5 ms·
> In release terms, you are not turning your store of energy into a mix of vapours, gases and particulates on every cycle This is sort of a point of contention
by closetnerd 12y ago
> In release terms, you are not turning your store of energy into a mix of vapours, gases and particulates on every cycle
This is sort of a point of contention at this point in time however. As you stated:
> putting sunlight into metal using sand.
This would be the longer term benefit of battery powered cars. Some countries have already made progress. And unless you're driving a Tesla and only charging it as there Supercharging stations, its not completely sunlight powering your wheels. It currently comes with the ecological impact of harvesting coal, burning it and etc.
- droidist2 12y agoIgnoring the differences between coal and oil (sure oil would be better if we had an unlimited amount) a single power plant will be more efficient and cleaner than hundreds of thousands of internal combustion engines.
- emj 12y agoIn Sweden all personal transport by car takes 45 TWh per year, if everyone converted to electric cars/hybrids it would be 13 TWh. That's what the propaganda says anyway. Since most personal transports by car are so short it's in the sweet spot for electric cars.
- closetnerd 12y agoInteresting what those number might mean. I expect energy consumption to be in favor of batteries, but didn't expect that much.
- selectodude 12y agoInternal combustion engines are only about 20 percent efficient, and that ignores the energy spent pulling the dinosaur puree out of the ground. In comparison, electric engines are about 85-90 percent efficient.