3 ms·

You're ignoring what it takes to bring the coal to the powerplant too. OP was making the point that boiler to wheels efficiency of electrics is higher than ice

You're ignoring what it takes to bring the coal to the powerplant too. OP was making the point that boiler to wheels efficiency of electrics is higher than ices. It isn't when you factor in all the conversion losses. It's a really simple point that battery zealots fail to grasp.

Schroedingersat 4y ago
> You're ignoring what it takes to bring the coal to the powerplant too. 908g/kWh is the mine to wall socket emissions figure I was using. Do you have a better supported one? https://insideevs.com/news/347916/tesla-model-3-epa-energy-consumption/ https://insideevs.com/news/347916/tesla-model-3-epa-energy-c... In EPA tests the tesla from the wall uses about 260Wh/km. Real world reports say range is from 80% to 110% of claimed, so we'll bump it up to 300Wh/km Our Mazda gets 8L/100km claimed (over 9 real world https://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/cx-5 https://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/cx-5) or 665Wh/km. A Civic is about the same real world if you wanted to compare that. If we burn that exact same gasolene (probably the most energy intensive fuel to extract) in a 58% efficient CCGT and use the 6% transmission loss of the US grid we get 330Wh. If you stop taking all of your rounding in the direction that favours the ICE you get around 240Wh for the EV vs 400Wh for the ICE. An Ioniq is slightly more efficient again. Even a fully fossil fueled grid requires less energy for the most popular EV than the most popular ICE car no matter which way you slice it. As soon as you use gas or coal or relax the assumptions where you drive the EV hard with the heater on and the ICE carefully with both on the highway you get more than double per energy input.