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
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.