After recently visiting a foreign city, it was noticeable that pollution and smog had decreased, with around 50% of vehicles and motorbikes now being electric. It was encouraging to see these improvements, and it was a relief to experience less engine noise and fewer fumes while walking the streets.

However, with any significant change, the consequences must be carefully considered. If the U.S. is moving towards more electric vehicles in major cities, the government needs a plan to prevent pollution and toxic waste from impacting the heartland, where our natural beauty, ecosystems, wildlife, and birds must be protected.

The U.S. needs a 25-year strategy to reduce pollution and move toward electric vehicles. While climate change is an important atmospheric theory, most of us on this planet prioritize reducing pollution and toxic waste as a starting point.

Shifting pollution from cities to our national parks, farmlands, forests, and rural areas is a harmful trade-off. Further, hasty green policies have created high energy prices and hyperinflation in the last 3 years which hurts: women, minorities and the middle class the hardest; thus, mindful long-term planning is required. In the end, change is worthless if it causes more harm than good. ^[i]

Electric vehicles (EVs) have become a symbol of the modern fight against pollution, particularly in urban areas. They are often heralded for reducing smog and noise, creating cleaner city environments. However, as the U.S. moves towards widespread adoption of EVs, the environmental costs associated with their production are often overlooked, especially concerning rural communities and ecosystems.

This article explores the environmental impacts of EV production and questions whether rural areas, which bear the brunt of this pollution, should receive reclamation payments from cities that benefit from cleaner air. It also discusses strategies to mitigate these harmful effects while still pursuing a sustainable future.

Pollution Shifts From Urban to Rural Areas

While cities enjoy the benefits of reduced tailpipe emissions from EVs, the pollution is not eliminated; it is merely shifted. The production of EV batteries involves several stages that significantly harm the environment, particularly in rural and remote areas. The key sources of pollution in the EV lifecycle include energy production, mining operations, manufacturing plants, and transportation of raw materials. ^[ii]

1. Energy Production: Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Waste

The production of EV batteries requires a large amount of energy, which is often generated in rural areas. If this energy comes from fossil fuels, such as coal or natural gas, the emissions from power plants contribute to air pollution, acid rain, and other environmental harms.

Additionally, regions relying on nuclear energy face the issue of nuclear waste, which remains hazardous for thousands of years. Although renewable energy could help mitigate this, many areas, especially in developing nations, still depend heavily on fossil fuels.

2. Mining Operations: Environmental Degradation

The materials needed for EV batteries, such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, are primarily mined in rural or remote areas, often in developing countries. Mining operations have significant environmental consequences, including water contamination, air pollution, and land degradation.

For instance, cobalt mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo and lithium extraction in South America have led to water pollution that affects forests, local wildlife and communities. The destruction of landscapes due to mining operations also causes deforestation and the loss of biodiversity, leaving land barren and unusable for years.

3. Manufacturing Plants: Greenhouse Gases and Hazardous Waste

The manufacturing process for EV batteries emits a substantial amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs). A single lithium-ion battery can produce between 9 to 12 tons of CO ₂, contributing to global warming.

In rural areas where environmental regulations may be lax, these emissions can be particularly problematic. Moreover, the chemical processes used in manufacturing generate hazardous waste, which, if not properly managed, can contaminate local ecosystems, including soil and water sources.

4. Transportation: Fossil Fuel Consumption

The transportation of raw materials from mining sites to factories and finished batteries to assembly plants further contributes to pollution. Fossil-fuel-powered trucks, ships, and planes emit pollutants, particularly in rural areas along transportation routes, exacerbating environmental harm in these regions.

The Environmental Toll on Rural Areas

Rural communities and ecosystems bear the brunt of the environmental damage caused by EV production. The following are some of the key impacts: ^[iii]

• Water Depletion and Contamination: Lithium extraction, particularly in South America, requires enormous amounts of water, leading to water scarcity in farming communities. This also pollutes natural water systems, harming both wildlife and agricultural productivity.
• Air Quality: Rural communities near mining and manufacturing sites often experience poor air quality, with particulate matter leading to respiratory illnesses and other health issues.
• Deforestation and Biodiversity Loss: The clearing of land for mining and industrial facilities results in deforestation, which not only destroys habitats but also contributes to carbon emissions. The loss of biodiversity has cascading effects on ecosystems, further threatening rural livelihoods.

Reducing the Environmental Impact of EV Production

To create a truly sustainable future for EVs, several measures must be taken to reduce the environmental harm caused by their production. These include adopting sustainable mining practices, promoting a circular economy through battery recycling, transitioning to renewable energy for manufacturing, enforcing stricter environmental regulations, and improving battery technology.

1. Sustainable Mining Practices

Mining companies can minimize their environmental footprint by adopting practices such as closed-loop water systems, which recycle water used in mining, and non-toxic extraction methods that limit the release of pollutants.

Furthermore, companies should invest in restoration projects to rehabilitate land after mining and avoid mining in ecologically sensitive areas to reduce habitat disruption.

2. Circular Economy and Battery Recycling

Battery recycling is crucial to reducing the demand for new mining operations. Efficient recycling methods can recover up to 95% of valuable materials from EV batteries, lessening the need for fresh raw materials. Governments and industries must invest in infrastructure for recycling and repurposing used batteries for energy storage systems.

3. Transition to Renewable Energy for Manufacturing

Switching to renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, and hydropower, to power factories and mining operations can significantly reduce the carbon footprint of EV production. Encouraging factories to generate their own renewable energy and working toward cleaning up national power grids are key strategies in this regard.

4. Stricter Environmental Regulations

Governments must enforce stricter regulations to control emissions, water use, and habitat destruction in mining and manufacturing processes. Regular environmental monitoring and public reporting can ensure that companies are held accountable for their impact on local ecosystems.

5. Improving Battery Technology

Advancements in battery technology, such as solid-state batteries and sodium-ion batteries, can reduce the need for environmentally damaging materials like cobalt and nickel, making EV production more sustainable.

Should Cities Pay Reclamation Fees to Rural Areas?

One proposal to address the environmental imbalance is for cities, which benefit from cleaner air due to EV adoption, to pay reclamation fees to rural areas that suffer from pollution and environmental degradation.

Such a system could ensure that rural communities are compensated for the environmental and health costs they face due to activities that primarily serve urban populations.

1. Just Compensation for Environmental Impact

Rural areas often bear the environmental burden of resource extraction, pollution from manufacturing, and energy production, while cities benefit from cleaner environments. A reclamation fee would provide financial compensation to rural communities, helping to fund environmental restoration projects and rehabilitate degraded land.

2. Encouraging Sustainable Development

By imposing reclamation fees, industries would have a financial incentive to adopt more sustainable practices, reduce resource extraction, and minimize environmental harm. Fees could also encourage the promotion of circular economies, reducing the need for new raw materials and mitigating environmental impacts.

3. Promoting Economic and Environmental Justice

Rural communities, often economically disadvantaged, could repair damages using reclamation fees that support local infrastructure, healthcare, schools, and clean energy projects. This would help offset the indirect effects of pollution and industrial activities.

4. Case Study Examples

Precedents for reclamation fees exist in the form of carbon pricing and natural resource extraction taxes. These systems channel funds toward environmental restoration projects, offering a model for how a reclamation fee system could work. ^[iv]

Conclusion

Electric vehicles offer a path to reducing pollution in cities, but their production comes at a significant environmental cost to rural areas and ecosystems. Sustainable mining practices, recycling, renewable energy, and stricter regulations can mitigate these impacts, but it is also essential to address the environmental injustice faced by rural communities.

Requiring cities to pay reclamation fees to rural areas and national parks based on population numbers is one way to ensure that the benefits of EV adoption are shared more equitably across regions, promoting both economic development and environmental responsibility.

As stated previously, the future is bright, but change without smart innovation is of no value and can create horrible effects for women, children and farmlands if we are not mindful about mitigating pollution from the increase in EVs across

________________

Commissioner George Mentz JD MBA CILS CWM® is the first in the USA to rank as a Top 50 Influencer & Thought Leader in: Management, PM, HR, FinTech, Wealth Management, and B2B according to Onalytica.com and Thinkers360.com. George Mentz JD MBA CILS is a CWM Chartered Wealth Manager ®, global speaker - educator, tax-economist, international lawyer and CEO of the GAFM Global Academy of Finance & Management ®. The GAFM is a EU accredited graduate body that trains and certifies professionals in 150+ nations under standards of the: US Dept of Education, ACBSP, ISO 21001, ISO 991, ISO 29993, QAHE, ECLBS, and ISO 29990 standards. Mentz is also an award winning author and award winning graduate law professor of wealth management of one of the top 30 ranked law schools in the USA.

^[i] Lithium-ion batteries need to be greener and more ethical (nature.com)

^[ii] Environmental Impact of EV Batteries | GreenCars

^[iii] The Environmental Impact of Battery Production for EVs (earth.org)

^[iv] Impact of battery electric vehicle usage on air quality in three Chinese first-tier cities - PMC (nih.gov)