I won’t cry, for a few reasons. Consolidated power generation is far cleaner and more efficient than burning fossil fuels at distributed points of consumption; and wind and solar power form a large component of my power mix. Even if that were not the case, the same argument applies about location and dilution. I would rather see pollution in remote areas where few are affected, rather than in dense urban environments or along freeways where many are affected. Furthermore- I’m not leaking or burning contaminated oil, I don’t need oil/filter/spark plug changes, and regenerative braking produces no particulate matterOriginally Posted by ssdelorean
Then some math if I might. My 500e Fiat has a 24kwh battery. One gallon of gas contains about 34 kWh of energy. The Fiat’s range is 80 miles. Works out to be 114mpge. Not bad. Cheap commuter.
It takes about 6kwh to refine and deliver a gallon of gas. I could take that 6kwh directly and drive 20 miles on it, before the gallon of gas is even refined. By the time you’ve refined and delivered a 13gal tank of gas, you’ve used enough electrical power to move me 260 miles and I still haven’t burned any gas.
The battery, which I accept is complex to manufacture, is only made once for the car, rather than fossil fuels and lubricants which must be extracted continuously over the life of the vehicle. At end of life, the battery or individual cells may be reused for bulk grid support storage before eventual recycling.
Maybe none of this will matter to you because you’d probably much rather stick to your deeply held beliefs about oil and engines and power, or because you think people who drive electric cars are flowery liberals. Don’t get me wrong- internal combustion/piston power has its place. There’s no battery that could fly my airplane 1200 miles like the 68 gallons of 100 octane low lead I can carry. But as soon as there’s a battery that can do it I’ll be first in line. In the meantime I’ll enjoy driving electric- which costs almost nothing.
Best,
KL
Reply With Quote