Re: Power production

["Peter VanDerWal" <peter_v@primenet.com>]

>>     Contrary to what's be touted on the list EVs are NOT more efficient
>> than ICEs (at least not much).
>
>Unless I misunderstand you, this is really not a fair comparison.  You
>are comparing crude conversion EVs with sophisticated direct injection
>diesels and hybrids designed by engineers with multi-million dollar
>budgets.  I think it's pretty impressive that these EVs are as efficeint
>as they are.


You did misunderstand.  Crude conversions get perhaps 2 miles to the kwh or
27mpg, high efficiency EVs (i.e. better than currently available commercial
EVs) get 5 miles per kwh or 66 mpg.
So I'm comparing the best commercially available ICEs to not yet
commercially available EVs.


>Besides, a major advantage of an EV over a fueled vehicle of ANY kind is
>that the vehicle with a tank needs a specific kind of fuel (except for
>the very few "flexible fuel" vehicles, which can use two -- gasoline and
>CNG).


How is that an advantage?  EVs only run on electricity.


>OK, I admit that right now I run my EV on power produced by the scrubber-
>equipped coal plants in Ohio.  But if those plants shut down tomorrow, I
>can run it on electricity from natural gas, hydrogen, nuclear energy,
>wind or solar power.   Even if all the coal miners go on strike, I can
>still charge up my EV.

If all the coal burning power plants shut down tommorow you wouldn't be
running your EV at all since they would be rationing electricity.   Think
about it, over 56% of the power in the US is produced from coal.