Electric Vehicles Outperform Combustion Engines in Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In recent years, the debate surrounding the environmental impact of electric vehicles (EVs) versus internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) has intensified, particularly as global awareness of climate change continues to rise. A comprehensive analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) reveals that battery electric vehicles (BEVs) are significantly greener than their ICE counterparts throughout their lifecycles. This report, published on July 24, 2025, indicates that in major markets accounting for 70% of global new passenger car sales, BEVs generate far fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than ICEVs.

According to Anh Bui, a researcher at the ICCT, the life-cycle GHG emissions of a representative 2024 model year BEV sport utility vehicle (SUV) are 71% lower than those of a comparable ICEV. This analysis further projects that as the electricity grid becomes cleaner, the emissions advantage of BEVs will only increase, reaching an estimated 77% reduction in GHG emissions by 2030-2047 (ICCT, 2025).

To provide context, the production of BEVs incurs an initial 'emissions debt' primarily due to the energy-intensive manufacturing of batteries, which can constitute about 25% of a BEV's total life-cycle emissions. For instance, the manufacturing phase emissions for a 2024 BEV SUV are slightly over 12 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e), compared to approximately 8 tonnes for an ICEV. However, BEVs offset this emissions debt within the first 1-2 years of operation, leading to a substantial reduction in overall emissions over their lifetimes (O’Malley & Slowik, 2024).

Moreover, when considering operational emissions, BEVs are notably more efficient, converting a larger percentage of energy into actual movement. The CO2e emissions from BEVs are estimated at about 130 grams per mile, while ICEVs produce more than 450 grams per mile by the end of their operational phase. This stark contrast highlights the impact of transitioning to electric mobility as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions.

Despite these findings, skepticism remains among some segments of the American public regarding the environmental benefits of EVs. This skepticism is often fueled by misleading narratives that do not take into account the full scope of emissions related to vehicle operation and production. Bui refutes these claims, emphasizing the comprehensive nature of the ICCT's analysis and the importance of understanding the broader context of emissions related to both vehicle types.

In addition to the GHG reductions, the recycling of battery materials and advances in battery technology are expected to further decrease the environmental impact of BEVs. The U.S. has enough operational and planned recycling capacity to manage end-of-life batteries from BEVs and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) until 2044. As battery chemistries continue to evolve and recycling practices improve, the reliance on newly mined materials will diminish, enhancing the sustainability of electric vehicles.

In conclusion, the ICCT's analysis underscores that BEVs are not only a viable alternative to ICEVs but are also a necessary step towards achieving lower emissions in the transportation sector. As the grid becomes increasingly reliant on renewable energy, the long-term benefits of electric vehicles will only grow, solidifying their role in the global effort to combat climate change. The transition to electric mobility not only represents an economic opportunity but also a critical component in the strategy to achieve significant reductions in global GHG emissions in the coming decades.