sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Renewable energy powered New Zealand well-placed to reap benefits of EVs, but other countries need to up their clean energy supply

Technology / news
Renewable energy powered New Zealand well-placed to reap benefits of EVs, but other countries need to up their clean energy supply
Toyota BZ4X charging. Photo: Juha Saarinen
Toyota BZ4X charging. Photo: Juha Saarinen

Electric vehicles (EVs) alone are not enough to combat climate change and could actually increase carbon dioxide emissions unless paired with significant renewable energy generation, a new study suggests.

Research spanning 26 countries over 15 years found electric vehicle adoption could in fact contribute to higher carbon emissions in regions where electricity generation still relies heavily on fossil fuels such as coal and oil.

In fact, if EVs are charged with electricity generated by coal-fired power plants, they could indirectly contribute to higher emissions than petrol or diesel vehicles, especially when the entire lifecycle from production to disposal is taken into consideration.

The global study, published in the journal Energy, analysed data from 2009 to 2023 using an extended STIRPAT framework, which examines the impact of population, affluence and technology on environmental outcomes.

A research team from the University of Auckland and Xiamen University found electric vehicle uptake shows a consistent positive correlation with carbon dioxide emissions across all quantiles measured.

What the researchers - Stephen Poletti, Simon Tao and Boqiang Lin - found challenges the common assumption that electric vehicles automatically reduce carbon emissions regardless of how their electricity is generated.

According to the paper, electric vehicles only begin to deliver emission reductions when renewable energy generation exceeds a critical threshold - approximately 48 per cent of the total electricity mix.

Globally, the world's renewable energy supply from mainly solar, wind and hydro accounts for just over 30 per cent of the total.

"EVs are only as green as the grid they plug into, and government policies should aim to increase the adoption and integration of renewable energy like solar and hydro. This can be achieved by setting ambitious renewable energy targets and providing adequate subsidies such as tax credits to producers and consumers of renewable energy," Poletti said.

New Zealand is well-placed to reap the benefits of EVs, as over 80 per cent of electricity generation in the country is renewable, the researchers said.

The researchers examined multiple factors affecting emissions, including economic growth, population density, green technological innovation, and renewable energy consumption.

While EVs showed a concerning positive relationship with emissions, the study found green technological innovation consistently helped reduce carbon dioxide output.

To that effect, the researchers recommend governments accelerate their transition to renewable electricity generation to ensure electric vehicles can fulfil their potential in helping combat climate change.

Removing subsidies for fossil fuels, and implementing carbon pricing mechanisms could also incentivise renewable energy development, the researchers added.

Higher population density also demonstrated a significant negative relationship with emissions, suggesting more compact urban development may contribute to lower carbon footprints.

The study identified economic growth, measured as per capita gross domestic product, as the strongest driver of increased carbon emissions across all countries in the analysis. A coordinated climate policy that integrates electric vehicle adoption with renewable energy expansion is important here.

They also suggest countries should focus on promoting sustainable urbanisation and effective population density management while encouraging the development of environmentally friendly green building standards.

It's worth noting EVs and other New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) provide other environmental benefits, one of the studies linked to in the paper suggests. Research from China shows subsidising private sector NEVs led to significantly improved air quality, reducing very fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 micron) from exhaust gases.

Such fine particulate matter can stay in the atmosphere for a long time, and is believed to cause lethal diseases and cancers for millions of people every year.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

23 Comments

60% on NZ energy is fossil fuels. Only 40% is electricity. The wide-eyed GND types think they can swap to electricity, and party on. The problem with that, is the stupendous amount of resources required; te other problem is that we are out of time. Not for CC reasons, but because we're up against the hard limits of the planet. 

They are correct that economic growth is the culprit - which means that every journalist who doesn't point that out, is not telling the truth. 

Urban crowding only works because fossil energy delivers and removes. Take it away and suburbia doesn't work. 

 

Up
6

Have you got a reference to that statistic?  Does the 60% include the petrol we power (most of) our road transport (petrol and diesel)?

Getting our policy right on whether or not to convert most of that fleet to EV via incentives requires reliable statistics and I'd love to be linked to them.

Because I believe the article/study quoted (80% of our power being from renewables), I'm seriously thinking of buying a new EV within the next few months.  Given the global passenger vehicle trade disruption, thanks to Trump, I'm guessing there will be great delas on new cars coming out.  And if in NZ, it is better (i.e., a good way as a consumer to reduce GHG emissions overall in NZ), I'll be sure to go for it.

I think, pdk that you're not that attuned to the fact that most of the population that reads the type of news and articles interest.co.nz publishes, that (likely) the majority of us are still making day-to-day financial decisions for ourselves and our families.  And yes, in doing so we should be conscious of our footprint - and buy accordingly.

I for example only shop in second-hand clothing stores - and I've even got the two eldest grandsons into op shopping as well!  Their Dad started them on the 'tip shop' from a very early age, so it was a natural for them to think about the planet, I suppose.  

We (that being all of us out here in 'normalville') find it difficult to fully ascribe to your "it's too late" philosophy.  The world has problems, but we are humans - the root of the word being humanity. 

 

Up
3

The difference is PDK is talking energy (the power we use to do everything, including move our vehicles and the electricity grid), whereas your 80% stat is about renewables in the electricity grid.

 

A great site for insights into the grid is

https://app.em6.co.nz/?stackedgwap.filter.gridZone=15

 

Note from that site

- Right now, 77% is renewable

- Currently in Auckland, the spot price for electricity is 44c kw/h (not including lines charges), and I'm paying 24c retail

- The ticker at the bottom left about which sources have produced electricity over a time period is fascinating!

 

 

 

Up
6

Thanks so much Officebound - will have a look :-).

We're paying 32c kw/h in Tauranga - but are gas for cooking and water heating.  I must do some shopping around in that regard as well.

Any idea how many kw/h it takes to charge your EV in the garage overnight?

Up
2

Over a regular 230 Volt line, I've seen 1.8-2.1 kW. I'm not sure how much the nominally 7.2 kW chargers use, but it'll be near that amount (although some cars only support 3.6 and 6.6 kW AC). 

Up
1

Thanks, Juha - that's good and yes, we'd be over a regular 230 Volt line. Gosh lots I need to learn before I head out shopping :-).  That Electrical Engineering nephew of mine bought one of these (traded in a Volt - one that he ordered months in advance so he could be a first-in);

https://www.ford.com/suvs/mach-e/?gnav=header-electrified-vhp&fbclid=Iw…

Funny thing, when he first got the Volt someone in the company went to management because he would charge the car overnight in his garage - and then needed to charge it at work to get home.  There was a concern by some person that he was using the company's energy for free. 

So, management decided to ask him to record his use in order to reimburse the company.  He didn't mind that at all but thought how stupid it was that he was paid near USD $200 an hour and he had to spend about an hour a week keeping a spreadsheet record of usage in order to reimburse the company a few bucks at the end of the month!!!!!

I think with the Mustang he can get both to and from work on the overnight charge, so the spreadsheet is no longer a requirement :-). 

 

Up
1

Ha. Which reminds me, Ford did say I could test drive an electric Mustang. Must follow up on that.

Up
0

With a little help from my friend ChatGPT, the most common electric cars in NZ, and various times to charge them

Short version is that if you actually drive it, an AC Wall charger is the way to go - many homes will need a switchboard upgrade to accommodate.

 

 

VehicleStandard         3-Pin Outlet (2.3 kW)            AC Wall Charger (7.4 kW)               Tesla Wall Connector (11 kW)

Tesla Model Y            ~32.6 hours                           ~10.1 hours                                        ~6.8 hours

Tesla Model 3            ~23.5 hours                           ~7.3 hours                                          ~4.9 hours

BYD Atto 3                ~26.1 hours                           ~8.1 hours                                          ~5.5 hours

Polestar 2                  ~33.9 hours                           ~10.5 hours                                        ~7.1 hours

MG4                           ~27.8 hours                         ~8.6 hours                                           ~5.8 hours

Up
1

Thanks, excellent information!  AC Wall charger it is :-).  so first thing I need to do is check out whether I need that switchboard upgrade and what that'll cost me.

Up
0

80-something % of our electricity, Kate. 

But electricity is only 40% of our total energy. 

Politicians use that to confuse, all the time. 

https://www.energyresources.org.nz/oil-and-gas-new-zealand/our-energy-m…

And making 'financial' is the wrong way to see it. Making strategic life decisions, now....

Up
2

And making 'financial' is the wrong way to see it. Making strategic life decisions, now....

 

Agree, but of course, all strategic decisions have a cost associated with them. 

Got that - I think that's what I assumed.  But, where a national energy strategy goes - incentivizing a 'big switch' of the transport fleet from FF to renewables would certainly improve our GHG position significantly.  Whether we have enough capacity given our current renewable generation is the question for strategic planners.  And given most of that generation is located in the SI (with much of it currently servicing a dying industry) - it does suggest other matters (such as where to house government in the future) are questions that need to be asked, if we want to plan strategically.

Up
0

Gee, great reporting on the study, Juha and I loved the nice simple quote by one of the authors of that study;

EVs are only as green as the grid they plug into

Yes!  I'm surprised that is not widely known already!

I knew it as a result of a conversation with a nephew of mine in the US years ago!  He has a MS in Electrical Engineering and has recently become a Registered EE in the US.  He current manages a team of engineers with a consultancy company that contracts to the US government in terms of grid planning.  His Masters thesis studied the grid requirements, specifically in the US, for a complete conversion of the national fleet to EV. 

And his explanation to me was essentially that - " it depends on where you live".  He was able to point me to an article from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) - and there is a cool little calculator box in there that allows the public in the US to check on the answer to this very question;

https://evtool.ucs.org/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR5l0A9XQRxocbvc1zY13U…

 

 

Up
5

Thanks and that is a useful calculator!

Up
3

The article needs to be clearer or what emissions are actually being counted here so as not to lead readers to the false presumption that EVs are worse for emissions that other vehicles

1. Total emissions footprint per capita?

2. Vehicle-only direct emissions kgCO2eq /km?

3. Vehicle and supply chain emissions kgCO2eq/km?

4. Whole of life vehicle and supply chain emissions kgCO2eq/km including embodied emissions from vehicle production and end of life remanufacturing?

Metric #4 is the most relevant and useful for decision making from an emissions perspective.

"Lies, damned lies and statistics" - Benjamin Disraeli

Up
0

Who said emissions were the (only) problem? 

Modernity - INCLUDING THE PRODUCTION OF EV'S - is the problem. 

This fellow was a physics Professor - until he though it all through. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/just-another-cassandra/  and has ended up here:

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2025-04-03/ishmael-chapter-3/

 

Up
1

"Electric vehicles (EVs) alone are not enough to combat climate change" - not only that the are the most eye wateringly expensive way to combat the runaway global warming hypothesis. Borrowing and mining to change the modelled temperature by sfa while bulldozing slag into the sea and giving workers arsenic poisoning. Clean air though.

Channel 7 China’s EV shame: the deadly reality behind the ‘clean, green’ electric vehicles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNag4j0nmKU

"IEA estimates that even if the world achieves its stated electric vehicle targets by 2030, the saved CO2 emissions will be 235 million tons. The standard climate model used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggests this will reduce global temperatures by only 0.0001°C by 2100."

https://financialpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-the-muddled-reality-of-…

 

Up
1

Below is a quick chat I had with my mate ChatGPT.

Not only are EV's better on a 100% Coal power plant, than a comparable petrol car, they maximise use of existing renewables, and encourage more investment by increasing grid-load.

 

 

ME

What is better for the environment 

1) Running a petrol car 

2) Running an EV, charged at home, using coal from a power plant to create the electricity

 

CHATGPT

Running an EV charged by coal-generated electricity is still generally better for the environment than running a petrol car — but just barely in some cases.

Here’s why:

  • EVs are more energy-efficient than petrol cars. Even when powered by coal, they convert more energy into motion.

  • Local air quality improves with EVs, as they produce zero tailpipe emissions.

  • However, coal is incredibly carbon-intensive, so charging an EV with coal power significantly reduces its environmental edge.

If your home electricity comes mostly from renewables or a cleaner grid, the EV wins by a long shot. If it's almost all coal? The benefits shrink but usually still favor the EV over time, especially as grids get cleaner.

 

 

Up
1

Your question is illogically framed.

It was actually: What is less damaging for the environment? 

Because they both are. 

Some of us have stood back, looked at the big picture, and reckon we have to say 'no' to both. But Chat tells you what you want, unless you frame your question properly. 

Try asking if EVs can be manufactured en masse ex fossil energy, and what road surface they'll be driving over? 

Up
0

Clearly less consumption/production/travel/people is better.

 

But this article is about the difference between the two options.

Up
0

By the way,

Your recent comment that your area/town needs more 3g/4g/5g bandwidth was an interesting piece of hypocrisy. 

Do you really think we should all have less of everything but you should have more interwebs?

Up
1

The key failing of the global climate change policy is that taxation officially has no carbon footprint.  

For example NZ has a total carbon economy of 32 Megatons and we tax the economy at a rate of about 33%.  This means our social spending is derived from about 10.5 Megatons of CO2 emissions (32 x 0.33 = 10.5).  However the official carbon footprint of taxation, under our climate change policy, stipulates that this is officially zero.    

Up
1

"Try asking if EVs can be manufactured en masse ex fossil energy, and what road surface they'll be driving over"

Indeed ...the systemic limitations are constantly overlooked. 

Up
0

Great information - ChatGP is so fun.

And I'm sometimes so very impressed with its answers.

I have an idea to end this issue/hurt associated with the Treaty Principles Bill - something that both sides need to make a concession on with respect to changes to our constitutional arrangements (i.e., two specific legislative changes).  A friend of mine put my suggestion to AI (not sure which program) in three separate questions to determine what the effect of such constitutional changes would be. Wow, AI knows a lot :-) and the answers were nuanced such that it sort of "spooked" me.  I should write it up in an interest article. 

Up
0