Sunvalleylaw
Member
Actually, that has been addressed in many posts here. And it depends on the region where you are and mostly drive and charge. But still, on balanced, better then continuing with fossil fuels other than for transition.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla uses 1/6 the energy compared to gasoline
- Thread starter RidgeRunner
- Start date
Actually based on Tesla annual report all superchargers in 2021 used green energy.
Sunvalleylaw
Member
Good to know. I was talking about all charging, home and otherwise, and all EV's but good to know on the Superchargers particularly.
I live in Wisconsin (not the worst part, but I still charge in there area on occasion) - that’s depressing. I wonder if there is an updated chart somewhere,
I agree somewhat. But the OP started out defending his stance on EV. If he claims 6x more efficient he will be labeled FUD.
EV is more efficient and cleaner burning. But not by as much as we’d like.
I run Solar. But I cheat with a Fossil Battery ( the grid).
BTW here is sone food for thought.
ZenRockGarden
Active Member
6x more efficient (at the car) is pretty accurate. Tesla's run around with a battery that has the energy content of about 2-3 gallons of gas.
Yes, there are losses to bring the electricity to the car... there are also transport costs to get gas to a fuel station.
Not sure where the FUD angle is in all this. I would think everyone could agree that electric cars are a lot more efficient, and that the "clean-ness" of electricity varies wildly depending on where and how you get it, but can be very clean if coming from wind/solar which are very much on the rise.
Yes, there are losses to bring the electricity to the car... there are also transport costs to get gas to a fuel station.
Not sure where the FUD angle is in all this. I would think everyone could agree that electric cars are a lot more efficient, and that the "clean-ness" of electricity varies wildly depending on where and how you get it, but can be very clean if coming from wind/solar which are very much on the rise.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
This is reasonably correct but ultimately a fool's statistic since the former is electricity and the latter is petrol. If the electricity is clean sourced then the efficiency per se is not much of a concern outside of cost; and if the electricity is fossil sourced then conversion efficiencies are a lot closer to ICE vehicles.
So if we are comparing ICE vehicles to electricity generated from fossil fuels, the efficiency is much less? I guess it would depend on the generation mix for different grids and see how much is generated from cleaner sources such as nuclear, solar, hydro, wind, and geothermal. Realistically, if you have solar installed at home generating for the house and the vehicle, you’re essentially getting free electricity from the sun but the cost and pollution generated from the production of solar panels would still need to be factored into the overall equation. It would seem to me that using an EV is much cleaner for the overall environment and more efficient as long as enough people use EVs instead of ICE.
Transportation losses are already factored into the price of gasoline (at the pump) and electricity (at the meter).
If you super charge, do pay what Tesla delivers to your car or what the car pulls out of the battery?
Measure energy at the consumer point of sale.
OP wants to defend EV arguments.
If you defend with bogus numbers, when friends of ICE owners with EV's say they only save 1/2 or 1/3 his whole argument goes out the window.
In practice, my Model S is getting about 60 mpg equivalent (which is VERY good for its size and performance). OP is claiming 180 mpg.
Here is really simple math.
I get about 250 wh/mi on my Model S. 1 kWh is $0.32 (delivered in New England)
0.250 kWh/mi * $0.32 / kWh = $0.08 / mile
Now take a 30 mpg vehicle at $6.00 / gallon that's not hard to obtain today.
$6/30 = $0.20 / mile
Where is the 6x ? It's not even close to that. And I didn't even factor in the REAL cost of electricity.
I'm really consuming probably around 350 wh/mi on my Model S. That includes charging losses and all HVAC when not moving, battery heating etc.
0.350 kWh/mi * $0.32 / kWh = $0.11 / mile
And that's with it at $6 / gallon, what was it when the price of gas was $3 / gallon?
People don't care about the theory. They care about their wallet.
It will vary a lot by location, but I doubt it's close to 6x any where.
yeah...32 cents is not close to the national average (14.5 cents), which at 4 miles/KWh would mean 3.6 cents per mile, or 1/5.5th.
Going more towards real numbers, I average 310 wh/mile on my YP, and my CA rooftop solar has an estimated cost of 11 cents per KWh over first 20 years, so down to 3.44 c/mile or 1/5.8th of the 20 cents per mile.
$6 is high, but so is 30 mpg - bit above average, esp for something with more spirited acceleration.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
A model S ICE equivalent at 30 mpg overall ?
Hmm. Possible with a hybrid
That is a different discussion from efficiency, and from the start the results are goofy because the costs of pollution are externalized to general taxation. Just because people are blind to the costs they pay for pollution does not make it go away.
Rav4 and CRV aren't in the same class as a MY either. Best comparison would be a BMW X4 (which gets about the same miles as original calculation, anyway).
Isn’t the BMW X6 essentially considered their crossover? I think the same is true for the Honda HRV and Mercedes GLA.
There's lots of different levels of crossover. I just don't think comparing a $60k premium crossover with a 0-60 in 4 seconds... to 4cyl Honda Civic-based crossover that's 1/3 the price is a fair comparison.
ZenRockGarden
Active Member
Building on this, if we're gonna play the "what were all the costs and energy that went into your electricity" then it would be only fair to add up not only the gasoline in your tank, but the energy to discover it, pump it out of the ground, refine it, store it, transport it etc. I think that roughly doubles the energy-cost of gas.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Then add on the social cost of the pollution, and the global military costs related to a scarce resource war.
The total costs are obscene.
ZenRockGarden
Active Member
I've seen reasonable-looking estimates that it costs something silly like 3 gallons of gas to make a gallon of gas, which can't be true but yeah half of all shipping is the supply chain of creating fuels.
We're running about half wind/solar/hydro here in California, the rest being a mix of nuclear and natural gas. We're building the solar and wind at a pretty good pace to have it be the majority in a decade - at that point the numbers are really strong in favor of electric for cars.
Similar threads
