Vaishnavi Venkat

Professor Goodyear
Case Report 1
2/26/19

Climate change is one of the biggest human right challenges of our time, and cities
all over the world are choking on vehicle fumes. The move to electric cars will improve
air quality and cut the carbon emissions that have pushed our planet to breaking point.
Though electric vehicles have disrupted the automotive industry since the 2000s, the
discussion about the actual “green and clean” label is under skepticism. There a few prominent
ethical questions posed to the hot new trend of electrical cars: Is EV Batter produced by
responsibility-sourced materials? Are EV’s price point only suitable for the wealthy? Would
increasing government infrastructure be worth the cost?
Electric vehicles are dependent on batteries have a significant negative environmental
impact. Many electric cars are not, currently as ethical as their labels might make them seem.
Amnesty International’s research has shown that cobalt mined by children and adults in
extremely hazardous conditions could be entering the supply chains of some of the
world’s largest carmakers. With partnership with a Congolese NGO, Amnesty
International found children as young as seven y ears old in the mining areas. This issue
is extremely severe-UNICEF estimates that 40,00 children work in mining across the
south DRC where cobalt is found. This situation is an example of moral hypocrisy.
Electric vehicles seem to want to do the right thing by providing cleaner and greener
options, but the tradeoffs seem much more dire. Hundreds of thousands of impoverished
people in third world countries risk their lives to mine cobalt so that wealthy people in
richer countries can lead a life of fake promise of cleaner and greener vehicles even
though people are dying from the production.
How do we address this problem? It’s all about transparency. In 2012, The
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) laid out
clear guidelines for companies sourcing cobalt and other minerals from high-risk areas
like the DRC. According to these guidelines, electric car manufacturers and battery
makers should be able to say who their smelters or refiners are and should make public
their own assessment of whether the company practices are adequate in identifying and
addressing human rights risks and abuses. Another strategy for dealing with dealing with
cobalt is responsible mining and the reduction of demand through solid recycling
processes. This has the greatest potential for the electric vehicle industry as this strategy
has been working for similar problems in the past like tin, tungsten, and tantalum.
Electric vehicle sales have grown in recent years, and cars such as the Tesla Model 3
have made the market a bit more affordable for everyday people. But data show most of those
who claim the electric vehicle tax credit earn far more income than the national average. In fact,
people with annual incomes of $100,000 or more have claimed nearly 80% of federal electric
vehicle tax credits, and about half of all sales take place in California. This mean that the middle
class and blue-collar taxpayers are all paying for a program that benefits those who are wealthy
enough to afford electric vehicles. Now there is a giant elephant in the room question in front of
us: should average taxpayers be responsible for subsidizing electric vehicle purchases that
overwhelmingly benefit high-income earners? It seems that leading a cleaner and greener life is
only welcome if you are in a higher tax bracket. This situation fits in perfectly in how the
environmental movement is a classist problem and electrical vehicles is a slice of the very large
pie.
Though at the mention of electric cars today most people picture a high- end tesla prices,
EV’s are proving to be more cost effective in the long run. Although fuel costs for hybrid and
plug-in electric vehicles are generally lower than for similar conventional vehicles, purchase
prices can be significantly higher. However, prices are likely to decrease as production volumes
increase and battery technologies continue to mature. A study conducted by UBS NEO in 2017,
Electric vehicles are already at cost parity in some markets and that auto makers could reap
profits comparable to or greater than gas-powered cars by or before 2025. By almost any
measure, the savings and benefits from EVs will vastly outweigh the costs of transitioning to
them. This means that though in the short- term purchase costs are more expensive, in the long
run people save a lot more on utilities. Driving an electric vehicle is not something the wealthy
can afford; more companies are coming out with affordable priced electric cars which means the
purchase costs will not be as high as they are now. This is due to continued market expansion
and competitiveness in innovation and design.
Consumers rank not having enough access to efficient charging stations as the third most
serious barrier to EV purchase, behind price and driving range. That’s according to
McKinsey’s 2016 EV consumer survey of buyers considering battery powered EV in China,
Germany, and the United States. With EV prices declining and ranges expanding, charging could
soon become the top barrier. The availability of public charging infrastructure is a major player
in the adoption of electric vehicles. There are a few benefits from updating charging
infrastructure. Mainly, the social responsibility governments have is imperative in ensuring a
greener future. This plays a large role in the adoption of electric vehicles.
Electric cars still face big hurdles in updating the current infrastructure to match the
needs of electric vehicles. First, depending on adoption of smart charging, charging behavior
patterns will impact the grid during specific times of day, on a particular distribution feeder,
substation or transmission zone is inevitable. This means on certain points in the day we can run
risk of causing huge bottlenecks. Second, faster public charging stations will be needed to allow
people to drive longer distances. Not only is this extremely expensive, consumer perceptions of
having to constantly wait for their car to charge may take away from the appeal of electric
vehicles.
The prominent dilemmas explained above all describe issues that need to be seriously
considering that electric vehicles are on the rise. All in all, there is really one question that all of
these problems boil down to- How will these changes happen? Increasing government
infrastructure is beneficial for a few main reasons. Using a stakeholder analysis, the benefits
increasing government infrastructure for electric vehicles will outweigh the cost. Stakeholders in
this case are national and local governments, grid operators, electricity producers and retailers,
electric vehicle companies, traditional gas station operators, charging network and service
providers, and of course- consumers. What is interesting in this particular area is that this is a
completely new sector where we can’t rely on previous analyses to help us figure out the correct
path. All stakeholders have a high interest and high power in this situation as there a few main
conflicts of interest for the stakeholders. 1) the division of tasks within a public recharging
infrastructure 2) the ways in which charging behavior can be influenced and 3) supportive
policies for full-electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. For the foreseeable future, supportive
policies will be necessary in order to provide a stable and reliable basis for further market
expansion.
Opponents of having the government update the infrastructure to meet the needs of
electric vehicles argue that there is massive pressure for the government and the timing might not
be right. The U.S. electric grid has continually evolved to accommodate new demands in the last
century. But, if the nation’s vehicles were to rapidly become electric, the grid would need to
change a lot faster. This is not only incredibly expensive but could exacerbate a larger energy
problem at hand. However, using the power of collaboration and a full suite of policies and
programs, the transition of updating the nation’s infrastructure may be smoother than critics say.
One of the main tradeoffs is cost. Though changing infrastructure is extremely costs, but at the
rate electric vehicles are adopted, the government needs to keep up with utilities and services that
can keep us with the market shifts. The second tradeoff is timing. At a certain point, it is enviable
that we will need to upgrade our infrastructure to match the demand of the public. Updating
infrastructure right now to add more charging stations and updating regulations and policies are
extremely fragile. This tradeoff is classic example of short-term loss and long-term benefit.
United States power grids are currently using only 30% of the power they are capable of. It’ll
take time but there is no time like the present to be ready for a new transportation market.
The impacts of updating infrastructure are much more crucial to the sustainability of our
future. Marketing the updated infrastructure for electric vehicles is a long and slow process but it
all starts off with one two basic concepts: transparency and availability. This transformation can
happen only if stakeholders are committed to these ideas. By giving consumers the resources to
sustain having an electric vehicle and giving ample information of how taxes will be collected,
developing and proving cost effecting charging infrastructure plans, we will mitigate the risk of
having misinformation spread about electric vehicles. Market transformation to advance
transportation electrification will support diverse state and local policy goals at the same time—
including energy independence and security, climate change mitigation, air quality improvement,
and local economic development. These benefits are substantial to utility customers, vehicle
owners, and all other stakeholders mentioned.
 Work Cited

Dummett, Mark. “Manufacturing Electric Cars Comes at an Ethical Cost.” Time, Time, 28 Sept.
2017, time.com/4939738/electric-cars-human-rights-congo/.
“Phones, Electric Cars and Human Rights Abuses - 5 Things You Need to Know.” Amnesty
International, www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/phones-electric-cars-and-human-
rights-abuses-5-things-you-need-to-know/.

Analysis of Stakeholder on the Construction of Electric Vehicle Charging Station in China -

IEEE Conference Publication, ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6940929/versions.

“Figure 2f from: Irimia R, Gottschling M (2016) Taxonomic Revision of Rochefortia Sw.

(Ehretiaceae, Boraginales). Biodiversity Data Journal 4: e7720.
Https://Doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.4.e7720.” doi:10.3897/bdj.4.e7720.figure2f.

Tabatabai, Arman. “The Economics and Trade-Offs of Ad-Funded Smart City Tech.”
TechCrunch, TechCrunch, 1 Dec. 2018, techcrunch.com/2018/12/01/the-economics-and-
tradeoffs-of-ad-funded-smart-city-tech/.

“China & Electric Vehicles: Six Things to Know.” Asset Management – Global,
www.ubs.com/global/en/asset-management/insights/china/2019/china-electric-
vehicles.html.