True.
However, the entire system for gas engines is something like this: pump oil, transport, refine, transport to station, fill tank, burn fuel, work.
For the electrical car it's something like: pump or dig fuel, transport, burn fuel to produce electricity, transmit electricity, charge battery, run electrical motor, work.
The electrical system has more stages, each with its efficiency loss. The electrical system is still probably more efficient, but not nearly as much so as most people think. The relevant issue is how much of the fuel winds up producing work, not the efficiency of an electric motor, which uses electricity that has nalready been produced with its efficiency losses in the process.
all of which is why nuclear is thesolution. The wackos piled on artifical work to decrease overall efficiency andrun up costs.
However, the entire system for gas engines is something like this: pump oil (defend regions where oil is pumped), transport, refine(burn fuel to refine), transport to station (burn fuel), fill tank, burn fuel, work.
For the electrical car it's something like: pump or dig fuel (and/or: capture photons, harness water, harness geo-thermal, wind, nuclear), transport (not always), burn fuel to produce electricity (not always), transmit electricity (to any electrical outlet), charge battery, run electrical motor, work.
Personally, I don't think the efficiency losses areas bad for E as you think. But regardless, there's only one real source for gas, many different sources for E with production efficiencies getting better all the time.
Don't get me wrong, I like the deep throaty roar of a RAT motor as much as any gearhead, and I would absolutely love to have a 1920's/30's era barrelback woody with a Liberty 12 sucking down high test avgas.
But I like E; clean efficient, quiet. Way cheaper in the long run, and I'm not sending $$$ to unstable sand castles in the ME. And I absolutely love to see the American can do spirit alive in guys that do things like this on their own.