Re: four elements for EV acceptance - or one alternative

[Michael A Perry <mperry@efn.org>]

Lee Hart wrote:

> Michael A Perry wrote:
> > We assume EVs are less expensive at MPG ratings than ICEs.
>
> This is a good assumption if you are comparing equivalent vehicles being
> driven the same way. EV conversions of ICE vehicles generally get better
> "gas" mileage. The same holds true when you compare electric vs.
> fossil-fuelled fork lifts, golf carts, and other vehicles.

Thanks to all.

When I have time, I'll borrow our line monitor and map how much power it
takes to charge this system.  It will give me a clearer idea of how much
power the car truly consumes.

As I recall from previous discussions, and from watching my car charge, the
first 80% of the charge is replaced fairly quickly, and at a high A return.
>From there, the Amps slowly drop off. I assume the consumed power also
drops, but haven't checked it, yet.  The last 20% of the charge, I'm
guessing, will be less efficient, since the net draw will be the amps going
into the battery, plus the losses to resistance and inefficientcies in the
charger.

With the ICE, if you burn a gallon, you replace a gallon.  With EVs, you
can't look at having "burned" 80 amps and assume it will cost you 80A *
cost/A to replace it.  I should know for sure in a couple weeks.