4 ms·
Also, you reduce the space that needs converting from {All the cars on Earth} to {All fossil fuel powerplants}. There are ~1 billion cars. I can't find good num
by JBReefer 10y ago
Also, you reduce the space that needs converting from {All the cars on Earth} to {All fossil fuel powerplants}. There are ~1 billion cars. I can't find good numbers for coal and gas plants, but it can't be more than a 200k or so.
That's a gigantic improvement in our ability to rapidly reduce CO2 from transportation.
- mikkael 10y agoWell, yes and no. My thinking is that for the climate it does not matter if you burn the fossile fuel in a car or in a power plant. At one point all the fossile fuel will have been burnt one way or the other and the same amount of CO2 will have been blown in the atmosphere. I am sure humanity will not stop consuming fossile fuels before they are exhausted unless it becomes economically unattractive to do so...
- dragonwriter 10y agoIt makes a difference because power plants are more efficient, and once electrical charging infrastructure is in place, changes to the input power source is easier.
- mikkael 10y agoAccording to my knowledge current car motor efficiency is about the same than power plants: gasoline car motor 40%, diesel car motor 43%, coal burning power plants 30-45%, gas burning power plants around 30% efficiency. All numbers are from Wikipedia. But even if power plants would be more efficient (meaning producing more energy for the same fuel input) it still would make no difference from a CO2 emissions point of view after all fuel has been burnt...