Motor Trend has been inflitrated
(archive.vn)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (43)
sorted by:
The one thing that gets me is that it says that EVs are more energy efficient then combustion engines. I find that a bit hard to believe. I've not read the entire article and studies in a lot of details but it looks like most energy produced is lost? somehow by the engine. We've had a lot of experience building engines and I find it hard to believe they are that bad. In fact it says that even if the entire grid was powered by coal it would be 31% more efficient to have all EVs. That seems wild. It would imply that The energy lost by EVs combined with the energy lost of producing the energy thru coal is considerably more efficient then a combustion engine.
I'd love to see an article or two about that.
The answer to every single question about why car companies don't build vehicles in specific niches is "governments made it illegal".
As a rule of thumb:
Passenger cars with 30+ mpg are less polluting than equivalent EVs powered by coal per mile driven (not including manufacturing). Cars with 45+ mpg less polluting than EVs powered by natural gas.
This formulation lets you look at your own car and grid makeup and see that, for most people, the EV even when better is marginally so.
"Efficiency" is a red herring because you can't compare like for like. 40% efficiency of a Prius includes generation and use, but 90% efficiency of an EV is only the use not the generation. For example, an EV powered by solar is often <20% efficient since the panels are only around 20% efficient, which is why they never talk about that. How much energy costs per mile, how much pollution - this is what matters.
Even without being worried about global warming, I think it's nice to move the smog out of cities. I don't want my town to be like Shanghai. That doesn't mean I think there should be any mandates or subsidies.