EV Drive Just Changing Pollution Goalpost? Nithin Kamath Raises Concerns

Zerodha Chief Executive Officer Nithin Kamath has raised alarm over the hidden environmental costs of transitioning from internal combustion engine vehicles to electric vehicles. In a post on X, Kamath raised concerns that the global push towards EVs, while aimed at reducing urban air pollution, might be inadvertently causing irreversible damage elsewhere in the world.

Kamath started his post with a stark observation. "I’m not sure most people truly understand the cost of transitioning from ICE vehicles to electric vehicles."

He questioned whether the world is genuinely reducing environmental harm, or simply shifting it out of sight. "Are we just moving pollution from city streets to biodiversity hotspots?"

The post draws attention to how resource extraction for EVs is concentrated in countries that are paying a steep environmental and social price. “Indonesia (~50% of the world's nickel) strip-mines paradise islands. Congo (~70% of cobalt) destroys communities with child labour,” Kamath wrote, highlighting how the mining of critical minerals essential for EV batteries — such as nickel and cobalt — is leading to environmental destruction and human rights violations.

He also outlined China's overwhelming control over rare earth minerals, stating, “China controls the minerals that make EVs possible: 90% rare earths, 75% lithium, 80% tungsten.” Kamath added that much of this resource processing and manufacturing was still “powered by coal plants,” thereby questioning the actual emissions savings from EVs.

“There are environmental costs at each step. Are we truly considering all this?” Kamath said.

He ended his post with a reflection on human behaviour. “Knowing us (humans), we'll always chase ‘better technology’ over what's better for the planet. Cleaner streets, yes. But at the cost of dirtier oceans, shattered communities, and forgotten islands?”

Here’s the post:

Kamath’s post prompted a flurry of responses, many echoing his concerns while others defended the shift towards cleaner mobility.

One user reflected on the belief that EVs represented progress, regardless of the unseen costs. The user wrote, “Humans don’t care about these things and marketing narratives will always win. For most, Electric Vehicles are the best environmental invention.”

Another user was more critical of the broader sustainability narrative. "It's just a huge scale drama .. on one side we say we’re moving towards EV to reduce pollution, on the other side, countries during war emit more pollution than anything. On one side we promote using jute bags or reusable plastics but on the other side industries like the snacks industry, water industry etc., are selling more plastics than their products. It’s just a large-scale drama," read the comment

Others urged a shift in focus altogether. "At the very least, we must avoid encouraging car culture in Indian cities — whether the vehicles are ICE or EV. A better-connected and well-managed #PublicTransport system is the way forward," one user argued, suggesting that urban planning should take precedence over vehicle type.

Some acknowledged the complexity of the issue. "Every technology comes at a cost. I'm not in favour of ev, only because of the cost, which is huge, else it seems to be a better mode of transportation as fuel is also doing the same harm to the environment," read another comment.

Kamath's remarks, along with the public responses, highlight the increasing focus on the broader implications of sustainability — extending beyond urban air quality to include the full lifecycle of electric vehicles, from raw material sourcing to energy use and infrastructure.