Electric Cars

I was looking at your links. They are very misleading. One said: "Electric motors are significantly more efficient than internal combustion engines and thus less energy is required to operate an EV. "
You cannot directly compare the efficiency of an electric motor directly to an internal combustion engine. An electric motor by itself approaches 100% efficiency. However, the thermodynamic laws required to produce that electricity are the same for a internal combustion engine that they are for the energy required to generate electricity for the electric motor. The theoretical limit of that efficiency is in the neighborhood of about 30% depending on a number of factors including the fuel used. . The only exception being solar and wind which at this time generates very little of the electricity.

 

What time scale?
At the current new car sales rate it would take 50 years to replace all the petrol cars in the US even if they ware all electric..

 

We'll all be underwater by then.

 

What is your scientific basis for that allegation and can you provide studies supporting it?

 

General Motors Is Going All Electric
The giant automaker will start with 20 new all-electric models by 2023.

https://www.wired.com/story/general-motors-electric-cars-plan-gm/

technology
Ford Goes ‘All In’ on Electric Cars

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ectric-vehicle-spending-to-11-billion-by-2022

 

Solar boats.

 

It's great that electric motors are efficient, but the cycle of battery discharging/recharging involves much inefficiency, batteries lose significant capacity as they age, the lifespan of batteries is relatively short, and recycling batteries is an energy-gobbling, pollution-generating nasty business.

 

Governments in the EU are looking to ban new car sales of diesel and petrol by 2040, some clowns want it brought forward to 2030 and some believe it's possible within 5 years.

It's frustrating for those that live in reality and not in Dreamland.

 

Thank you for confirming that you've not read all the posts in the thread.

 

Natural gas price vs gasoline
According to Gasbuddy.com the average price today in the USA for a gallon of gasoline is $3.35. Thus, it costs about $27.92 to produce 1 million BTUs of energy from refined gasoline. Thus, gasoline is almost 6 times as expensive as natural gas on a per unit energy basis. Ethanol is even more expensive than gasoline.Feb 28, 2011
Cost of Gasoline vs. Natural Gas - MktNeutral | Seeking Alpha

https://seekingalpha.com › instablog › 727006-mktneutral › 142777-cost-of-...

 

Solar powered submarines. Install a charging point beside the Titanic.

 

Another factor is that the quality of modern vehicles is good for 30 years so the 2nd hand market will still have gasoline vehicles on the road.

That being said the 2nd hand market will also have EV's joining the mix so that adds another variable to be considered.

The single most significant factor IMO will be the cost of gas. There is going to be a supply and demand curve that will come into play here and as more EV's are on the road the demand will drop in first world nations but continue in developing nations. This will lead to fewer imports of oil to first world nations which in turn might raise the cost thereby increasing the sales of EV's. In the developing nations the demand will still exist but the ability to pay higher prices is limited.

 

Then we run into problems with the generation of enough electricity for all those cars in a way that doesn't contribute to other environmental problems.

 

Governments in the EU were also looking to ban nuclear power plants by 2025 back in 1995.

More power is being generated by nuclear power today in Europe than was generated by nuclear in 1995.

Sometimes reality is really real.

 

The point being FORD & GM are not being incentivized like you claimed is necessary in your post. You know the one I quoted.

I was just debunking your claim that they wouldn't build electric cars without incentives. I think I quoted your post, so I don't know why you are confused.

 

This study shows that the potential exists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_the_United_States

This study shows that it is feasible.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...and-solar-can-power-most-of-the-united-states

 

Nuclear is way forward, not renewables.

Until technology in a century or so, assuming mankind is not extinct by then from wars etc.., there's no realistic electric storage means.

 

Technology will take care of that problem. Much of the power generated today is wasted.

 

same issue with my Samsung 7, once it became annoying I paid $55 for a new one.

 

Anyone in California with an EV?

How are you charging you car with the power cut to avoid forest fires?

 

True. These things need to be developed concurrently.

 

Yup!

Nuclear plants are some of the worst offenders as far as waste is concerned because they were primarily designed to operate at only a single capacity and retrofitting them with variable capacity is expensive. Some plants were built to take advantage of hydro stored power so as provide flexibility. This hydro stored power flexibility can be reused with wind and solar sources instead.

The biggest downsides to nuclear power is the massive expense of building them and the storage of the used material. Without government subsidies they are NOT commercially viable entities and are also high risk targets for terrorism.

A diversified grid with smaller cheaper generation sources will be more flexible and less wasteful overall IMO.

 

There already is one


But not for the reasons you think

This is Waanyi land the creek is sacred so it cannot be polluted

 

Sure.
In this case it's almost automatic. As we get more and more renewables the electricity to charge cars (at night mostly) increases.

 

Sorry, incorrect opinion.