In its 2025 federal election program, the German right wing party AfD claims, “Battery production also pollutes the environment more than a combustion engine,” citing a 2019 ifo-study. However, this claim, used in 2021 as well, relies on unrealistic assumptions and outdated data, making it mostly false.
Image 1: Screenshot of the translated part of the federal election program 2025 of the AfD
Battery capacity and CO2 balance
Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from the production of a battery increase linearly with the size of the battery capacity. In addition, production generates around 100 kg of CO2 per kilowatt hour of battery capacity (ADAC).
The ifo-study bases its calculations on a mid-range vehicle with a 75-kWh battery. However, this does not correspond to the standard for this vehicle class at the time. Other studies from 2019 and 2020 (Fraunhofer ISI 2019, Fraunhofer ISI 2020, ifeu, ICCT)show that a mid-range electric vehicle was typically equipped with 30-40 kWh. The unrealistically high assumption of 75 kWh artificially worsens the GHG balance of electric vehicles in the study.
Production location and electricity mix
The production of batteries is responsible for around 30-50% of the total emissions of an electric vehicle. CO2 emissions therefore depend heavily on the electricity mix in the country of production. According to Fraunhofer ISI (2019) between 60 and 120 kg of CO2 equivalents are produced per kWh of battery capacity, depending on the energy source.
By comparison, a realistic 30-40 kWh battery produces around 100-146 kg of CO2 per kWh. The ifo-study, on the other hand, assumes 145 to 195 kg of CO2 per kWh, which is well above the average.
As battery production is increasingly relocated to European countries, the environmental impact is also decreasing. The European Union is supporting the increasing share of renewable energies in the european overall energy mix.
Tesla´s manufacturer in Berlin already states that they produce their batteries using almost 100% green electricity.
Raw material extraction
The extraction of the raw materials for the lithium-ion battery lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, tin, manganese, aluminum and carbon, which are required for the battery, causes ecological and social challenges.
Lithium mining and its high-water consumption are particularly criticized. In the main mining countries of Australia (63%) and Chile (20%), lithium is mostly extracted from saltwater deposits. The fresh water used in the evaporation method is not drinkable.
The extraction of fossil fuels also causes considerable environmental pollution, such as oil leaks, oil sand extraction, air pollution and high CO2 emissions. In addition, crude oil is not renewable, unlike the raw materials in batteries, which can be recycled and reused, using new technologies.
Recycling and service life
Current research and industrial processes are enabling ever more efficient recycling. Duesenfeld GmbH has developed a process that is much more environmentally friendly than conventional melting processes. Using a mechanical-hydrometallurgical process, up to 91% of battery components can be recycled, including the raw materials lithium, nickel, cobalt, nickel and graphite. This process also reduces CO2 emissions in the recycling process by up to 70% compared to conventional methods. The improved recycling rate improves the environmental balance of the entire life cycle of an electric car.
This is also confirmed by Dr. Timo Siemers from Duesenfeld GmbH. He also points out that the cycles can be closed with efficient recycling processes: “Environmentally friendly recycling makes a huge difference to the extraction of raw materials from primary sources. The production of secondary raw materials with our recycling process saves 8.1 tons of CO2 per ton of recycled batteries compared to primary raw materials.”
The service life of electric vehicle batteries is often underestimated. The ifo-study assumes 150,000 km, while more recent studies such as the P3-study show that the batteries still have over 80% of their capacity even after 200,000 km. This not only extends the service life of an electric car but also reduces the ecological footprint per kilometer driven.
Utilization and electricity mix
The environmental footprint of an electric vehicle during use depends largely on the electricity mix used for charging. In 2018, CO2 emissions in Germany from the final energy consumption were around 530-550 g/kWh. The ifo-study incorrectly assumes that this value does not change over the entire service life. It could already be assumed at that time that the proportion of renewable energies would increase. This has also been proven in the statistics. In 2019, the share was still 40,4% and in 2024 the figure was already 59.4%.
As a result, the emissions balance of electric vehicle has also improved considerably over the years.
A vehicle with an electricity consumption of 15 kWh/100 km causes approx. 8.25 kg CO2/100 km at 550g/kWh.
Projections by the Fraunhofer ISI show that in 2030, emissions of 350g/kWh will result in only 5.25 kg CO2/100 km. In a scenario in which the vehicle is charged with 100% green electricity, almost 0 kg of CO2 is produced.
A modern diesel engine with a 5-liter consumption per 100 km is around 13.25kg CO2/100km.
Break-Even-Point
From approx. 55,000 km onwards, an electric car from 2019 already has an ecological advantage compared to a diesel car. An electric car from 2030 will already have this advantage from approx. 28,000 km.
This means that an electric car with a 40-kWh battery using the German electricity mix can save around 6 tons of CO2 compared to a diesel vehicle.
Advertise user behavior
In 2019, 50% of e-car drivers already had their own photovoltaic system and 28% of them had a stationary storage system. According to Fraunhofer ISI, 84% of e-car owners are already using green electricity contracts by 2022.
Conclusion
The AfD’s blanket statement “Battery production also pollutes the environment more than a combustion engine” falls short of the mark and distorts the facts.
It is true that battery production, when viewed in isolation, causes more CO2 than the production of a combustion engine. However, the entire life cycle of the vehicle is decisive for the environmental balance.
If you take into account the constantly decreasing emissions due to electricity from renewable energies, the increasing service life of batteries, the decreasing consumption of raw materials due to new technologies, as well as batteries that are produced with other raw materials and also the new possibilities of battery recycling, which is also low in CO2 with modern technologies, it becomes clear that electric vehicles have a significantly lower CO2 footprint than combustion engines in the long term.
Even studies that were initially critical of electric vehicles now confirm that electromobility makes a significant contribution to achieving the European climate targets, considering the consistent expansion of charging infrastructure and electricity from renewable energies.
The AfD bases its position on outdated, one-sidedly interpreted study results and completely ignores advances in technology, energy supply and recycling. The party’s statement should therefore be classified as “mostly false”.
Nevertheless, the narrative is obviously catching on. After all, 60 per cent of Germans are sceptical about whether electric cars are really more environmentally friendly than combustion engines. Read our blogpost to find out why drivers in Sweden and Denmark are more open to the new technology.
RESEARCH | ARTICLE © Sophia Timmermann-Spallek and Pia Ebinger | Jade University of Applied Sciences, Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Leave your comments, thoughts and suggestions in the box below. Take note: your response is moderated.
