Harnessing Electric Vehicles: A Pathway to Cleaner Air and Better Health

The researchers utilized computer simulations to demonstrate that a robust shift towards electric vehicles in the U.S. vehicle market, paired with a strong implementation of renewable energy sources, might yield health benefits ranging from US$84 billion to US$188 billion by the year 2050.

Even in scenarios with a less aggressive approach to reducing grid carbon emissions, health benefits were still projected to reach into the tens of billions of dollars.

“Typically, studies concerning the impacts of EVs center around climate change and their potential to reduce CO₂ emissions,” explains Professor Marianne Hatzopoulou, a co-author of the study published in PNAS.

“However, CO₂ is not the only emission from internal combustion engines; they release numerous air pollutants that significantly affect public health. Additionally, research indicates that these effects are often felt more acutely by disadvantaged, racialized, or marginalized communities.”

The research team includes lead author and postdoctoral fellow Jean Schmitt, Professors Daniel Posen and Heather Maclean, along with Amir F.N. Abdul-Manan from Saudi Aramco’s Strategic Transport Analysis Team.

This team had previously leveraged their expertise in life-cycle assessments to develop models that forecast the outcomes of extensive EV adoption in the U.S.

As part of their findings, they noted that while adopting EVs positively impacts climate change, it is insufficient alone to meet the targets defined by the Paris Agreement. They recommended combining EV adoption with other measures, such as enhancing public transit, promoting active transportation, and increasing housing density.

In their current study, the team aimed to include the non-climate-related advantages of EV adoption. They modified their models to analyze the output of common air pollutants from fossil fuel usage, including nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and PM_2.5 particles.

“Modeling these pollutants differs fundamentally from modeling CO₂, which remains in the atmosphere for long periods and gets evenly mixed,” states Posen.

“In contrast, these pollutants and their associated health effects are more localized, meaning that the timing and location of emissions matter significantly.”

While EVs do not emit pollutants directly, they can still contribute to air quality issues if the power plants supplying them depend on fossil fuels like coal or natural gas. This situation displaces emissions from busy roadways to nearby communities that are more affected by these plants.

Additionally, air pollution from both the power grid and conventional vehicles is expected to change over time.

“Today’s gasoline vehicles emit much less pollution than those manufactured two decades ago, many of which are still operational,” remarks Schmitt.

“To accurately compare EVs with internal combustion vehicles, we must consider that air pollution will decline as these older models are phased out. Furthermore, the power grid is progressively becoming cleaner with the increasing installation of renewable energy sources.”

For their model, the team evaluated two primary scenarios extending to 2050. In the first, they assumed that no additional EVs would be manufactured, but that older internal combustion vehicles would be replaced with newer, more efficient alternatives.

In the second scenario, they estimated that by 2035, all new vehicles sold would be electric. While they labeled this as “aggressive,” it aligns with the plans of several countries; for instance, Norway aims to end the sale of non-electric models next year, and Canada has similar intentions by 2035.

For each scenario, they assessed different rates of transition for the electric grid towards low-emission and renewable energy sources, whether the rate would remain approximately the same, decrease, or accelerate in the coming decades.

In each of these scenarios, the team simulated air pollution levels across the U.S. They utilized established calculations commonly used by epidemiologists, actuaries, and policymakers to link these pollution levels with statistical estimations of life-years lost and associated economic values.

“Our simulations indicate that the total public health benefits from widespread EV adoption by 2050 could amount to several hundred billion dollars,” states Posen.

“This is significant; however, we also discovered that these advantages are contingent on the grid maintaining a progressive shift towards renewable sources. Although we are already moving away from fossil fuels, a controlled model demonstrated that if we halted the grid transition, we’d be better off just replacing old combustion vehicles with new ones. But, this is not a realistic scenario.”

This raises an important question: should the focus be on decarbonizing the transportation sector through EV growth, or should the priority be on decarbonizing power generation, the primary source of pollution from EVs?

“It’s crucial to remember that vehicles sold today will still be in use for many years,” Hatzopoulou emphasizes.

“Purchasing more internal combustion vehicles, regardless of their efficiency, will bind us to those emissions for a long time and spread pollution wherever roads exist.

“We must continue to decarbonize the power generation system alongside this move—not waiting for its completion to increase EV adoption. We need to embark on the journey toward a healthier future immediately.”