Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Want to buy an electric car but unsure you can justify it? Here’s how the arguments against EVs stack up

News Feed
Sunday, July 28, 2024

So you’re thinking of buying an electric car. Perhaps you want to save money on fuel, or reduce your greenhouse gas emissions, or both. After all, for Australia to reach net zero it needs to electrify vehicles (and expand public transport use). But you’ve heard arguments against electric cars: they have limited range and many owners can’t easily charge at home. They cost too much, resale values are poor and insurance costs are higher than for other cars. They’re also heavier and cause more damage to our roads. Alarmingly, the mining of some minerals used to make them involves modern-day slavery. Are these concerns warranted? Let’s walk through them. Driving range In 2014, an electric vehicle’s top driving range was between 160 and 210 kilometres. Today, most new models can travel 300–600km under real-world conditions. In Australia, the average privately owned car travels 12,100km a year. That’s about 33.2km a day. Current models have more than enough battery capacity to cover most trips. Access to chargers What about longer trips? Many drivers still worry about finding a public charger. It’s common to see long queues at public charging stations (when they are working) or owners searching for a charger. Public charging infrastructure is struggling to keep up with rising demand. While not an issue for short trips (90% of owners charge at home or work), it’s a challenge for longer travel. Private home chargers are getting cheaper but not everyone has off-street parking. Some resort to the legally questionable strategy of running power cables over sidewalks or through trees. Apartment block residents typically have requests to install private chargers rejected for safety reasons (mainly fire risks). Many also can’t install solar panels, which would greatly reduce charging costs. Purchase costs While electric vehicles cost more than petrol or diesel vehicles today, this won’t be true in future. In 2023, the average price of a new petrol car in Australia was A$40,916, compared to $117,785 for battery electric vehicles. But the problem with averages is they’re skewed by outliers. And there are lots of very expensive outliers on the electric vehicle market. You can own a Porsche Taycon Turbo S for $374,000, or a Mercedes-AMG EQS 53 for $327,000. Three models account for about 70% of electric vehicle sales in Australia: the Telsa Model Y (from $60,900), Tesla Model 3 (from $58,900) and the BYD Atto 3 (from $48,011). The Model 3 entered our market in 2019 at $66,000, so it’s clear prices are dropping, and dropping fast. You can buy the GWM ORA or MG4 Excite MY23 for $39,990. Prices becoming cheaper is common for most new technology. It’s just we notice it more with electric vehicles because they cost more than most technology we buy, including phones and TVs. Secondhand value Concerns about resale value may be justified. In the year to January 2024, the value of used electric vehicles fell 21%, which was more than for fossil fuel vehicles. A higher initial price does not necessarily carry over to the second-hand market. Early adopters valued EV technology, but most buyers have different priorities. As the technology improves and misconceptions fade, resale values could rebound. Insurance costs Insurance costs are also higher than for other vehicles – typically around 20% more. The vehicles generally cost more to buy in the first place and newer technology is more costly to produce and replace. The supply chain for parts is still developing, with fewer trained technicians and service centres to maintain these vehicles. As the market grows and service infrastructure improves, insurance costs should fall. Access to charging and service infrastructure will improve as electric vehicles become mainstream. Darunrat Wongsuvan/Shutterstock Environmental damage? One recent study suggests electric vehicles are actually more environmentally damaging than petrol and diesel vehicles. They are typically heavier, resulting in more tyre wear and heavier braking. As this produces small particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns (PM10) or less (a typical human hair is 50–70 microns wide), the suggestion is electric vehicles will produce more of it. But such studies often compare particulate emissions from EVs to tailpipe emissions from their fossil fuel counterparts. They ignore the latter’s tyre and braking concerns, which means comparing apples to oranges. More scientific studies suggest electric vehicles, particularly smaller ones, produce less PM10 from non-exhaust sources than their non-electric equivalents. Slavery in the supply chain Unfortunately, the modern-day slavery concern is very real. Electric vehicle batteries require cobalt. About 70% of the world’s supply comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo. About 20% of this mining activity involves small, informal, subsistence mines with little or no mechanisation and often using child labour. The minerals from such mines are scattered throughout the world’s supply chains. Those who raise slavery concerns against electric vehicles are usually silent on other affected products such as phones and laptops. Much more must be done to reduce these concerns about battery supply chains. The good outweighs the bad On balance, you’re justified in buying an electric vehicle, assuming you want one. Overall operating costs are far lower than for other vehicles. Public charger issues affect a small percentage of trips. While prices are dropping quickly, this doesn’t mean the bottom is falling out of the market. Price reductions simply represent greater supply of cheaper electric vehicles. Previous market-leading manufacturers can no longer charge hefty premiums for their products. And demand isn’t decreasing. The share of electric vehicles on the road continues to increase. Further, the technology is evolving. Trials of vehicle-to-grid charging, where vehicles return power to the grid or directly to a person’s house, have been taking place across Australia. This ability to power your house will help reduce energy bills, saving owners even more money. Aside from justifiable concerns about human rights abuses, most of the perceived barriers to EV uptake aren’t really barriers at all, or soon won’t be. The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

You’ve probably heard the arguments against electric cars, but most of them are getting weaker as the technology, markets and infrastructure mature.

So you’re thinking of buying an electric car. Perhaps you want to save money on fuel, or reduce your greenhouse gas emissions, or both. After all, for Australia to reach net zero it needs to electrify vehicles (and expand public transport use).

But you’ve heard arguments against electric cars: they have limited range and many owners can’t easily charge at home. They cost too much, resale values are poor and insurance costs are higher than for other cars. They’re also heavier and cause more damage to our roads.

Alarmingly, the mining of some minerals used to make them involves modern-day slavery.

Are these concerns warranted? Let’s walk through them.

Driving range

In 2014, an electric vehicle’s top driving range was between 160 and 210 kilometres. Today, most new models can travel 300–600km under real-world conditions.

In Australia, the average privately owned car travels 12,100km a year. That’s about 33.2km a day. Current models have more than enough battery capacity to cover most trips.

Access to chargers

What about longer trips? Many drivers still worry about finding a public charger. It’s common to see long queues at public charging stations (when they are working) or owners searching for a charger.

Public charging infrastructure is struggling to keep up with rising demand. While not an issue for short trips (90% of owners charge at home or work), it’s a challenge for longer travel.

Private home chargers are getting cheaper but not everyone has off-street parking. Some resort to the legally questionable strategy of running power cables over sidewalks or through trees.

Apartment block residents typically have requests to install private chargers rejected for safety reasons (mainly fire risks). Many also can’t install solar panels, which would greatly reduce charging costs.

Purchase costs

While electric vehicles cost more than petrol or diesel vehicles today, this won’t be true in future. In 2023, the average price of a new petrol car in Australia was A$40,916, compared to $117,785 for battery electric vehicles.

But the problem with averages is they’re skewed by outliers. And there are lots of very expensive outliers on the electric vehicle market. You can own a Porsche Taycon Turbo S for $374,000, or a Mercedes-AMG EQS 53 for $327,000.

Three models account for about 70% of electric vehicle sales in Australia: the Telsa Model Y (from $60,900), Tesla Model 3 (from $58,900) and the BYD Atto 3 (from $48,011). The Model 3 entered our market in 2019 at $66,000, so it’s clear prices are dropping, and dropping fast. You can buy the GWM ORA or MG4 Excite MY23 for $39,990.

Prices becoming cheaper is common for most new technology. It’s just we notice it more with electric vehicles because they cost more than most technology we buy, including phones and TVs.

Secondhand value

Concerns about resale value may be justified. In the year to January 2024, the value of used electric vehicles fell 21%, which was more than for fossil fuel vehicles.

A higher initial price does not necessarily carry over to the second-hand market. Early adopters valued EV technology, but most buyers have different priorities.

As the technology improves and misconceptions fade, resale values could rebound.

Insurance costs

Insurance costs are also higher than for other vehicles – typically around 20% more.

The vehicles generally cost more to buy in the first place and newer technology is more costly to produce and replace. The supply chain for parts is still developing, with fewer trained technicians and service centres to maintain these vehicles.

As the market grows and service infrastructure improves, insurance costs should fall.

An electric vehicle parked next to a row of chargers
Access to charging and service infrastructure will improve as electric vehicles become mainstream. Darunrat Wongsuvan/Shutterstock

Environmental damage?

One recent study suggests electric vehicles are actually more environmentally damaging than petrol and diesel vehicles. They are typically heavier, resulting in more tyre wear and heavier braking. As this produces small particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns (PM10) or less (a typical human hair is 50–70 microns wide), the suggestion is electric vehicles will produce more of it.

But such studies often compare particulate emissions from EVs to tailpipe emissions from their fossil fuel counterparts. They ignore the latter’s tyre and braking concerns, which means comparing apples to oranges. More scientific studies suggest electric vehicles, particularly smaller ones, produce less PM10 from non-exhaust sources than their non-electric equivalents.

Slavery in the supply chain

Unfortunately, the modern-day slavery concern is very real.

Electric vehicle batteries require cobalt. About 70% of the world’s supply comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo. About 20% of this mining activity involves small, informal, subsistence mines with little or no mechanisation and often using child labour.

The minerals from such mines are scattered throughout the world’s supply chains. Those who raise slavery concerns against electric vehicles are usually silent on other affected products such as phones and laptops. Much more must be done to reduce these concerns about battery supply chains.

The good outweighs the bad

On balance, you’re justified in buying an electric vehicle, assuming you want one. Overall operating costs are far lower than for other vehicles. Public charger issues affect a small percentage of trips.

While prices are dropping quickly, this doesn’t mean the bottom is falling out of the market. Price reductions simply represent greater supply of cheaper electric vehicles. Previous market-leading manufacturers can no longer charge hefty premiums for their products.

And demand isn’t decreasing. The share of electric vehicles on the road continues to increase.

Further, the technology is evolving. Trials of vehicle-to-grid charging, where vehicles return power to the grid or directly to a person’s house, have been taking place across Australia. This ability to power your house will help reduce energy bills, saving owners even more money.

Aside from justifiable concerns about human rights abuses, most of the perceived barriers to EV uptake aren’t really barriers at all, or soon won’t be.

The Conversation

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Rewriting the Story of Human Migration: Scientists Uncover Lost Land Bridge to Europe

An “emotional and inspiring” archaeological find of Paleolithic tools has revealed a long-lost prehistoric passage that may have enabled movement between Ayvalık and Europe. Continuous stretches of land, now lying beneath the sea, may once have allowed early humans to move between what is now Türkiye and Europe, according to groundbreaking research in a region [...]

A Paleolithic handaxe with a broken distal end, discovered during the Ayvalık survey. Credit: Kadriye, Göknur, and HandeAn “emotional and inspiring” archaeological find of Paleolithic tools has revealed a long-lost prehistoric passage that may have enabled movement between Ayvalık and Europe. Continuous stretches of land, now lying beneath the sea, may once have allowed early humans to move between what is now Türkiye and Europe, according to groundbreaking research in a region that has remained largely unexamined. The findings, published on 19 September 2025 in the peer-reviewed Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, document the first evidence of a Paleolithic presence in Ayvalık. More significantly, they may reshape our understanding of how humans entered Europe. For decades, the prevailing view has been that Homo sapiens reached the continent mainly through the Balkans and the Levant, traveling from Africa into the Middle East. Yet, the recent discovery of 138 stone tools across 10 sites spanning 200 km² suggests a different possibility: long before Ayvalık became known for its olive groves and coastal landscapes, its northeastern Aegean shoreline may have provided an alternative pathway for humans adapting to a shifting prehistoric world. “Our archaeological discovery has unveiled that this now-idyllic region once potentially offered a vital land bridge for human movement during the Pleistocene era—when sea levels dropped and the now-submerged landscape was briefly exposed,” explains Dr Göknur Karahan, from the Department of Archaeology-Prehistory, at Hacettepe University, in Turkey, who was part of a fully female team of expert archaeologists from the country. General view of the Ayvalık region, where the Paleolithic survey was conducted. Credit: Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande“We are very excited and delighted with this discovery. These findings mark Ayvalık as a potential new frontier in the story of human evolution, placing it firmly on the map of human prehistory – opening up a new possibility for how early humans may have entered Europe.   “It feels like we are adding an entirely new page to the story of human dispersal. Our research raises exciting possibilities for future exploration, and we hope it emerges as a body of work that will shift the approach of Pleistocene archaeology for decades to come.”  How were these findings possible?  During the Ice Age, sea levels were more than 100 meters lower than today, revealing broad stretches of land that are now submerged. In that period, the islands and peninsulas of modern Ayvalık were connected as part of a single landmass, creating a natural corridor between Anatolia and Europe. The newly uncovered tools lie along the present coastline, offering direct evidence of people inhabiting and traveling across these landscapes that later disappeared beneath the sea. During the field survey in Ayvalık. from left to right, Göknur, Kadriye, and Hande. Credit: Göknur, Kadriye, and HandeUntil now, factors such as environmental changes and the depth at which remains are buried have made it difficult to identify and preserve archaeological evidence in the Ayvalık region. “In all these periods, the present-day islands and peninsulas of Ayvalık would have formed interior zones within an expansive terrestrial environment,” explains co-author Professor Kadriye Özçelik, from Ankara University.  “These paleogeographic reconstructions underscore the importance of the region for understanding hominin dispersals across the northeastern Aegean during the Pleistocene.”  What was found?   The region’s shifting geology and active coastlines in the North Aegean made preservation difficult and the number of items uncovered “limited.” However, this research team managed to uncover Levallois technologies from various Paleolithic periods, as well as handaxes and cleavers.     Among the most significant finds include Levallois-style flake tools, sophisticated implements linked to the Middle Paleolithic Mousterian tradition – these are often associated with Neanderthals and early Homosapiens.    “These large cutting tools are among the most iconic artifacts of the Paleolithic and are instantly recognizable even today, so are a very important find,” explains Dr Karahan.    “The presence of these objects in Ayvalık is particularly significant, as they provide direct evidence that the region was part of wider technological traditions shared across Africa, Asia, and Europe.” Field survey in Ayvalık from left to right, Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande. Credit: Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande Describing the initial discovery of the 131 items, Dr Karahan adds: “It was a truly unforgettable moment for us. Holding the first tools in our hands was both emotional and inspiring.  “And each find from there on was a moment of excitement for the whole team.   “Holding these objects —after walking across landscapes where no one had ever documented Paleolithic remains before— was unforgettable.”  What does this discovery tell us about early humans? The experts’ key argument hinges on the potential of Ayvalık as a dynamic site for interaction and exchange, facilitating early human movement between the Anatolia peninsula and Europe.   Exploring how Anatolia, with a specific focus on Ayvalık, and Europe were linked during glacial sea-level low stands offers alternative pathways for how early humans moved around the region beyond dominantly emphasised northern mainland-centered routes.  Addressing a gap in the scholarship, the authors’ work provides a new foundation for examining resources and migration routes in which Ayvalık may have featured as part of a mobility corridor.  The survey’s yield of tools demonstrates a “consistent use of Levallois technology and flake production… and a diversified toolkit,” whilst all artefacts together offer what the team state are “valuable insights into early human presence, raw material preferences, and technological variability.” “The findings paint a vivid picture of early human adaptation, innovation, and mobility along the Aegean,” Dr Karahan explains.  “The results confirmed that Ayvalık – which had never before been studied for its Paleolithic potential – holds vital traces of early human activity.”  Incredible recoveries, hundreds of thousands of years later  As this was a survey (carried out across a two-week period in June 2022) rather than an excavation, the team could not be certain of what they would find when they set off. They knew from the region’s geology and paleogeography that there was potential. They explored – often muddy, (particularly in lowland basins and coastal plains) – sites by foot.  What followed was a “discovery of such a diverse and well-preserved set of artifacts, which exceeded our expectations,” Dr Karahan says.   Although these recovery efforts were not without challenges, the authors explore what both the challenges and findings reveal in the paper.   They state: “The widespread, muddy cover was considered a limiting factor for the preservation and detectability of Paleolithic materials.   “However, despite these constraints, high-quality raw material sources, such as flint and chalcedony, were identified in multiple locations, including areas affected by alluvial deposition.” Future potential   Fellow author Dr Hande Bulut, from Düzce University, adds: “Ultimately, the results underline Ayvalık’s potential as a long-term hominin habitat and a key area for understanding Paleolithic technological features in the eastern Aegean.  “While preliminary, the current findings underscore the region’s potential to contribute to broader debates on Aegean connectivity and technological evolution during the Pleistocene.  “Excitingly, the region between the North Aegean and the Anatolian mainland, may still hold valuable clues to early occupation despite the challenges posed by active geomorphological processes.”  The team recommends future research uses a multidisciplinary approach to outline absolute dating, stratigraphic excavation, and paleoenvironmental reconstruction, which they describe as “essential to clarify the temporal depth and functional character of the Ayvalık assemblage.” Reference: “Discovering the Paleolithic Ayvalık: A Strategic Crossroads in Early Human Dispersals Between Anatolia and Europe” by Hande Bulut, Göknur Karahan and Kadriye Özçelik, 17 September 2025, Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology.DOI: 10.1080/15564894.2025.2542777 Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.Follow us on Google, Discover, and News.

EPA grants air permit, clears way for new deep-water oil port off Southeast Texas coast

The Texas GulfLink would be about 30 miles off the coast of Freeport. It's touted for first-of-its-kind technology to reduce emissions. Environmentalists and Brazoria County residents still have concerns.

This August 2014 shows the Gulf shoreline in Texas’ Bolivar Peninsula.The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued an air-quality permit for a proposed deep-water crude oil port about 30 miles off the shore of Freeport, a Gulf Coast town south of Houston. Its supporters say it takes an extra step toward reducing emissions, while environmental advocacy groups and some nearby residents worry it will still exacerbate pollution. The Texas GulfLink deep-water port would implement a "first-of-its-kind use of vapor capture and control technology mounted on an offshore support vessel," according to a news release issued Monday by the EPA. The agency notes that such technology has been used on shuttle tankers for decades with 96% emission-control efficiency. "Sentinel Midstream is proud to unveil a groundbreaking vapor control application that will revolutionize the loading of Very Large Crude Carriers in the Gulf of America," said Jeff Ballard, the CEO of Sentinel Midstream, of which Texas GulfLink is a subsidiary, in the EPA news release. "Developed by our Texas GulfLink team in close collaboration with the EPA, this innovative approach significantly reduces volatile organic compounds, setting a new industry standard for environmental performance and advances the implementation of Best Available Control Technology." Air pollutants that are emitted during the process of obtaining crude oil "will be captured at the tanker and routed via flexible hose to a control system located on an adjacent, dynamically positioned offshore support vessel," according to Brad Toups, an EPA official who wrote the permit and presented it during a public hearing in June. Those emissions, referred to as volatile organic compounds, are either stored and sold, or they're used as fuel. Sentinel Midstream did not immediately respond a request for comment Tuesday. The permit, under the Clean Air Act, is one piece of the puzzle toward the rig's development. The other is approval from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration, or MARAD. In February, MARAD issued a Record of Decision, indicating its approval of the project. RELATED: EPA approves long-awaited plan to clean up San Jacinto River waste pits near Houston Though the project takes steps toward reducing emissions, clean energy advocacy groups have expressed criticisms of the Texas GulfLink deep-water port. "Approving yet another massive offshore oil terminal like this will only worsen a global climate crisis that is already slamming Texans with flooding, heat waves, and drought," Jen Duggan, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, told Houston Public Media. "This terminal is expected to release more than 21,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year, as much as much as 4,321 cars and trucks driven for a year. It is good that the Trump Administration says the terminal will be using some pollution controls. But we should remember that ‘unleashing' more dirty fossil fuels like this also means more air and water pollution released upstream during the fracking, drilling, and processing of the oil before it even arrives at the oil export terminal. And then more pollution again when it is burned — all to the detriment of the climate and local communities." During a public EPA hearing in June, members of the Brazoria County community also shared concerns about the initiative. "This project doesn't benefit people in Brazoria County, it only benefits rich executives who continue to squeeze profits at the expense of communities like Freeport," said Riley Bennington, a Brazoria County resident, according to an EPA transcript of the hearing. "As a kid growing up in Texas, I really thought we'd be past this by now. We've had renewable energy figured out. Why is this even being considered?" Though most of the testimony during the June 25 public hearing opposed Texas GulfLink, the initiative wasn't completely without praise. Amy Dinn, an attorney from Lone Star Legal Aid representing Better Brazoria, said GulfLink's permits are "much better and more protective of the environment" than other such projects, though she still expressed concerns that not enough research was done on the ozone emissions and impacts of severe weather.

‘They dictate the rules’: BBC tells PM’s Evan Davis to stop hosting heat pump podcast

Presenter believes decision was taken due to the technology’s link with net zero after he was told he risked accusations of political biasThe BBC presenter Evan Davis has been told he can no longer host a podcast about heat pumps due to the corporation’s concerns that discussing the technology risks “treading on areas of public controversy”.The presenter of BBC Radio 4’s PM programme had hosted 20 episodes of the Happy Heat Pump Podcast, which launched in 2024. It has covered issues around installing the technology, the cost, noise levels and the alternatives for people replacing their gas boilers. Continue reading...

The BBC presenter Evan Davis has been told he can no longer host a podcast about heat pumps due to the corporation’s concerns that discussing the technology risks “treading on areas of public controversy”.The presenter of BBC Radio 4’s PM programme had hosted 20 episodes of the Happy Heat Pump Podcast, which launched in 2024. It has covered issues around installing the technology, the cost, noise levels and the alternatives for people replacing their gas boilers.However, despite initially being given approval to go ahead with the non-BBC project, bosses told Davis the podcast risked exposing him to accusations of political bias. “As the series has gone on – in fact as the world has progressed over the last few months – they have become concerned that anything like this trying to inform people about heat pumps can be interpreted, rightly or wrongly, as somehow treading on areas of public controversy,” he told followers of the podcast’s YouTube channel.“I take their shilling, they dictate the rules. They have to try and keep their presenters out of areas of public controversy, and they have decided heat pumps can be controversial, so they’ve asked me not to be involved.”The widespread installation of heat pumps is seen as necessary to achieve the government’s target of hitting net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Last month Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, dropped her party’s support for the target. Davis said he believed the decision to stop him appearing on the podcast had been taken because of a link between heat pumps and the net zero target.Bean Beanland, a director at the Heat Pump Federation and Davis’s co-presenter on the podcast, described the decision as “quite extraordinary”. Douglas Parr, Greenpeace UK’s policy director, said: “As an impartial broadcaster, the BBC should not be pandering to attempts from the right to turn the world’s most efficient home heating system into a culture war issue. What’s next – cancelling Gardeners’ World because of Monty Don’s support for peat-free compost?”Davis told the Guardian he received “no remuneration at all” for the podcast and had personally paid its small costs for music, dissemination and microphone equipment. He said there was no link with the HPF, other than the fact it employed his co-host.However, he defended the broadcaster. “While it’s easy to be infuriated by the BBC and its caution on things like this – and of course, I do disagree with it in this case – I’ve never had the burden of actually having to run the BBC and make a hundred decisions a day, while people from all sides shout incessantly at me,” he said.“I’m obviously free to leave if I don’t like the restrictions that come with working here, but I choose not to because it is a great institution, the PM programme is in excellent shape, and they pay me handsomely.”The BBC has received criticism over its handling of environmental issues. In 2018, the broadcaster said it would stop “both-sidesing” the climate crisis, admitting that it got some of its coverage “wrong” by setting up debates with those who deny climate science.However, more recently, the broadcaster has given a platform to some who call for reduced action on the climate breakdown. Producers also accused the BBC of shelving a 2023 political programme by Sir David Attenborough that linked the UK’s biodiversity loss to the climate crisis. Insiders said this was because of fears its themes of the destruction of nature would risk a backlash from Tory politicians and the rightwing press.BBC guidelines state employees should not compromise the impartiality of the corporation in their outside work. A source said while the BBC is clear that climate change is happening, responses to it are a matter of public policy. They added that Davis’s podcast only explored and promoted one possible solution.The BBC has previously come under pressure over the external projects of its presenters. Last year, the broadcaster Clive Myrie apologised for failing to declare at least £145,000 earned from external events and said he would stop doing them for the “foreseeable future”.

Workshop explores new advanced materials for a growing world

Speakers described challenges and potential solutions for producing materials to meet demands associated with data centers, infrastructure, and other technology.

It is clear that humankind needs increasingly more resources, from computing power to steel and concrete, to meet the growing demands associated with data centers, infrastructure, and other mainstays of society. New, cost-effective approaches for producing the advanced materials key to that growth were the focus of a two-day workshop at MIT on March 11 and 12.A theme throughout the event was the importance of collaboration between and within universities and industries. The goal is to “develop concepts that everybody can use together, instead of everybody doing something different and then trying to sort it out later at great cost,” said Lionel Kimerling, the Thomas Lord Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at MIT.The workshop was produced by MIT’s Materials Research Laboratory (MRL), which has an industry collegium, and MIT’s Industrial Liaison Program. The program included an address by Javier Sanfelix, lead of the Advanced Materials Team for the European Union. Sanfelix gave an overview of the EU’s strategy to developing advanced materials, which he said are “key enablers of the green and digital transition for European industry.”That strategy has already led to several initiatives. These include a material commons, or shared digital infrastructure for the design and development of advanced materials, and an advanced materials academy for educating new innovators and designers. Sanfelix also described an Advanced Materials Act for 2026 that aims to put in place a legislative framework that supports the entire innovation cycle.Sanfelix was visiting MIT to learn more about how the Institute is approaching the future of advanced materials. “We see MIT as a leader worldwide in technology, especially on materials, and there is a lot to learn about [your] industry collaborations and technology transfer with industry,” he said.Innovations in steel and concreteThe workshop began with talks about innovations involving two of the most common human-made materials in the world: steel and cement. We’ll need more of both but must reckon with the huge amounts of energy required to produce them and their impact on the environment due to greenhouse-gas emissions during that production.One way to address our need for more steel is to reuse what we have, said C. Cem Tasan, the POSCO Associate Professor of Metallurgy in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (DMSE) and director of the Materials Research Laboratory.But most of the existing approaches to recycling scrap steel involve melting the metal. “And whenever you are dealing with molten metal, everything goes up, from energy use to carbon-dioxide emissions. Life is more difficult,” Tasan said.The question he and his team asked is whether they could reuse scrap steel without melting it. Could they consolidate solid scraps, then roll them together using existing equipment to create new sheet metal? From the materials-science perspective, Tasan said, that shouldn’t work, for several reasons.But it does. “We’ve demonstrated the potential in two papers and two patent applications already,” he said. Tasan noted that the approach focuses on high-quality manufacturing scrap. “This is not junkyard scrap,” he said.Tasan went on to explain how and why the new process works from a materials-science perspective, then gave examples of how the recycled steel could be used. “My favorite example is the stainless-steel countertops in restaurants. Do you really need the mechanical performance of stainless steel there?” You could use the recycled steel instead.Hessam Azarijafari addressed another common, indispensable material: concrete. This year marks the 16th anniversary of the MIT Concrete Sustainability Hub (CSHub), which began when a set of industry leaders and politicians reached out to MIT to learn more about the benefits and environmental impacts of concrete.The hub’s work now centers around three main themes: working toward a carbon-neutral concrete industry; the development of a sustainable infrastructure, with a focus on pavement; and how to make our cities more resilient to natural hazards through investment in stronger, cooler construction.Azarijafari, the deputy director of the CSHub, went on to give several examples of research results that have come out of the CSHub. These include many models to identify different pathways to decarbonize the cement and concrete sector. Other work involves pavements, which the general public thinks of as inert, Azarijafari said. “But we have [created] a state-of-the-art model that can assess interactions between pavement and vehicles.” It turns out that pavement surface characteristics and structural performance “can influence excess fuel consumption by inducing an additional rolling resistance.”Azarijafari emphasized  the importance of working closely with policymakers and industry. That engagement is key “to sharing the lessons that we have learned so far.”Toward a resource-efficient microchip industryConsider the following: In 2020 the number of cell phones, GPS units, and other devices connected to the “cloud,” or large data centers, exceeded 50 billion. And data-center traffic in turn is scaling by 1,000 times every 10 years.But all of that computation takes energy. And “all of it has to happen at a constant cost of energy, because the gross domestic product isn’t changing at that rate,” said Kimerling. The solution is to either produce much more energy, or make information technology much more energy-efficient. Several speakers at the workshop focused on the materials and components behind the latter.Key to everything they discussed: adding photonics, or using light to carry information, to the well-established electronics behind today’s microchips. “The bottom line is that integrating photonics with electronics in the same package is the transistor for the 21st century. If we can’t figure out how to do that, then we’re not going to be able to scale forward,” said Kimerling, who is director of the MIT Microphotonics Center.MIT has long been a leader in the integration of photonics with electronics. For example, Kimerling described the Integrated Photonics System Roadmap – International (IPSR-I), a global network of more than 400 industrial and R&D partners working together to define and create photonic integrated circuit technology. IPSR-I is led by the MIT Microphotonics Center and PhotonDelta. Kimerling began the organization in 1997.Last year IPSR-I released its latest roadmap for photonics-electronics integration, “which  outlines a clear way forward and specifies an innovative learning curve for scaling performance and applications for the next 15 years,” Kimerling said.Another major MIT program focused on the future of the microchip industry is FUTUR-IC, a new global alliance for sustainable microchip manufacturing. Begun last year, FUTUR-IC is funded by the National Science Foundation.“Our goal is to build a resource-efficient microchip industry value chain,” said Anuradha Murthy Agarwal, a principal research scientist at the MRL and leader of FUTUR-IC. That includes all of the elements that go into manufacturing future microchips, including workforce education and techniques to mitigate potential environmental effects.FUTUR-IC is also focused on electronic-photonic integration. “My mantra is to use electronics for computation, [and] shift to photonics for communication to bring this energy crisis in control,” Agarwal said.But integrating electronic chips with photonic chips is not easy. To that end, Agarwal described some of the challenges involved. For example, currently it is difficult to connect the optical fibers carrying communications to a microchip. That’s because the alignment between the two must be almost perfect or the light will disperse. And the dimensions involved are minuscule. An optical fiber has a diameter of only millionths of a meter. As a result, today each connection must be actively tested with a laser to ensure that the light will come through.That said, Agarwal went on to describe a new coupler between the fiber and chip that could solve the problem and allow robots to passively assemble the chips (no laser needed). The work, which was conducted by researchers including MIT graduate student Drew Wenninger, Agarwal, and Kimerling, has been patented, and is reported in two papers. A second recent breakthrough in this area involving a printed micro-reflector was described by Juejun “JJ” Hu, John F. Elliott Professor of Materials Science and Engineering.FUTUR-IC is also leading educational efforts for training a future workforce, as well as techniques for detecting — and potentially destroying — the perfluroalkyls (PFAS, or “forever chemicals”) released during microchip manufacturing. FUTUR-IC educational efforts, including virtual reality and game-based learning, were described by Sajan Saini, education director for FUTUR-IC. PFAS detection and remediation were discussed by Aristide Gumyusenge, an assistant professor in DMSE, and Jesus Castro Esteban, a postdoc in the Department of Chemistry.Other presenters at the workshop included Antoine Allanore, the Heather N. Lechtman Professor of Materials Science and Engineering; Katrin Daehn, a postdoc in the Allanore lab; Xuanhe Zhao, the Uncas (1923) and Helen Whitaker Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering; Richard Otte, CEO of Promex; and Carl Thompson, the Stavros V. Salapatas Professor in Materials Science and Engineering.

California launches first-in-nation satellite tech to curb methane leaks

California air quality regulators on Friday announced the launch of a first-in-nation satellite data project, with the aim of monitoring and minimizing methane emissions. The technology involves the use of satellite-mounted methane sensors that transmit data regarding the location of methane leaks that could otherwise go undetected, according to California Air Resources Board (CARB). The...

California air quality regulators on Friday announced the launch of a first-in-nation satellite data project, with the aim of monitoring and minimizing methane emissions. The technology involves the use of satellite-mounted methane sensors that transmit data regarding the location of methane leaks that could otherwise go undetected, according to California Air Resources Board (CARB).  The project, funded by a $100 million state budget investment, serves to bolster collaboration between industry and state and local leaders, in order to curb emissions and protect public health, per the agency. In advancing this new initiative, state officials touted the effort as critical climate action amid the Trump administration’s many rollbacks in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  “Decades of progress to protect public health is on the line as the Trump Administration works to roll back critical environmental protections,” Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) said in a statement. “California isn’t having it." Of specific concern to Californians has been the EPA’s decision to reconsider what’s called the “endangerment finding” — the basis for federal actions to curb planet-warming emissions.  “We’re using satellite technology to detect methane leaks as they happen,” Newsom said. “With this new data, we’ll be able to move faster to cut harmful methane pollution – protecting Californians and the clean air we’ve fought so hard for.” Methane — a clear, odorless gas released from landfills, livestock facilities and fossil fuel operations —is more than 80 times as potent as carbon dioxide when it comes to near-term warming.  The satellites, one of which has already been deployed, will be able to show specific regions for observation, leading to targeted mitigation efforts. “The effort provides information that is much closer to real time than the data now available,” Liane Randolph, chair of CARB, said in a statement. “It allows us to get ahead of one of the major contributors to what has become an immediate threat to public health and the environment.” The governor on Friday also announced that he was joining the “America Is All In” bipartisan climate coalition as its newest co-chair. The coalition of state and local leaders intends to halve emissions by 2030 and achieve net-zero by 2050, while boosting resilience amid climate challenges.  “With the all-out assault we’re now facing on low-carbon, green growth from the federal level, it’s the subnational leaders — those of us leading our states and cities — who have to step up,” Newsom said. 

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.