/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10219785
>Not by a large margin, once you factor in losses associated with power generation, power transfer from the power plant to the charging pole, charging the battery and battery discharging when it is not used. As far as I know, the net energy efficiency of electric cars is under 50%.
Wrong

>>10212939
>Literally no one believe that electric vehicles are clean if run off a coal powergrid
Surprisingly, they actually are, since electricity has a much higher thermodynamic efficiency than ICE.

>>6539923

>These are both about plug-in hybrids: cars which burn conventional fossil fuels. The essential feature of these cars is that plugging them in to charge is entirely optional.

You can't read, so expecting you to read between the lines was asking way too much.

>And this study is only about the impact on the power grid, not things like whether it's feasible to make so many batteries.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-17/pentagon-less-dependent-on-china-rare-earths-report-says.html

Despite what CNW Marketing, the Connecticut State University Recorder and the Telegraph tell you, we aren't going to run out of batteries any time soon.

>Furthermore, if you look closely at the analysis, what you commonly find is that the emissions will be lower if you *don't* plug them in. This is one of the reports honest enough to face the fact that the clean power sources, such as hydro, nuclear, solar, and wind, are being used to their fullest extent, such that additional load on the grid, such as charging electric cars, will be met mostly by burning coal.

This was wrong the first time you said it, and it hasn't gotten any more correct with the passage of time.

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php