Onshoring the EV supply chain to Europe would cut the emissions of producing a battery by 37% compared to a China-controlled supply chain, according to new analysis by Transport & Environment (T&E). This carbon saving rises to over 60% when renewable electricity is used. Producing Europe’s demand for battery cells and components locally would save an estimated 133 Mt of CO2 between 2024 and 2030, equivalent to the total annual emissions of Czechia.
But over half of Europe's battery production plans are at risk without stronger government action, the researchers say.
Less than half (47%) of the lithium-ion battery production planned for Europe up to 2030 is secure, the report also finds. This is up from one-third a year ago following a raft of measures put in place to respond to the US Inflation Reduction Act. The remaining 53% of announced cell manufacturing capacity is still at medium or high risk of being delayed, scaled down or cancelled without stronger government action.
Julia Poliscanova, senior director for vehicles and emobility supply chains at T&E, said: “Batteries, and metals that go into them, are the new oil. European leaders will need laser sharp focus and joined-up thinking to reap their climate and industrial benefits. Strong sustainability requirements, such as the upcoming battery carbon footprint rules, can reward local clean manufacturing. Crucially, Europe needs better instruments under the European Investment Bank and EU Battery Fund to support gigafactory investments.”
France, Germany and Hungary have made the most progress in securing gigafactory capacity since T&E’s previous risk assessment last year. [1] In France, ACC started production in Pas-de-Calais last year while plants by Verkor in Dunkirk and Northvolt in Schleswig-Holstein, Germany, are going ahead thanks to generous government subsidies.
Finland, the UK, Norway and Spain have the most production capacity at medium or high risk due to question marks over projects by the Finnish Minerals Group, West Midlands Gigafactory, Freyr and InoBat. T&E called on lawmakers to help lock in investments by doubling down on EU electric car policies, enforcing strong battery sustainability requirements that reward local manufacturing, and beefing up EU-level funding.
Securing other parts of the battery value chain will be even more challenging given China’s dominance and the EU’s nascent expertise. The report finds Europe has the potential to manufacture 56% of its demand for cathodes – the battery’s most valuable components – by 2030, but only two plants have started commercial operations so far. By the end of this decade, the region could also fulfil all of its processed lithium needs and secure between 8% and 27% of battery minerals from recycling in Europe. But T&E said processing and recycling plants need EU and state support to scale quickly.
Julia Poliscanova said: “The battery race between China, Europe and the US is intensifying. While some battery investments that were at risk of being lured away by US subsidies have been saved since last year, close to half of planned production is still up for grabs. The EU needs to end any uncertainty over its engine phase-out and set corporate EV targets to assure gigafactory investors that they will have a guaranteed market for their product.”
We all want fewer cars on the road. Objecting to cars/buses/other road-using vehicles (which will certainly be here for the short-medium term future whether people like it or not) transitioning to using clean energy in both the production and usage stages of their lives achieves nothing other than keeping us burning fossil fuels for longer.
Even if everywhere could use rail, it will take decades to build that infrastructure out everywhere. In the meantime, cars, buses, vans, and lorries exist and they should be as clean as we can make them. You're letting perfect be the enemy of good.
The money used to maintain car infrastructure could be used to build all rail ever. Rail is both insanely cheap to build and maintain compared to asphalt roads. If every larger city builds a tram network in the next 5 or so years instead of doing endless road maintenance that will have more impact than any investment in electric vehicles ever could in the same timeframe.
Also electric vehicle adoption is far slower than building public transit as only very wealthy countries have any chance of mass adopting while everyone else will keep buying 10 year old ICE cars. So any chance of electric cars being a solution is pretty much null. It's fine to develop them but any government investment has to go to more effective solutions, like building a rail network to replace air travel.
That might be possible in cities (if we're being extremely generous to your position). But not everyone lives in cities, some of us aren't that privileged. What do those people do, stay at home?
You're living in another universe if you think it's possible to move away from road vehicles in the short term.
Road vehicles will exist for the foreseeable future. So they may as well be as clean as they can be.
People who live away from all settlements make up maybe up to 5% of population if being generous and they can all roll coal and it would still be a net win if the vast majority of people take a tram or train instead of a car or plane. Also people living in the middle of nowhere have no infrastructure to recharge their cars anyway if they need to drive outside the car's range so it's not like electric cars help them.
You are not living in reality if you think electric vehicle adoption can be fast enough to have any effect on climate change. Building a proper electric train and tram network on the other hand is doable in a short timeframe while being cheaper.
Where I live, everyone has photovoltaics on their roofs. Of I drive to a friend's place, I'll just hook the EV up to his charger. No problem... If I could afford a goddamn EV that is.