Building Better Batteries: How Science and Ethics Shape the EV Revolution

Electric vehicles (EVs) represent a pivotal shift toward sustainable transportation, promising lower greenhouse gas emissions and reduced reliance on fossil fuels. However, beneath their sleek exteriors lies a complex reality that involves extracting raw materials with profound environmental, human health, and ethical implications.

As someone deeply aware of the socioeconomic challenges faced by developing nations, I find it necessary to examine not just the scientific aspects of EV battery materials but also the human cost of their extraction. Many of these materials—lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements—are sourced from countries where weak environmental regulations, hazardous working conditions, and geopolitical tensions complicate ethical supply chains.

This blog post explores the pros and cons of EV batteries, the toxicological concerns surrounding their raw materials, and the ethical dilemma of conflict minerals, highlighting how sustainability must extend beyond carbon emissions to encompass human rights and responsible sourcing. Before delving into the challenges, it is important to acknowledge the benefits of EV batteries. 

Over their lifetime, EVs produce significantly fewer emissions than gasoline-powered vehicles, especially when charged using renewable energy sources. They also convert more energy into motion than internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, reducing energy consumption. Furthermore, there's potential for recycling and second-life uses, which could minimize raw material extraction in the future. As battery technology advances, reliance on oil and gas decreases, contributing to energy independence.

However, these advantages must be considered alongside the serious consequences of raw material extraction, many of which pose significant toxicological and ethical challenges. Each component of an EV battery comes with environmental and health trade-offs.

Some of the primary materials used in lithium-ion batteries and the concerns associated with their extraction and processing include:

• Lithium (A Water-Intensive Process): Primarily mined in Chile, Argentina, and Bolivia, lithium extraction requires massive amounts of water, leading to water scarcity in arid regions. The toxic chemicals used in lithium processing can contaminate local water supplies, affecting human health and biodiversity.

• Cobalt (Toxicity & Human Rights Violations): 70% of the world’s cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where child labor and inhumane working conditions are widespread. Chronic exposure to cobalt dust is linked to lung diseases, heart complications, and potential neurotoxicity. Ethical sourcing remains a major challenge, with many supply chains lacking full traceability.

• Nickel (Environmental Degradation & Worker Exposure): Nickel refining releases sulfur dioxide, which contributes to acid rain and respiratory illnesses. Workers exposed to nickel dust and fumes face risks of lung and nasal cancer. Many nickel mines are in Indonesia and the Philippines, where large-scale extraction has led to deforestation and soil contamination.

• Graphite (Air Pollution & Lung Health Risks): China dominates graphite production, where unregulated mining results in high levels of air pollution. Inhalation of graphite dust can cause pneumoconiosis, a severe lung disease.

• Rare Earth Elements (REEs) (Toxic Waste & Geopolitical Control): REEs, critical for EV motors, are primarily mined in China, Myanmar, and the U.S. The extraction process generates radioactive waste, which, if mismanaged, poses long-term health risks. China controls 60% of the global REE supply, raising concerns about supply chain monopolization and ethical extraction.

These environmental and health risks highlight the urgent need for toxicologists to play a greater role in battery safety, sustainable material sourcing, and regulatory oversight.

While much attention is given to the environmental impact of EV batteries, there is another equally pressing issue: the human cost of mining in conflict zones. Conflict minerals refer to natural resources mined in regions of armed conflict, where profits often fund violence, corruption, and human rights abuses. Cobalt, tin, tungsten, and tantalum (3TG metals) are among the most notorious conflict minerals.

In the case of EV batteries, cobalt is the most concerning. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), supplies over two-thirds of the world’s cobalt, and has a long history of violent conflict, corruption, and exploitative labor practices. Many artisanal miners, including children, work under hazardous conditions without protective equipment and are exposed to high levels of toxic dust. The lack of supply chain transparency makes it even more difficult to ensure that cobalt used in EV batteries is ethically sourced.

As a toxicologist, I see two significant areas where my field can contribute to the ethical and health-conscious advancement of EV technology:

• Safer Alternatives & Battery Innovation: This includes researching cobalt-free battery chemistries, such as lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, which companies like Tesla and BYD are already adopting. It also involves developing solid-state and sodium-ion batteries, which could reduce reliance on lithium and cobalt.

• Regulatory Oversight & Ethical Sourcing: This involves establishing stricter regulations on toxic exposure limits in mining regions and advocating for stronger global policies on supply chain transparency, ensuring that companies source materials ethically. It also means collaborating with environmental scientists and human rights organizations to develop responsible sourcing guidelines.

The transition to EVs must be as much about human rights and ethical labor as it is about reducing carbon emissions. While the current supply chain presents serious challenges, progress is being made in battery innovation, recycling, and ethical sourcing. Companies like Redwood Materials and Li-Cycle are pioneering closed-loop recycling, recovering lithium, nickel, and cobalt from used batteries. This reduces reliance on newly mined materials and lowers the toxic burden of battery disposal.

Sodium-ion batteries offer a promising alternative that eliminates reliance on lithium and cobalt. Solid-state batteries, still in development, could improve safety and efficiency while reducing toxic exposure risks. The EU Battery Directive and the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act encourage ethical and sustainable battery production and more automakers are committing to conflict-free minerals and improved worker protections.

The road to sustainable EV batteries is long, but toxicologists, policymakers, and engineers must work together to ensure the transition is both environmentally responsible and ethically sound.

Electric vehicles are not a perfect solution, but they represent a step forward in reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. However, for the EV industry to be truly sustainable, it must address:

• The toxicological impact of raw material extraction

• The ethical implications of conflict minerals

• The need for safer battery innovations and recycling

As a toxicologist, I believe science and ethics must go hand in hand in the pursuit of sustainable energy. The future of EVs depends not just on reducing carbon emissions but on ensuring that the people and environments involved in their production are not sacrificed in the process.