Please have a look: Electric shock – Tesla cars in Hong Kong more polluting than petrol models, report claims I am not sure if anyone has seen it (Mark did for sure since he is mentioned in this article). It seems to me that it is beginning of lobbying by car dealers to prevent extension of tax waivers. The article (or rather the report it is quoting) is wrong on so many counts but I think they are playing the old game of repeating a lie thousand times so that it becomes common sense (the arguments here are rehash of old reports I have seen in US and Europe that were proven to be lacking). Tesla should react quickly and debunk it or we will have problems next year (possibly together with HK Electric and CLP). Below a few points I would make re this article: On the methodology of comparison with ICE cars: 1) If you compare emissions of power plants then you need to take into account that gasoline does not just flow out of the earth into gas stations, at minimum it needs to be refined - the estimated energy for that is around 4-5kwh per gallon of gasoline produced according to US sources that I googled up - and this is not clean energy. I bet the report does not account for it since that energy alone is enough for a Tesla to go about 20km. You can add on top all the pollution caused by extraction and transportation of oil and then gasoline (Coal and Natural Gas - the most common fuels in in power generation are much more energy efficient in terms of extraction/distribution - that's why they are the most popular fuels) 2) The article seems to imply that big reason for 'pollution' are the batteries. That is another red herring. How exactly do they account for 'pollution' - do they divide production/materials pollution by no of kilometres driven on the batteries? And to by fair, do they account on the ICE side for what the batteries replace - i.e. engine, power train and of course ICE car batteries which for hybrids are quite big as well and the pollution resulting from making these parts?. There is not enough data on longevity of the batteries to really use it and they forget that large size LiOn batteries are not typically disposed of but typically repurposed in storage systems (where battery efficiency requirements are different). Add to this Gigafactory that is fully powered by solar and this argument is on really thin ice. Logical Fallacies: Besides the above technical points I think the article/report have some significant logical issues in their argument: 1) They seem to conflate CO2 with all pollution - I don't see any mention of other pollutants caused by ICE cars. According to this methodology the cleanest car on the road would be a VW Diesel model - low CO2 and who cares about the rest. (as I mention above their CO2 numbers are likely wrong in the first place but still it's wrong even using their numbers) 2) Efficiency logic - large power plant turbine has thermal efficiency ratings which are around twice as high as ICE - how can something twice as efficient be worse if one fully accounts for the whole fuel cycle?? Coal generates more CO2 but only because it hasn't been processed beforehand which gasoline was. Also it is easier to scrub emissions in one spot vs in thousands of individual vehicles. Using their arguments it would be cleaner for HK to produce electricity in individual generators and shut down those bad dirty power plants! - the logic fails here and points to omissions in analysis. Let me know if you have any other points but we should strongly encourage Tesla to react to fight this misinformation campaign.