investigated.
This source proves to be a strong fit for my research paper because it challenges the ways
in which the emissions of electric vehicles are being calculated. It does this while also exploring
the ways in which calculating a number of the sort can be difficult because of how it can change
depending on use and location.

House, The White. “FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Standards and
Major Progress for a Made-In-America National Network of Electric Vehicle Chargers.”
The White House, 15 Feb. 2023, www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-
releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-standards-
and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-
chargers/#:~:text=There%20are%20now%20more%20than.

This “fact sheet” provided by the white house provides even more information on the economics
behind the advancement of EVs. It highlights the tax incentives that are present along with a
detailed plan to further develop.

Jenn, A. (2023). Emissions of electric vehicles in California’s transition to carbon neutrality.

Applied Energy, 339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.120974
This article highlights one of the major downsides of electric vehicle production, battery
production. Electric vehicles are powered by rechargeable lithium-ion batteries which deteriorate
over time and occasionally need to be replaced. Current methods of production are not very
efficient and lead to a huge waste stream
This article will be beneficial to my paper because it specializes in the area that is most
overlooked. Electric vehicles need maintenance just like all other vehicles but something like a
battery replacement is more harmful to the environment.
Jessica Aizarani, and Mar 22. “Shell Revenue 2022.” Statista, 22 Mar. 2023,
www.statista.com/statistics/268734/revenue-of-shell/.
I used these statistics to show how Shell has not really lost any revenue as a result of the “EV
takeover”.
Kirti Richa, Callie W. Babbitt, Gabrielle Gaustad, Xue Wang, “A future perspective on lithium-
ion battery waste flows from electric vehicles, Resources, Conservation and Recycling”,
Volume 83, 2014, Pages 63-76, ISSN 0921- 3449,
 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.11.008.
A high adaptation of electric vehicles could prove to be detrimental to the environment
with (then) current recycling practices. Substantial changes would have to be made to our waste
management and lithium-ion battery recycling before EVs can be fully adopted.
This paper creates waste projections based on different levels of EV adoption which will
be helpful in my paper as a baseline for recycling practices.

Matulka, Rebecca. “The History of the Electric Car.” Energy.gov, Department of Energy, 15
Sept. 2014, www.energy.gov/articles/history-electric-car.
This article by the Department of Energy shows the progress that electric vehicles have
made since the debut of the Toyota Prius. It highlights some of the economic aspects of the rise
of Tesla.

Stolze, Eric D. “A Billion Dollar Franchise Fee? Tesla Motors’ Battle for Direct Sales: State
Dealer Franchise Law and Politics.” Franchise Law Journal, vol. 34, no. 3, 2015, pp.
293–309. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A406163112/AONE?u
=miami_richter&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=9b7d60fa.
Most electric car manufacturers employ a different sales model to that of traditional
manufacturers. They sell directly to consumers and use loopholes to do so in states like Texas
where it is not legal to do so. Franchised dealerships have long been protected from
manufacturers since states earn considerable amount of sales tax through them, but Tesla puts
this relationship at risk.
While not illegal, Tesla’s sales strategy (specifically in Texas) will prove to be difficult
for many consumers. Older people specifically will be less likely to purchase a new car.

Wang, Lei, et al. “Optimal Design of Electric Vehicle Battery Recycling Network – From the

Perspective of Electric Vehicle Manufacturers.” Applied Energy, vol. 275, 2020, p.

115328, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115328.

In his paper Lei Wang proposes and develops a projection of emissions reduction
regarding electric vehicles. Like many, he agrees that battery production and recycling is the
weakest point of EV development, but he creates an optimized plan to help solve that problem.
 This paper by Lei Wang serves as a follow up to Hawkins’ paper questioning the viability
of recycling batteries. It shows how technology has developed and can continue to develop to
better support EVs.