||| FROM THE GUARDIAN |||
The Global Environment Outlook (GEO) report, which is produced by 200 researchers for the UN Environment Programme, said the climate crisis, destruction of nature and pollution could no longer be seen as simply environmental crises.
The science is good. The solutions are known. What is required is the courage to act at the scale and speed that history demands.
One of the biggest issues was the $45tn a year in environmental damage caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas, and the pollution and destruction of nature caused by industrial agriculture.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
What frustrates me so much is nothing in this report is new. We have had this information for 25+ years. What we lack is the political will to do what needs to be done. Much of that lack of political will stems from big money influence on our elections. The fossil fuel industry has successfully created doubt around the science of what should now be called the climate crisis. Remember when Dick Cheney said that we couldn’t afford to deal with global warming? It was a lie then, and we’re seeing the tragic results of that attitude now. We really need a paradigm shift in how our economy works – to shift from an extractive mechanistic economy to one that functions like a living system and puts a real value on those “externalities”. Until we do that, we will continue to provide welfare for big corporations and practice austerity for the rest of us. I highly recommend John Fullerton’s online course “Introduction to Regenerative Economics”, in addition to his new book on the subject. I would like to host a discussion about this in Eastsound shortly into the new year.
This is good information. I want to add the idea that Electric and rechargeable batteries in, for example, electric vehicles are also detrimental to the environment, and that there is human trafficking and children used to process and collect the products for the EV. The explosions from an EV are toxic, almost impossible to put out for fire departments.
So while the options above and the EV are not solutions, many are doing the best they can.
I will remind those who push the ‘global warming’ that this concept was pushed by those who travel around in their JET liners and private aircraft to push this agenda. For many, we work to lower our footprint, while there is no PERFECT solution.
I want to remind you that the use of electricity is also not feasible or long-lasting, as the SJ is at its maximum for power output. Meanwhile, water is scarce. Yet we push to continue to grow without the push to use solar on all rooftops.
Info for thought
Cobalt Mining in the DRC: The DRC produces over 70% of the world’s cobalt. A significant portion of this is extracted through artisanal and small-scale mines, where adults and children as young as seven work in extremely hazardous conditions for very low pay. These conditions can involve debt bondage, tunnel collapses, and exposure to toxic dust, leading to serious injury or death. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has listed cobalt from the DRC as a good produced with child or forced labor since 2009.
Processing in China: Cobalt mined in the DRC is often shipped to China for processing by companies that supply major battery and car manufacturers globally. Concerns have also been raised by the U.S. government and human rights organizations regarding the use of state-sponsored forced labor, particularly targeting Muslim Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region of China, to produce materials like polysilicon for solar panels and other battery components.
Supply Chain Complexity: The complexity of the global supply chain, involving thousands of suppliers, makes it difficult for EV companies to fully audit and verify the origins of their materials. This lack of transparency has allowed human rights abuses to persist upstream in the supply chain. Electric vehicle (EV) battery studies reveal significant environmental destruction, primarily from mining raw materials (lithium, cobalt) causing water depletion and habitat loss, high energy use in manufacturing leading to large carbon footprints (especially for NCM batteries), and issues with toxic PFAS pollution near plants, though recycling and better battery chemistries (like LFP) and cleaner electricity can mitigate these impacts over the battery’s life. While EVs have higher initial production impacts than gas cars, they generally offer lower lifetime emissions, with battery end-of-life management being crucial for sustainability.
Key Areas of Environmental Impact
Mining & Extraction:
Water Use: Lithium extraction from brine (like in South America) uses vast amounts of freshwater, impacting local ecosystems.
Land & Biodiversity: Mining for cobalt and other minerals (e.g., in the DRC) causes deforestation, habitat loss, and pollution, with studies examining biodiversity impacts beyond just carbon.
Toxic Pollution: Research shows toxic PFAS (forever chemicals) are emitted during manufacturing, polluting air, soil, and water near plants, potentially traveling long distances.
Manufacturing (Battery Production):
High Carbon Footprint: Battery manufacturing is the most carbon-intensive stage of an EV’s life, accounting for a large chunk of its total emissions, especially for Nickel-Manganese-Cobalt (NMC/NCM) batteries.
Electricity Mix: The carbon intensity of the grid used for manufacturing significantly affects the battery’s footprint, favoring cleaner grids.
End-of-Life (Recycling & Disposal):
Low Recycling Rates: Currently, only a small percentage of lithium-ion batteries are recycled, far less than lead-acid car batteries, posing landfill risks.
Recycling Benefits: Recycling reduces raw material demand but needs improvement, with higher cell-to-pack recycling rates being key.
Mitigating Factors & Solutions
Battery Chemistry: Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) batteries have lower environmental impacts than NCM types, reducing reliance on cobalt and nickel.
Recycling & Reuse: Second-life uses (e.g., stationary storage) and better recycling can significantly lower lifetime impacts.
Cleaner Grids: As electricity grids decarbonize, the use-phase emissions of EVs decrease, making them more environmentally beneficial faster.
In essence, studies highlight that while EVs combat climate change, their batteries present significant localized environmental challenges that require careful material choices, cleaner production, and robust recycling infrastructure to truly fulfill their green potential.