From the article:
An auto club in Germany that claims 21 million members ran some controlled charging test electric vehicles to see how efficient that process was. The results put another nail in the value coffin. Not only are they expensive to buy and own, but the average charge also wastes up to 13% of the electricity.
Put another way, the consumer is charged for all the electricity required to fully charge the battery, which is as much as 13% more than the battery can hold.
So, imagine pouring two gallons of gasoline on the ground every time you filled a 20-gallon tank. People would lose their collective minds. But that will be standard for every charge of every vehicle in the utopian electric fleet of the future.
ADAC’s Ecotest calculated the kWh needed to fully charge a range of electric vehicle batteries.
The result of the test under the same conditions for all electric car models: E-car drivers have to plan for a particularly large amount of power loss for some models – but everyone has to pay extra. According to the ADAC Ecotest, a 100 kWh battery in a Tesla Model X100D actually needs 108.3 kWh. The Kia e-Niro Spirit has 72.3 kWh for a 64 kWh battery. The Jaguar I-PACE EV400 also needs at least 10 kWh more for a 90 kWh battery.
With electricity prices scheduled to double in New Hampshire (as an example) and with the cost of EVs still out of the range of most middle and lower-income families, throwing money out the window with every charge might just as well be another tax
Never mind the real environmental disaster that is battery element mining
Oh a that little thing about disposing of all the spent EV batteries.... fucking hypocrites
Everyone who bought an EV should be sent to work at a lithium mine.
It’s just African children in the mines. Dnc loves that stuff.
The MORE one KNOWS:
Chile Lithium Open Mining and the Affects on the Population and the Future!!!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-chile-lithium-analysis-idUSKCN1T00DM
People pushing this NONSENSE are and should be charged with Crimes Against Humanity for doing shit like this!!!!
EV cars ARE NOT GOING TO SAVE THE DAMN PLANET, CUTTING DOWN WHOLE FORESTS, LIKE GERMANY IS THINKING TO DO TO THE BLACK FOREST WITH 300 YEAR OLD TREES OR TEXAS PUTTING UP A WIND MILL FARM OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF FUCKING NO WHERE (WEST TEXAS) AND "OOOPS" NOW THERE IS NO WIND BLOWING...Oh, EVERYONE, set your thermostat higher during the hottest part of the day and don't run it BUT FOR 2 HRS...
NOTE ON THE BATTERIES...THEY CANNOT BE RECYCLED!!! ONE-an-DONE!!!
IF my language OFFENDS anyone or the editors of this website, I apologize...
Hit them where it hurts, then they may finally wake up.
What you're referring to is charging efficiency... yes, it consumes more power to charge the vehicle than is stored in the battery. It's like 90+% efficient.
Combustion engines turn about 35% of the energy available in gas to work, and waste the remaining 65%.
ICE engines have nothing to brag about in the efficiency department.
Nor do electric cars. They get their power from typically a carbon-based fuel-fired system (40% efficient). Go through transformers, and power lines and transformers (maybe 85% efficient), before arriving at the charger (90%) efficient. That adds up to a system efficiency of ~30% efficient. And the electric motor is about 90% efficient. (total ~27% efficient). Makes ICE look not so bad.
The real winner is the gas-electric hybrid. With energy recovery from regenerative braking, and optimal generating efficiency at constant RPM, they demonstrate above 40% efficiency in city driving. Plus, you don't need to turn up your nose at the pre-existing hydrocarbon fuel infrastructure.
Except you just compared apples and oranges. Do it again for gas from wellhead, to gas tank and recalculate them efficiencies.
It's not even a contest... Electric as a fuel source wins by a lot. Nor is it a contest on which has better energy density and portability. Electric vehicles are also far more energy intensive to build due to their battery packs.
For the vast majority of people electric cars will work just fine with batteries alone. Adding additional complexity and weight would be detrimental. For others that need additional range or flexibility a series hybrid is definitely something that could make a lot of sense.
But even those will get rendered pointless when battery energy densities exceed 400w/kg which will make all but the most extreme cases manageable with batteries alone.
Well, then you would have to add in the gasoline and other fuels consumed in the mining and production of lithium---and other rare metals. I've read such analyses and it destroys the electric vehicle model as a "reduction" in carbon footprint.
Lithium batteries have an energy density of maybe 260 watt-hours/kg (0.936 MJ/kg), whereas kerosene or gasoline has a heat of combustion of 46.2 MJ/kg. This is the reason that it is highly unlikely that airplanes will convert to electric propulsion. I do agree that it is not a contest, but not for the reason you think. And try to lug a megajoule of electrical energy anywhere. It's easier to transport kerosene.
For the vast majority, electric cars are too expensive to purchase and entertain the problems of (1) what to do when you run out of charge on the road, and (2) do you carry insurance for battery fires? So few electric cars; so many battery fires. So many gasoline-powered cars; so few car gasoline fires. Also, very problematic life when the battery replacement can cost up to $15k and the used EV market is unknown.
As for hybrids, the point is that you repose the main energy store in a fuel, not a battery. Such battery that there would be is only enough needed to handle transients in loading through a spell of driving. So, it is a great reduction in weight: less battery by the major part of the battery being replaced by fuel in a 1:46 ratio.
The battery warms up as it charges so you have to assume the battery cooling system is running and using up some of the power as it charges.
Some of that new fancy alien tech would be pretty nifty right about now!
Ok, but gas engines are only like 35% efficient.
this must be similar how a car alternator charges the battery at 14 volts for the 12 volt battery i guess
Yes. You need higher voltage to get the electric charge INTO the battery. If you come at it with 12 volts, the battery says "I will see your twelve volts," and there is an impasse. You can think of it like tire pressure. You need to have higher pressure air in order to get it into a tire at 35 psi.
The loss occurs primarily when converting AC power to DC power. You take 10 units of AC power put it through a transformer but only 9 units of DC power comes out. It's much easier to generate and distribute AC power, but all batteries store that energy as DC.
The charging a 12V battery with 14V is just how charging works. Think of voltage kind of like water pressure, you won't be able to push energy into the battery if the battery has higher or similar "pressure".
If two gallons poured out with every 20 gallon fillup there would be a lot more fires. Guess tried and true fossils fuels are just too visible to be viable. Leftist logic confuses me.
Maybe we should stop planning cities so everyone has to own a car. Do you know how much money we spend on widening widening and widening roads in this country? It’s a hidden tax and a waste of money. Give me a small conservative walkable town any day where I can walk or ride my bike to everything.
Electric cars don’t solve the real issue and that is carbrain auto culture which conflates freedom with owning a car. If you have to own a car just to live your life that’s not freedom that’s slavery. It’s another deep state scam on the population.
Here in the us,things are more spread out as we have more land. It would cost far more to condense the people than it does to widen the road.
But I own my own home and a screaming fast ford mustang and a 4 wheel drive. That is freedom and fun. When we get large snowstorms you can't leave the house without 4 wheeldrive for several days.
Speak for yourself. The life you want you can have in abundance in New York City, etc. Go for it. The fact of the matter is that people associate liberty with freedom, and freedom with the ability to go where you want to go. You don't have to own a car---just like you don't have to own a telephone, a TV set, or be on the internet. You don't even have to travel by airplane. Live your life as you wish. That will be one less person cluttering up the roads for the rest of us.