The Daily Populous Tuesday February 17th, 2026 day edition
Authored by thedrive.com and submitted by sg_plumber

The biggest car news and reviews, no BS Our free daily newsletter sends the stories that really matter directly to you, every weekday. Email address Sign Up Thank you! Terms of Service & Privacy Policy.

It’s broadly understood that electric vehicles are more environmentally friendly than their counterparts that burn only gasoline. And yes—that includes the impact of manufacturing batteries and generating power to charge them. But even then, such generalizations gloss over specifics, like which EVs are especially eco-friendly, not to mention where. The efficiency of an electric car varies greatly depending on ambient temperature, which is less compromising for gas-burning vehicles.

We now have the data and math to answer these questions, courtesy of the University of Michigan. Last week, researchers there released a study along with a calculator that allows users to compare the lifetime difference in greenhouse gas emissions of various vehicle types and powertrains from “cradle to grave,” as they say. That includes vehicle production and disposal, as well as use-phase emissions from “driving and upstream fuel production and/or electricity generation,” per the university itself.

What’s more, these calculations can be skewed by where you live. So, if I punch in my location of Bucks County, Pennsylvania, I can see that my generic, pure-ICE “compact sedan” emits 309 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent (gCO2e) per mile. A compact hybrid would emit 20% less; a plug-in hybrid, 44% less; and an EV with a 200-mile range, a whopping 63% less. And, if I moved to Phoenix, the gains would be even larger by switching to pure electric, to the tune of a 79% reduced carbon impact.

Per the study: “This chart shows how greenhouse gas emissions of different types of vehicles compare with a gas-powered pickup truck, according to new U-M research. Grams of carbon dioxide equivalent emitted per mile are listed in parentheses. Powertrain abbreviations are as follows: ICEV = Internal combustion engine vehicle; HEV = Hybrid electric vehicle; PHEV = Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle; BEV = Battery electric vehicle. Numbers after the powertrain abbreviation indicate the electric mileage range.” Umich.edu

Where this research is especially eye-opening is when comparing, say, the most efficient purely internal combustion or mild-hybrid vehicle to a large electric SUV or pickup equipped with a big battery. The heaviest, largest EV still emits just 71% as much carbon dioxide as a compact that burns only gas (again, using PA as our venue). So, yes—as shocking as it might be to consider, a 7,000-pound Rivian R1T is less damaging to the environment than a normal Civic, over its lifecycle.

Meanwhile, it turns out that a midsize, plug-in hybrid SUV with a 35-mile battery-only range lands about even with a 400-mile, all-electric pickup in the lifetime emissions department.

Given the popularity of trucks in the U.S., the study also factored into account the cost of pickups hauling cargo. However, even with a 2,500-pound payload, an electric truck with a 400-mile range is still estimated to produce around 35% the CO2 equivalent of a gas-only truck hauling nothing. On the flip side, cargo obviously hurts an EV’s range more than it would an ICE truck’s.

Check out the university’s calculator, play around with different variables, and see for yourself. The researchers admit there’s some room for improvement. Charging times and patterns weren’t factored into this analysis, for example, and the study acknowledges that emissions do vary depending on grid load.

That said, the message is clear: Any vehicle with an internal combustion engine only, no matter the size or shape, is more detrimental to the environment than any EV. And, while choosing the smallest possible vehicle to fit your needs is best—regardless of what your car runs on—the researchers leave us with another major takeaway: “We estimate that powertrain electrification has greater potential for lifecycle emissions reduction relative to the benefits of downsizing alone.”

Got a news tip? Let us know at tips@thedrive.com.

Lonely_Noyaaa on February 17th, 2026 at 03:03 UTC »

People love bringing up battery mining as a gotcha but conveniently ignore that oil extraction, refining, and transport cause exponentially more environmental damage. Plus EV batteries are recyclable, fossil fuels just get burned and pollute forever.

HesTheRiverSquirrel on February 17th, 2026 at 02:43 UTC »

Can't tell if thread is full of bots or if this is just what people are like.

CDN-Social-Democrat on February 17th, 2026 at 02:09 UTC »

I try and tell people that propaganda is not just a "foreign" reality.

All the lines coming out of the Oil & Gas Lobby against Green Energy/Green Technology are garbage.

It's sad that people continue to fall for that stuff.

A lot of people don't know the Oil & Gas Lobby actually hired some of the same individuals and organizations involved with the Old Tobacco companies campaigns around "Alternative Science/Facts & Messaging"..

Not exactly the most honest of folks...