The climate impact of bigger electric vehicles like the GMC Hummer EV can be equal to that caused by the emissions from small gasoline-powered cars, data from the MIT Trancik Lab shows.
Larger, heavier EVs produce a greater environmental impact than their diminutive relatives, and the GMC Hummer EV weighs in at more than 4.5 tons in some configurations.
Large electric pickups and SUVs like the GMC Hummer EV are the main culprits when it comes to matching small ICE vehicles for pollution, the New York Times reports. EVs do not directly generate emissions, but manufacturing processes for both the vehicles and their batteries as well as the electricity generation providing them with power all release pollutants into the atmosphere.
This isn’t the first time the GMC Hummer EV has drawn criticism for its environmental footprint and other perceived problems. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) cited the immense weight of the GMC Hummer EV as making it more polluting than a Chevy Malibu, generating 341 grams of C02 emissions per mile driven compared to the Chevy Malibu’s 320 grams. The Malibu’s emissions come from the tailpipe while the Hummer’s are “upstream emissions” from fossil fuel use at power plants.
The limited-run Hummer EV Pickup Edition 1’s curb weight does indeed tip the scales at a whopping 9,046 pound (4,103 kilograms). Its battery alone weighs 2,900 pounds (1,315 kilograms), the same as an entire 2015 Toyota Corolla. However, as GM pointed out in a statement to GM Authority responding to the ACEEE study, the vehicle is a halo product encouraging electric vehicle adoption.
A company representative said “the GMC Hummer EV (and other performance-oriented EVs) are accomplishing more in bringing EV skeptics into the EV fold than any of these glass-half-empty criticisms ever will.”
Critics, and even defenders, of the GMC Hummer EV also tend to forget the battery-powered giant is a niche vehicle. It will never sell in large volumes on the mass market. However, the criticisms also apply to the upcoming Chevy Silverado EV and the GMC Sierra EV, which are intended, like the Ford F-150 Lightning and the Ram 1500 REV, to be sold to a wider market.
Whatever the merits of the arguments against the relative high upstream emissions produced by the GMC Hummer EV, the public response to the vehicle seems strongly positive. GM reported in a media briefing attended by GM Authority last October that both the pickup and SUV variants of the Hummer are sold out for a minimum of two years.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GMC Hummer news, GMC news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Wow, it took MIT to tell us what most car guys already knew.
What do you “know”? What you know is quite simply wrong. You sound like my dad and have no idea what you are talking about but trying to push a certain barrier and ignore some pretty critical parts😂
You are comparing apples to oranges and here’s why. The hummer is a 9k lb vehicle and a small car is about 3k lbs. Not the same vehicle and wouldn’t be used for the same thing. Let’s compare apples to apples. This would be difficult with the hummer because most people won’t use it for an actual truck but a fair comparison would be a 1/2 ton gasser to the Silverado EV.
That wouldn’t fit your narrative you are trying to push though.
Brandon, I think you missed the point of this comparison, completely. The article is not comparing the usefulness or what the two vehicles will be used for, but is comparing the effects these vehicles will have on
climate change. The article starts right off with “The climate impact of bigger electric vehicles”. I don’t know how you could have missed that point.
No, you are missing the point. They frame it so people who have a hard time comprehending complex situations have the takeaway of them not being any better for the environment when in fact they are. Many of those people read on here as you can see in the comments here.
There is no use in comparing two vehicles of different sizes because they won’t be used for the same purpose. They are two different buyers. As you can see in these comments you can see how people interpreted the article. Look at the top comment. A guy who says they already knew this. Referring to its not any better than the gas vehicle.
The report is misleading! If the electricity used to charge the vehicle came from green sources such as hydro generated and solar power then the foot print is no greater than any other vehicle manufacturing process.
Don. The point that you are missing is that in the U.S. only 20% of the electric power produced is from the “Renewables” and of that 20% only 12% is generated by Wind and Solar while power generated from Coal and Natural Gas is 60%, as quoted by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, February of 2022.
Don,
Would you know what fuel source is used to generate the electrical energy to charge a 2900lb battery? Its natural gas, coal, some nuclear and 2% from wind and solar. The point is the carbon footprint to charge the Hummer battery is the equivalent carbon footprint as a small gasoline powered car. I’m surprised its that good. Consider the energy to mine and produce the battery materials and the pollution is actually much higher.
I’ve been telling folks this for 9 months!
I saw a video where a guy charged his Hummer for 45 minutes got 64 miles of charge and it cost his $19.00. His last word before the video ended. “This is a scam”.
Yeah, I think you’re talking about StradMan.
It sounds like he was only charging at 55kW/hr when the Hummer can actually accept a charge at up to 350kW/hr. In other words, what took 45 minutes should have taken only 8. That’s typically dependent on the charger used. A different charger would probably produce a different result.
This isn’t entirely true as they are not accounting for the Well to the Wheel emissions of the Malibu (think what it takes to explore, drill, extract, ship, refine, deliver and store fossil fuels plus oil changes, etc.). In addition, renewables already displaced coal for electricity production in US (still lagging NG). I agree this thing is a beast and requires a sh!t ton of electricity, but this ‘selected’ article is just fulfilling a narrative that most readers on this site will agree with.
Information I read says coal still accounts for 19.5% of USA total power generation. Almost even with all renewable sources combined at 21.5% according to eia.
And that number is inflated. The DEI counts renewables when they run at 100%, which is moronic when wind farms are built with extra turbines to maintain output on calm days (ever walked by a wind farm and counted how many turbines were actually running) and same reason solar farms have panels facing east and west though you really can only use half of those at any given time.
Same reason the grid 5 years agoe was only 2 % renewables and now is magically 20% despite only modest improvements. They just counted differently. In reality 35% of your power comes from coal
MVB- Your statement that “renewables already displaced coal for electricity production in the US” is not entirely true.
According to U.S. Energy Information Administration as of February 2022 Renewables represent 20% while Coal and Natural gas represent 60% and Nuclear represents just 19%.
lets not forget, at 9,000lbs, those 35-37″ tires are going to do a lot more damage to roads. Oh, and I wonder how those tires are made, couldn’t be with petroleum could it?
I’m all for big tires and fast trucks/suvs, but lets quit pretending this is a green vehicle.
They should have thrown the 6.6 duramax in that thing.
No one in real life and GM are pretending.
If you have a better way to meet the Zero emissions regs that are not likely to be repealed.
Besides the Hummers job was to make money to pay the development cost going into the cheaper EV models that are coming thAt would have a difficult time paying the development cost and being affordable.
Actually they are likely to be repealed. Just wait until the rebellion against them is strong enough.
Same story as original Hummers had. What a joke.
Yes, the original Hummer also had a carbon footprint comparable to a small modern car….
But here is the deal. The Hummer meets the no ICE requirements that are coming an unlikely to be receded.
Like I have said all along GM and any other automaker is not out to save the trees. They are out to survive major regulations even their lobby groups have failed to challange.
This goes back to the WEC power brokers and how much power they are getting over us.
Read up on ESG scores. Very scary and our present leaders have already signed on.
This sounds like a win to me.
So MIT finally admits that EV’ vehicles have substantial emissions? I call it a win for normal people who knew that years ago.
People on this site will see that as a bad thing. The hummer Ev pollutes as much as a small gas powered vehicle. That’s a great thing! We are comparing a 9k lb vehicle to a small car. Come on now. Embrace change it’s coming.
And educate yourself about charging. Someone on here said it takes 4 days to charge a hummer at hummer. It’s simply a function of charging speed. If you fill a swimming pool with a garden hose it’s going to take a lot longer than a fire hose.
The bad think is this comes from the NYT. If their saying it it’s definitely worse.
LOL, surprise surprise surprise! Confirmation of what the smart people already knew!
All of the extra expense an inconvenience for nothing!
How does MIT consider whether the Hummer is being charged by power coming from hydroelectric, wind, solar or even nuclear generators? These sources now represent >20% of electrical power generation. Its closer to 50% in California. Once u eliminate fossil fuel for electrical generation, there goes ur emissions argument.
The EU (Brussels) is furious that Germany has dispensed with the NO-ICE requirement of 2030….
It is to be expected that most ‘liberals’ with no Scientific or Technical background could be deluded into thinking that Carbon Dioxide (CO2), a Building Block of Life – would be Classified as a ‘Pollutant’, but the fact remains that the main danger of CO2 is having a shortage of it and not a surfeit. It is much more instructive to learn of the lower limit of CO2, where Photosynthesis STOPS. If that happens, we are all dead.
What is most surprising is the number of supposedly educated people who should know better, is that the term ‘Fossil Fuel’ was coined by JOHN D. Rockefeller – to give people the illusion that Crude Oil and Methane (Natural Gas) were both RARE, and expensive. Doubters can answer me how they got all those Dinosaurs up to Saturn’s moon TITAN, where there is a 5,000 year supply out of the stuff in LNG lakes – out in the open. Obviously actually drilling for it there would find more thousands of years of supply.
Of course, the latest PLANNED ‘Controlled’ Burning of Vinyl Chloride in Eastern Ohio has been deemed ‘SAFE’ by the EPA but PLANT FOOD (C’O2) is a ‘Dangerous Pollutant’.. The waters of the ohio river, where tens of thousands of fish have died, has also been deemed ‘Safe to Drink’.. Now pets are dying inside homes, and people are complaining of new health problems… Won’t be long until this SAFE water and air will force total evacuation of East Palestine, Ohio.
The relatively few number of Hummer EVs made will not be a problem in Comparison with those fiascos.
Regardless of what people think about global cooling/heating/climate change, the fact is in the past 30 years as CO2 levels have increased, the earth is now 14% greener as a result. CO2 has limited capacity for holding heat, unlike water, and evidence for its role in the gradual increase in the earth’s surface temperature is correlative at best. It is undeniable that tailpipe emissions lead to broader scale pollution (there’s a reason you open the garage door when your car is running) which increases asthma, lung infections, heart disease and lung cancer to name a few – Beijing is a great example, pollution completely recedes rapidly following government mandated no ICE vehicles on the road. Since the adoption of more BEVs in California, asthma levels have been reduced – I know, this study is only correlative as well and more long term studies need to be carried out.
My Rivian is charged 100% by solar at home. Some commercial chargers are 100% green using carbon offsets. EVs are just in their infancy as is renewable power. We got to start somewhere. I don’t see a lot of foresight in this forum.
Other Steve,
How much money do you got? Are you off the grid? If not then it’s likely your not charging anything with that solar, if you are, it’s kinda douchy if you to flaunt how you can afford a 90K truck, 100K in solar panels and storage units and say all of us buying used cars here need to buck it up and shell out the cash for a BEV too.
Evolution is unavoidable! The question has never been IF the next big idea or scientific breakthrough will take place, but WHEN it will take place. This is why words like INNOVATION exist. You cannot expect everything to stay the same for the next 100 years AND make advancements also (i.e. there’s a new cell phone produced every 6 months- a year because the original one is obsolete).
Has anyone against EVs looked around? No one is driving a 1920s car or truck across the country on family vacations BECAUSE WE’VE EVOLVED!
Don’t worry, no one is going to confiscate your Gas and Diesel powered vehicles. They’re just going to stop making new ones. The world is going forward whether you like it or not. So, it’s ROLL OR GET ROLLED OVER!! Get on board.
A VERY hefty truck that only pollutes as much as a small car seems like a pretty big net positive.
Your report is misleading! If the electricity used to charge the vehicle came from green sources such as hydro generated and solar power then the foot print is no greater than any other vehicle manufacturing process.
Goes to show you that battery vehicles really do suck the environment .It sure doesn’t take much to figure that out . Keep the kids out of the mines, and the lithium lakes out of our back yards .People wake up
I can almost guarantee that none of the negative commenters own an EV. I love my EV. I would like to hear from an EV owner that is negative on EVs especially if they charge at home.
OK for now. Just wait until the government starts to recoup lost tax revenue from declining gasoline sales taxes. Your smart meter will break out the EV vehicle charging and add taxes to that usage. Ultimately the government will be able to control how many hours you can charge your EV, thus limiting your mobility, forcing people to use public transportation. ICE cars represent freedom, and are antithetical to the government desiring to control every aspect of your life, all in the name of allegedly saving the planet.
There are numerous studies out there that show the average EV does not become less CO2 “polluting” than a similar sized ICE vehicle until it’s been driven 60k miles plus. When the EV is driven off the lot it has already contributed to the alleged greenhouse gas pollution equivalent to driving an ICE vehicle over 5 years. Volvo did one of the studies, comparing its x60 SUV Recharge to its ICE counterpart. Again, EVs make sense in congested Urban areas where zero tailpipe emissions reduce smog, but not anywhere else.
Well first of all I think most of the people purchasing a hummer ev are doing it for the look at me reason not for it being environmentally friendly. Me personally I think it’s a waste of money.
There’s so much wrong with this click bait. And the author feels safe since they are just citing MIT. You cannot compare a massive suv to a sedan it just is uneven match. You would never compare a ICE hummer to an ICE Malibu and expect the same mpg. So those who think hummer is less environmentally friendly it’s actually the opposite. “Upstream fossil fuel” General Motors sells solar panels I also have solar so “0 upstream fossil” used. Your ice batteries die every what 3 years and EV batteries die around 9 years so you’re already using 3 times the amount of batteries as EV