Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles 1

WHY PETROL VEHICLES DEMONSTRATE GREATER EFFICIENCY THAN ELECTRIC

VEHICLES

By [Name]

Course Name

Institution Name

Location of Institution

Date
 Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles 2

Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles

vehicles (EVs) in contrast to traditional fossil-fueled engine vehicles (ICEs) has become

increasingly prominent. Although EVs are frequently regarded as the cornerstone of future

sustainable transportation, ICEs continue to prevail in numerous regions globally, influenced

by factors such as longevity, cost, and performance. This paper aims to elucidate the

reasons behind the superior efficiency of fossil fuel-powered vehicles in certain contexts by

analysing environmental hazards, longevity, harmful components associated with EVs, and

their depreciation rates. This paper also looks at what consumers want, government policies,

and market trends to give a well-rounded view of how the automotive industry is changing

and the competition between EVs and ICEs. Moreover, it discusses important obstacles that

EVs face, including the lack of charging stations, the high upfront costs, and worries about

battery sustainability. It provides a deeper insight into the automotive industry, and how it is

changing. This showcases that even though electric vehicles (EVs) are frequently seen as

the future of eco-friendly transportation, internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles still have

some benefits in specific situations. As such, EVs's durability, affordability, and extensive

infrastructure show that the shift from traditional fossil-fueled engine vehicles is more

complicated than it seems, which the paper dives into by evaluating the environmental pros

and cons of electric vehicles (EVs) and internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, with a

focus on emissions, resource extraction, and overall sustainability. Furthermore, it covers the

durability and lifespan of electric vehicles (EVs) and internal combustion engine (ICE)

vehicles in the second section and cost factors and economic sustainability, focusing on

issues like depreciation, battery replacement costs, and resale value in the third section.

2.1. 1st sub-section

Are Electric Vehicles really better for the environment than ICE Vehicles?

Evs do not have a positive impact on the environment. To truly grasp the

sustainability of electric vehicles (EVs) compared to internal combustion engine (ICE)

vehicles, examining their environmental effects throughout their entire lifecycle is crucial.

Fossil fuel-powered vehicles are often subject to criticisms regarding their carbon footprint,

particularly due to the greenhouse gas emissions they produce, and their dependence on

finite resources. As climate change and energy resources are now major issues worldwide,

there has been a stronger push for sustainable transportation. This has made electric

vehicles (EVs) a key topic in discussions about policies and new innovations. On the

contrary, internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles are improving in fuel efficiency and using

alternative fuels, which helps them stay relevant, especially in places where cost and

existing fuel infrastructure are important. According to Hasan et al. (2021), vehicles that run

on petrol and diesel are major contributors to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions throughout

their use, representing a significant portion of global transportation-related emissions.

Nevertheless, the environmental implications of electric vehicles (EVS) are also noteworthy,

especially concerning the production of their batteries. The extraction and processing of

lithium, cobalt, and other essential materials for EV batteries result in substantial emissions

in the environment. Although EVs emit less CO2 during operation, their lifecycle emissions

can rival or even exceed those of traditional vehicles, depending on the energy mix used for

electricity generation (Hasan et al., 2021). In numerous countries that depend on fossil fuels

for electricity, electric vehicles (EVS) do not automatically lead to a significant decrease in

emissions to the environment. Thiel et al. (2010) emphasise that in specific energy policy

contexts within Europe, the emissions associated with the production of EVs, may not be

completely compensated, particularly due to ongoing dependence on coal and natural gas

for power. As such, while fossil fuel cars directly emit more CO2 during operation, EVs may

carry hidden environmental costs that challenge the assumption of their superiority.

Nonetheless, improvements in EV technology, like improving battery recycling and the

transition to renewable energy sources, are starting to become better. If it keeps on

improving, then it might tackle the automotive industry's market. Danilecki et al.(2023) posit

that the importance of the carbon footprint is linked to car usage, which is a vital factor for

environmental sustainability. By exploring the entire life cycle of vehicles, covering

everything from manufacturing to maintenance, repairs, and disposal. It is found that

maintenance and repair can greatly impact a car's total carbon footprint, sometimes making

up almost half of its environmental effects. Regular repairs, poor parts replacements, and

insufficient servicing can increase emissions throughout the car's life. However, improving

maintenance routines and making cars last longer can lower the carbon footprint by reducing

the need for new car parts and cutting down on resource use. It is shown that EVs need

regular servicing, and repairing body parts. That in itself causes immense harm to the

environment, because of constant checkups on the vehicle. This comparison highlights that

neither electric vehicles nor internal combustion engine vehicles can be seen as completely

sustainable at this point, and both types of technology come with environmental drawbacks,

yet ICEVs pose less of a threat to the environment than EVs.

How do lifecycle emissions of EVs compare to those of ICE vehicles?

The emissions emitted by a vehicle in its entire lifetime from the fabrication phase to

disposal designate its lifecycle emissions. As a result, narrowing down to the environmental

implications of mining and manufacturing processes of both vehicles is crucial in

comprehending their emissions viability across their lifespan. Hasan et al. (2021) report that

increased uptake of EVs in New Zealand indicated that it would reduce greenhouse

emissions by 87% to 90% and offer monetary benefits. However, the reported significant

decline in emissions due to the adoption of EVs in New Zealand has been considerably

fueled by the country’s large share of renewable energy across its power generation mix,

facilitating low emissions across their life cycle. This means that this would not be the case

in countries where their production processes rely on non-renewable sources of energy.

Indeed, Sharma et al. (2023) state that although lithium-ion batteries are technologies to

reckon with for diminishing global dependence on fossil fuel, the mining processes utilized in

the extraction of critical minerals, including lithium and cobalt, to make them threaten

biodiversity by triggering changes in land use and sabotage of habitats. Laskowski et al.

(2021) contend that emissions by EVs and ICE vehicles hinge upon the type of internal
 Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles 5

combustion, spark or compression ignition, energy mix, and capacity of the internal

combustion engine, meaning that increasing usage of EVs may have no significant effect on

emissions, apart from carbon emissions. The researchers contend sulfur dioxide and

nitrogen oxide emissions for EVs are higher than those of ICE vehicles. Hence, considering

the different pollutants released by both vehicles besides carbon (IV) oxide is critical in

understanding the specific contribution of each. In this regard, despite the association of ICE

vehicles with high emissions while in operation of EVs, their eco-friendliness in terms of

lowering emissions should be scrutinized beyond their operation period to include emission

implication during fabrication of raw materials to disposal to capture the entire lifecycle. This

discussion indicates that no vehicle can be concluded to be the most viable in terms of the

ability to lower emissions because emissions can be of different types and the energy used

in the exploration of critical minerals and fabrications also matters.

2.2. 2nd sub-section

How does the lifespan of EVs compare to that of ICE vehicles?

The lifespan of a vehicle is fundamentally determined by the general cost of

ownership, which is influenced by durability, cost of repair and maintenance, and

advancement in technologies in favor of reliability and durability. Weldon et al. (2018)

investigated this topic based on a similar cost perspective and found out that the long-term

cost of ownership of EVs is only preferable when their usage is high and vehicles are larger.

Indeed, the authors specified that both types of vehicles demonstrated competitive cost-

effectiveness provided the mentioned factors remain constant. This means that savings on

fuel for EV owners may not match the maintenance costs of EVs, especially those with a

lower initial purchase cost compared with similar-sized ICE vehicles, as illustrated by the

graph in Figure 1 below. According to Weldon et al. (2018), savings on the cost of

maintenance of EVs depend on the initial cost of acquiring, where the luxurious and

expensive ones win despite their correlation in size to similar ICE vehicles. The costs of

replacing EVs’s batteries significantly hampers their cost-competitiveness with ICEVs,

especially those with large battery capacities (Weldon et al., 2018). Consequently, in the

face of the current technology for battery development for EVs, the vehicles are vulnerable

to sharp depreciation. On the contrary, Liu et al. (2021) say that ICEVs’s higher pack-to-

wheel efficiency and lower costs of maintenance and repair translate to cost savings for

these vehicles. Liu and co-researchers' findings showed that it would take approximately 8

years for a low-range EV, under 200 miles, to achieve cost parity with a similar ICEV with a

much larger range. In this sense, the comparison indicates that ICEVs are generally cost-

effective, which is significantly attributed to the long-term cost of ownership, which, in turn,

influences the vehicle’s lifespan. Thus, Evs' lifespan is preordained to be shorter primarily

due to their long-term financial inviability compared to internal combustion engine cars based

on the current technologies for batteries and engines development.

Figure 1: A comparison between EVs and ICEVs’s annual maintenance and repair

costs based on linear regression (Liu et al., 2021).

What factors influence the longevity of each vehicle type?

The longevity of EVs and ICEVs is tied to factors that influence the cost of keeping

them operational without needing significant repairs or replacements. Mahiban & Emimal

(2023) contend that the longevity of EVs depends on battery lifespan, technological
 Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles 7

advancement, consumer behavior, and policy support. Advanced knowledge and technology

in battery manufacturing, energy density, and heat management are critical in enhancing

their durability and reliability, favoring their lifespan. Batteries being detrimental to EVs’s

durability, effective management of aspects that influence their efficiency and reliability

require to be critically studied. On the contrary, ICEVs' lifespan is dictated by the quality of

engine wear maintenance and frequency of servicing, whose cost is significantly lower

compared to rectifying battery degradation in EVs. This means that ICEs can easily be taken

care of, alleviating their longevity. However, technology advancements stand out as

promising ways to streamline these factors for both vehicles to achieve reliable and well-

performing batteries and engines to enhance their longevity.

2.3. 3rd sub-section

How do depreciation rates differ between EVs and ICE vehicles?

EVs and ICEVs’s depreciation rates designate the loss of value over time, which is

broadly determined by the initial cost of acquiring, maintenance costs, technology changes,

and consumer behavior. Gautam et al. (2024) report that the efforts to replace ICEVs with

EVs have significantly been facilitated by government and industry subsidies because EVs

depreciate much faster. Indeed, an empirical evaluation of the depreciation of EVs and

ICEVs by (Schloter 2022) indicated that the former has a significantly higher depreciation of

13.9% annually compared to the latter with 10.4% per annum. The high rate of depreciation

is triggered by rapid technological progress, lowering the older cars’ demand in the market.

The battery life is a major factor that drives EVs’s depreciation rates, whose only solution is

the use of advanced technologies that enhance battery longevity and reliability at a lower

cost. This means that second-hand EVs lose value when new models with better ranges and

enhanced battery efficiency venture into the market, thus not attracting customers due to

further uncertainty in the resale value. On the contrary, Danilecki et al. (2023) attribute

ICEVs’s depreciation to maintenance and replacement costs, where a new vehicle can

reliably last for about 20 to 30 years following a long-term replacement policy that considers
 Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles 8

environmental implications. Arguably based on the above comparison, ICEVs have a lower

depreciation rate than EVs because the former is stable, predictable, and less affected by

technology changes and the mentioned effects on EVs’s resale value.

What is the economic depreciation for long-term vehicle efficiency?

Economic depreciation for long-term vehicle efficiency refers to the effect on the total

cost of ownership of the vehicle and keeping it functional, including maintenance and

replacement costs. These expenses highly influence the resale value because buyers tend

to prefer the cost-effective types. Thus, achieving efficient long-term economic depreciation

of a vehicle can be realised by prioritising the types with cheaper and less often

maintenance and repairs and whose rates of losing values are predictable and relatively

stable.

Conclusion

What is the overall evaluation of EVs and ICE vehicles in terms of efficiency and

sustainability?

Although EVs have received significant attention as feasible options to lower

emissions by ICEVs, the latter have better cost-effectiveness due to longer longevity,

affordability, and lower depreciation rates. The ability of EVs to adequately lower emissions

may not be as viable as it appears when the long-term emissions of both vehicles are

considered. The emissions generated while mining critical minerals in the fabrication of EV

batteries, including lithium, may outmatch the contribution of ICEVs, especially where non-

renewable energy sources are used in extraction and fabrication.

What is the balanced approach to transportation’s future?

The balanced approach to the transportation future with a critical focus on eco-

friendliness lies in utilizing technological advances to improve battery reliability and range,

enabled by a collaborative approach by the government, manufacturers, and other relevant

stakeholders in EV development. This way, cost efficiency, battery sustainability, and

infrastructure development can be harmonized to shift the balance in favor of EVs as

effective solutions to environmental stewardship.

References

Danilecki, K., Smurawski, P., & Urbanowicz, K. (2023). Optimization of Car Use Time

for Different Maintenance and Repair Scenarios Based on Life Cycle Assessment. Applied

Sciences, 13(17), 9843. [Link]

Gautam, P., Pode, G., Pode, R., Godwin, K. A., & Diouf, B. (2024). Depreciation in

the Electric Vehicle Transition: Sustainability of the Second-Hand Electric Vehicle Market.

Vehicles, 6(4), 2044. [Link]

Hasan, M. A., Frame, D. J., Chapman, R., & Archie, K. M. (2021). Costs and

emissions: Comparing electric and petrol-powered cars in New Zealand. Transportation

Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 90, 102671.

[Link]

Laskowski, P. P., Zimakowska-Laskowska, M., Zasina, D., & Wiatrak, M. (2021).

Comparative analysis of the emissions of carbon dioxide and toxic substances emitted by

vehicles with ICE compared to the equivalent emissions of BEV. Combustion Engines,

187(4), 102-105. [Link]

Liu, Z., Song, J., Kubal, J., Susarla, N., Knehr, K. W., Islam, E., ... & Ahmed, S.

(2021). Comparing total cost of ownership of battery electric vehicles and internal

combustion engine vehicles. Energy Policy, 158, 112564.

[Link]

Mahiban, L. N., & Emimal, M. (2023). Longevity of electric vehicle operations. Qeios.

doi: 10.32388/ZAPC23, 2. [Link]

Schloter, L. (2022). Empirical analysis of the depreciation of electric vehicles

compared to gasoline vehicles. Transport Policy, 126, 268-279.

[Link]
 Why Petrol Vehicles Demonstrate Greater Efficiency Than Electric Vehicles 11

Sharma, S., Edge, J., & Mumford, J. (2023). Evaluating the impact of mining for

critical electric vehicle and stationary storage battery minerals on land use and biodiversity.

[Link]

Thiel, C., Perujo, A., & Mercier, A. (2010). Cost and CO2 aspects of future vehicle

options in Europe under new energy policy scenarios. Energy policy, 38(11), 7142-7151.

[Link]

Weldon, P., Morrissey, P., & O’Mahony, M. (2018). Long-term cost of ownership

comparative analysis between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine vehicles.

Sustainable Cities and Society, 39, 578-591. [Link] 2018.02.024