Comparing Energy Costs per Mile for Electric and Gasoline Vehicles

[PamW]

11. CORRECT!!

Very good. I've always stated that an electric car can be no more efficient, or no more climate friendly than the power plant used to charge the batteries.

Since most of the electric power in the USA is from carbon-based fossil fuels; by switching to an electric, one is just moving the source of the pollution from the tailpipe to the smokestack of a power plant.

There's also about a 7% average loss in the power lines. So the power plant has to generate 7% more energy to compensate; with 7% more pollution. Additionally, batteries and chargers are not 100% efficient either. Nickel-Metal-Hydride batteries give you back about 2/3 the energy you put in.

So many quote the high efficiency of the electric motor as if it were the only loss mechanism.

In point of fact, the motor is NOT the engine. If anything a motor is analogous to a transmission.

Warning Science content: In Science, an engine takes a fuel input and outputs work ( useful energy ).
A motor takes in work and output work in another form. Electricity is not a fuel, it is a form of work ( energy without entropy ). An electric motor takes in work ( electricity ) and outputs work in the form of rotary motion. A transmission takes in work as rotary motion and outputs work as rotary motion of a different speed. So a motor is analogous to a transmission and not an engine. The power plant is analogous to the engine.

From a carbon footprint point of view, the only place an electric car makes sense from a carbon footprint point of view is in northern Illinois. The Commonwealth Edison service area is so heavily based on low-carbon nuclear power that it is the only place that makes EVs carbon friendly. Anyone in the Commonwealth Edison area; I support your choice of EV. I can't make the same recommendation for anywhere else.

PamW