Did he say “for a given highway range”? EVs are more efficient than ICE, so you gain 2-3x there. Then, if we’re talking city driving ICE is even less efficient

Did he say “for a given highway range”? EVs are more efficient than ICE, so you gain 2-3x there. Then, if we’re talking city driving ICE is even less efficient unless they’re hybrid or ideally plug-in hybrid, in which case much of the weight benefit goes out the door. Then you’ve got the fact that batteries are now being used as a structural member, which you can’t do with a gas tank. Then there’s volumetric energy density. Gas tanks necessarily eat into the usable volume within the car. Batteries can just be integrated in the floor of the car. In theory, if you drove around with a huge gas tank you could exploit the benefits of the high energy density, getting range that an EV could never hope to match. You could drive for thousands of kilometres without refuelling. But with the gas tanks that cars are actually delivered with, for the kind of range people actually need, the weight of the engine/transmission becomes a very significant fraction of the whole drivetrain+energy storage. I really don’t see the point of throwing the “100x” number around when it’s completely obvious from looking at real-world vehicles that the actual achievable difference is far, far smaller, and that we’re 1-2 generations of battery chemistry improvements away from weight parity for a vehicle with the kind of range people actually need.