Why electric vehicle policy revision in Delhi is deeply flawed

The recently introduced policy by the Delhi government, which requires that a household's third private vehicle be an electric vehicle (EV), exemplifies a form of coercive environmentalism that lacks both economic insight and scientific validity. By prohibiting the registration of fossil fuel-powered three-wheelers starting this August and extending similar restrictions to two-wheelers by 2026, the new state administration is aligning itself with the global left-liberal climate agenda, while overlooking the complex realities surrounding energy production, economic viability and consumer preferences.

Although the initiative to promote EVs is presented as a measure to combat pollution, the actual implications of electric vehicles tell a more complicated story. Advocates assert that EVs are a greener option, yet the true environmental consequences remain uncertain.

EVs pollute more, not less

The extraction and processing of essential minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, which are vital for EV batteries, carry a significant environmental cost. These energy-intensive operations produce considerable emissions, which largely negate any supposed advantages of adopting EV technology.

Furthermore, transitioning to EVs will increase India's reliance on China, the leading global supplier of rare earth metals and battery components, thereby creating geopolitical risks similar to Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas.

The notion of reduced emissions from EVs is fraught with assumptions and approximations. Energy expert Mark Mills from the Manhattan Institute points out that every assertion regarding emissions reductions linked to EV usage is merely an estimate. The emissions produced during battery manufacturing, vehicle assembly and electricity generation for charging stations introduce additional uncertainties regarding the actual net benefits of EVs.

The nuance

• Production emissions: EV production generates higher emissions than traditional internal combustion engine vehicles, primarily due to battery manufacturing. However, studies show that EVs compensate for these high production emissions with lower tailpipe emissions during their lifespan.
• Battery material extraction: The extraction of materials like lithium and cobalt for EV batteries has environmental and health implications. Researchers emphasize the need for sustainable and responsible sourcing practices.
• Charging emissions: The environmental impact of EVs depends on the energy source used for charging. A study found that when renewable energy sources are used, EVs can reduce carbon emissions by up to 70%.
• Air pollution reduction: Research has shown that EV adoption can lead to significant reductions in air pollution and associated health problems. A study in California found that a 2% increase in EV adoption led to a 3.2% decrease in asthma-related emergency department visits.
• Life cycle assessment: A comprehensive life cycle assessment study highlighted the importance of considering the entire life cycle of EVs, from raw material extraction to disposal. This approach helps identify areas for improvement and optimisation.

Economic impact on citizens

In addition to environmental issues, the economic viability of electric vehicles (EVs) is still in question. Although the government promotes subsidies to stimulate adoption, many consumers find EVs to be excessively priced. A significant part of the expense associated with EVs is linked to raw materials, which are influenced by unpredictable global markets and supply chain challenges. This situation leaves consumers vulnerable to fluctuations in foreign pricing and policy changes.

Furthermore, EVs currently do not offer the same level of utility as internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. The existing charging infrastructure is insufficient and factors such as lengthy charging times, limited driving ranges and battery deterioration further hinder their practicality. Pressuring consumers to shift to a technology that is neither affordable nor user-friendly can be seen as a form of economic coercion.

Flawed approach to energy transition

The underlying assumption of this policy (which Union Transport Minister Nitin Gadkari is excited about too)  is that a shift away from hydrocarbons is both unavoidable and essential. However, global energy patterns challenge this belief. Fossil fuels still account for 84% of the world's energy consumption, a statistic that has seen little change despite two decades and five trillion dollars invested in green energy initiatives. Oil remains the primary source for 97% of global transportation, rendering the idea of a swift transition to EVs more of a political illusion than a reality.

To effectively replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources, the extraction of critical materials would need to increase by over 1,000%.

Environmental activists, often aligned with the push for electric vehicle (EV) adoption, continue to hinder mining initiatives globally, including within the United States. This inconsistency highlights a contradiction within the green movement: while advocating for a shift to renewable energy, they simultaneously impede the essential activities required to facilitate that transition.

Misguided policies of Delhi government

The Delhi government's stringent mandates are leading its residents toward an unaffordable and impractical future. Policies should prioritise economic feasibility and technological readiness rather than ideological posturing. Rather than enforcing an early transition to EVs, the government ought to concentrate on creating a comprehensive energy strategy that embraces advancements in hybrid technology, cleaner fossil fuel options and a pragmatic approach to emission reductions.

Imposing a system that lacks the reliability, affordability or practicality of traditional vehicles will inevitably result in economic strain and public discontent. History demonstrates that enacting sweeping bans and inflexible policies without considering their long-term implications often leads to more challenges than solutions. The citizens of Delhi deserve a more thoughtful approach than being subjected to a flawed and ambitious experiment.