I don’t see how electric cars use less energy than gasoline-powered cars. So is this about emissions? I suppose that’s an advantage. But are emissions a problem, outside LA?
Never mind that the electricity comes from coal plants, which is why some people describe electric cars as “coal-fired”. They increase pollution, but don’t say that to a lefty who wants to feel good about himself.
Electric cars use less energy because electric motors are extremely efficient at converting stored energy into forward motion. Around 90 percent compared to a gasoline engine that may only be around 25 percent efficient.
That is precisely why I think the entire concept of EVs has lived WAY beyond its prime. In the beginning, maybe 30 or 40 years ago, internal combustion engines were much dirtier than they are today and it may have made sense to generate and transmit electric power at night to charge EV batteries, thus relocating the emissions to some far-away place. But today ICE are much cleaner, eliminating that need. Plus you’ve got the highly evolved infrastructure to deliver liquid hydrocarbon fuels and it only take you a few minutes to pump 20 gallons into your tank. With EVs, you can drive maybe 50 minutes at freeway speed and then need to spend the next hour charging your battery. Try that on a long family trip.
The only logical justification in this century is to stop importing oil from middle east tyrants. But we could easily accomplish the same goal by opening up our own domestic resources.
On top of that, the green kooks are shutting down every conventional source of power and now they are even going after natural gas. There simply won’t be enough economical electricity available to charge your EVs.
Lastly, you’ve got the huge environmental problem of EV batteries loaded with toxic compounds and elements. This needs to be included with the emissions from power generation for a complete environmental analysis of EVs. What becomes of the mountains and mountains of these if EVs ever really take off? I don’t know that anybody has addressed that looming problem.
On balance, from a systems perspective, it’s hard to beat liquid hydrocarbons for speed, convenience, high energy density, low overall emissions, and simple manufacturing.
I hate to say it, but for all the hype about electric cars, Tesla did something right that GM completely flubbed:
No-one’s gonna add $20,000 to the price of a $10,000 car for it to be electric. But those who would already buy a $70,000 would pay $90,000 for it to be electric, if being electric meant it had the most kick-ass performance ever.
Tesla was aiming for under $50,000. That they had to go as low as 40 kwh to make it $50,000 means they failed badly. And yet, they will still be profitable and pay those loans back. At $100,000 a car, it doesn’t take too long to pay off $1 billion startup costs.
Frankly, I think Tesla’s big mistake is battery management. I sure as hell wouldn’t pay for a car that I couldn’t even visit my folks in. Using Battery swaps at refueling would defer costs to Tesla down the road, but allow you to travel more than 250 miles in a day.