When it comes to electric cars, the debate immediately ignites. There are those who consider it the definitive solution to the climate crisis and those who, on the contrary, paint it as an expensive and unsustainable illusion. In the middle, as often happens, there is the reality of the data. And it is precisely from numbers, not from slogans, that one of the most cited studies of recent years on the future of mobility starts.
This was published by the International Council on Clean Transportation, an independent research center that has been analyzing the environmental impact of transport for years. His work doesn’t just look at what comes out of the tailpipe, but follows the energy step by step, from production to the wheels spinning on the asphalt.
A petrol or diesel car works thanks to a simple and ancient principle: you burn fuel, you generate heat and some of that heat becomes movement. The problem is that only a part, in fact. The rest is dispersed in the air in the form of exhaust fumes, in the heat you feel when you get into a car after a journey, in the energy wasted in traffic or during cold starts.
According to the analyzes cited by the ICCT study, in real everyday driving a combustion car is able to transform just over a quarter of the energy contained in the fuel into movement. Everything else is lost. Not due to bad design, but due to physical limitations that no technology can ever completely eliminate.
Because electric cars waste less energy
The electric car plays another game. It doesn’t burn anything, it doesn’t produce heat to transform, but it uses electricity directly to turn the wheels. Even considering energy production, grid transportation and battery charging, the end result is surprisingly more efficient.
The ICCT study shows that, already today, an electric car emits 60 to 70% less greenhouse gases over its entire life cycle than a petrol or diesel car in the same category. It is a fact that often surprises those who think that the advantage of electric will only begin when electricity is entirely renewable. In reality, the benefit is already there, and grows as the energy mix improves.
Here lies one of the most misunderstood points of the debate: electric cars no longer consume energy, as we sometimes read in sensationalist headlines. On the contrary, it uses the energy it has available better, transforming a much higher share of it into kilometers travelled.
In recent months there has been a lot of talk about synthetic fuels, the so-called e-fuels, as a possible lifesaver for traditional engines after 2035. The idea is fascinating: using renewable electricity to create “clean” fuels to burn in existing engines. It’s a shame that physics, once again, takes its toll.
To produce e-fuel several steps are needed, all of which are energy intensive. Electricity is used to obtain hydrogen from water, then to capture carbon dioxide from the air and finally to synthesize fuel. With each step, energy is lost. When that fuel reaches the tank and is burned, the losses typical of the combustion engine are added.
The result, confirmed by independent analyzes also cited by the ICCT, is that to travel the same distance an e-fuel car requires many more energy resources than an electric car. Not because electric is inefficient, but because e-fuels make energy travel a long and dispersive path before becoming movement.
What does all this mean for the future of cars in Europe?
If a substantial part of cars continued to use combustion engines powered by e-fuels, Europe would need to produce much more renewable energy to move the same number of vehicles. More panels, more wind turbines, more pressure on the networks. It is not an ideological question, but one of simple energetic arithmetic.
The ICCT study does not reject e-fuels at all. For planes and ships, where batteries struggle to find space, they can play an important role. But on everyday roads, where electric is already a reality, the most efficient solution remains the one that wastes less energy along the way.
You might also be interested in:
