« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Myth of the Electric Car

President Obama visited Michigan recently to talk about how he “saved” the auto industry. But what he really did was bail out the unions, pure and simple.

 

On his visit, Obama touted the Chevy Volt, an electric car which costs a whopping $41,000.

 

Americans really need to know the truth about the electric car. It is just more enviro nonsense. First, its high price tag means that it will need to be subsidized by the government which is just more wasteful eco-economics, where ‘green’ technologies are subsidized dollar for dollar by the taxpayer. So if your neighbor buys a Volt, you are paying for his car.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Of course not.

 

More importantly, however, the electric car will actually use more energy and cause more pollution than an internal combustion engine. Because electricity is a highly-refined resource that should be used to power computers, light bulbs, refrigerators, water pumps, power tools and the like. To move around heavy things like cars with one person in them is “the wrong use” for electricity.

 

Have you ever known people who use electricity to heat their house?

 

If you have, you will notice that they always talk about how expensive it is because heating a home is the “wrong use” for a refined resource like electricity.

 

Electricity is generated through a conversion process that dissipates a lot of ‘raw’ energy in order to produce a ‘refined’ form of energy. In a coal-fired power plant, coal is burned at high temperature to boil water in a pressurized steam generator. The steam then has “power” like it does in a steam locomotive, and the power is used to spin an electrical generator.

 

In this process, much of the ‘raw’ energy in the coal is lost in order to produce a much smaller quantity of ‘refined’ energy called electricity, which then can be stepped down further through DC to run the delicate circuits in a computer.

 

You could never run those circuits with a pile of red-hot coal, but then again, a pile of red-hot coal in a cast iron stove would be much more efficient for heating your home than an electric space heater.

 

And it does not make sense to use electricity to move a big car around. It is best to use a super-efficient internal combustion engine, a technology which has reached extremely high levels of refinement today.

 

America is facing an electricity crisis. Through our modern economy’s increasing dependence on electricity, we are going to need significant increases in our installed generating capacity, which currently is about 1.1 million megawatts.

 

But with Obama and his eco-profiteer cronies pushing electric cars, we would need to increase our generating capacity far beyond the expected big increases anticipated over the next 25 years. Yet even without a huge new load on the grid like electric cars, we still are going to have a hard time installing enough capacity because the eco-obstructionists are blocking the most efficient energy source ever devised by man – nuclear power.

 

Their solution is to install inefficient windmills one megawatt at a time. But to use windmills to fuel millions of new electric cars ain’t gonna work. Only big nuclear plants could, but that still would be inefficient. Because moving automobiles is, at its core, the “wrong use” for electricity.

 

You gotta love all those ads that show the electric car with no emissions coming from a tailpipe. Because the emissions occur “upstream” at the coal-fired generation plant’s smokestack.

 

The best way to save fuel is to not drive at all. Because there is an “efficiency paradox” at work that says that the more efficient that we make cars – or anything else, for that matter – the more energy we consume.

 

How?

 

Well, think of the opposite. If all cars got 2 miles to the gallon, we sure would not drive them much. But as they become more and more efficient, we drive them more and more and more, actually increasing overall energy consumption.

 

We need to start thinking realistically about the electric car: It is another stupid idea from the enviro left that does not work and that will harm our energy supply. That is why there are so few electric cars on the road – because they cannot compete in the marketplace.

 

So if you think that electric cars are all clean and green, think again. They are an extremely inefficient and wasteful way to move people around. Unless we all want to go short distances in golf carts.

 

Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can print out for free my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.

COMMENTS

  • somewhereintheusa

    More importantly, however, the electric car will actually use more energy and cause more pollution than an internal combustion engine. Because electricity is a highly-refined resource that should be used to power computers, light bulbs, refrigerators, water pumps, power tools and the like. To move around heavy things like cars with one person in them is ?the wrong use? for electricity.

    I am sorry you are just simply 100% completly wrong in that statement.

    Electric vehicle ‘tank-to-wheels’ efficiency is a factor of about 3 higher than internal combustion engine vehicles

    http://ec.europa.eu/transport/urban/vehicles/road/electric_en.htm

    or

    Internal combustion engines are relatively inefficient at converting on-board fuel energy to propulsion as most of the energy is wasted as heat

    electric drive vehicles do not consume energy while at rest or coasting, and some of the energy lost when braking is captured and reused

    Typically, conventional gasoline engines effectively use only 15% of the fuel energy content to move the vehicle or to power accessories

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car%23Energy_efficiency

    EVs recharging from fossil-fueled power plants such as coal and oil have unique efficiency advantages over ICE vehicles. As a system, EVs and power plants are twice as efficient as ICE vehicles and the system that refines gasoline

    http://www.electroauto.com/info/pollmyth.shtml

    I mean think about it… an ICE vehicle gets if your very very lucky 20% effiency, electric cars are more like 90%. Couple that with the fact that power plants are more efficent than a “gas power plant” in your car. its obvious what wins.

    • ehosterman

      Most fossil plants are only approx 33% efficient

      So an electric car efficiency

      = 0.9 x 0.33 = 0.297

      Of course this figure also dies not consider electrical line losses, or electrical losses in the charging system. From the listed atricle line losses were approx 6.5% in 2007

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission

      So 0.297 x 0.935 = 0.278

      If we assume the charger is 99% efficient (which is probably very generous)

      efficiency = 0.278 x 0.99 = 0.275 or 27.5%

      Therefore, there is only about a 2.5% difference in efficiency between gas and electric vehicles.

      Given the difference in capital cost, you’ll never make up the difference in fuel savings.

      • ehosterman

        Should be 7.5% difference in efficiency not 2.5 %.

        Although you still won’t make up the difference in capital costs in fuel savings.

      • ehosterman

        Should be 7.5% difference in efficiency not 2.5 %.

        Although you still won’t make up the difference in capital costs in fuel savings.

        • somewhereintheusa

          As far as capital costs are concerned, I would note that electric cars are still in very early development, and costs are likely to plumit as time passes just like every other peice of technology that gets mass developed.

          The Nissan Leaf is going to be sold for a little under $33K, give it another decade and I would expect to see little to no difference between ICE and electric cars.

          Since most of the extra cost is tied up in the cost of batteries it realy all depends on how well battery tech advances in the years to come.

          • gekster

            From:
            http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aacarselectrica.htm

            Excerpt:
            Between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), Robert Anderson of Scotland invented the first crude electric carriage. A small-scale electric car was designed by Professor Stratingh of Groningen, Holland, and built by his assistant Christopher Becker in 1835. Practical and more successful electric road vehicles were invented by both American Thomas Davenport and Scotsmen Robert Davidson around 1842. Both inventors were the first to use non-rechargeable electric cells. Frenchmen Gaston Plante invented a better storage battery in 1865 and his fellow countrymen Camille Faure improved the storage battery in 1881. This improved-capacity storage battery paved the way for electric vehicles to flourish.

            And from:
            http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/223/electric-car-timeline.html

            Excerpt:
            1832-1839
            Scottish inventor Robert Anderson invents the first crude electric carriage powered by non-rechargeable primary cells.

            1835
            American Thomas Davenport is credited with building the first practical electric vehicle — a small locomotive.

            1859
            French physicist Gaston Plant? invents the rechargeable lead-acid storage battery. In 1881, his countryman Camille Faure will improve the storage battery’s ability to supply current and invent the basic lead-acid battery used in automobiles.

            1891
            William Morrison of Des Moines, Iowa builds the first successful electric automobile in the United States.

            1893
            A handful of different makes and models of electric cars are exhibited in Chicago.

            1897
            The first electric taxis hit the streets of New York City early in the year. The Pope Manufacturing Company of Connecticut becomes the first large-scale American electric automobile manufacturer.

            1899
            Believing that electricity will run autos in the future, Thomas Alva Edison begins his mission to create a long-lasting, powerful battery for commercial automobiles. Though his research yields some improvements to the alkaline battery, he ultimately abandons his quest a decade later.

            1900
            The electric automobile is in its heyday. Of the 4,192 cars produced in the United States 28 percent are powered by electricity, and electric autos represent about one-third of all cars found on the roads of New York City, Boston, and Chicago.

          • somewhereintheusa

            http://jalopnik.com/119602/first-presidential-car-the-columbia-electric-victoria

            1902 – First presidental electric car :)

          • gekster

            We should one to Obama, he’s so green.

      • gekster

        If I run out of gas out on a country road in a conventional car, gas or diesel,
        I can go and get a couple of gallons of either and get my car going again.
        I can even call a friend and siphon some gas if they didn’t bring any.

        If my battery runs out on a country road, I can’t call a friend to bring a couple of batteries for me. Even if he brings a portable generator, it will take hours to get me going again.
        I may be forced to get a tow truck at $75.00+, ($75.00 just to show up, pluss milage) to take me somewhere to where I can get a charge.
        I don’t think the tow truck would be running on electricity, either.

        • somewhereintheusa

          I am definitely not trying to say there are no downsides to electric cars, just saying that efficiency is not one of them. In fact about the only major downside to electric cars is the one you mention… batteries.

          Electric cars provide a better torque curve, they need less mantinence, and have less moving parts compared to their ICE counterparts. All that is missing is a better battery.

          • ehosterman

            Cost, Cruising range and Time to recharge are the big differences. They are why electric cars won’t sell.

          • ehosterman

            Cost, Cruising range and Time to recharge are the big differences. They are why electric cars won’t sell.

          • somewhereintheusa

            Cost, Cruising range, and Time to recharge are all the same problem… batteries :)

            and cruising range has already been solved… its called a series hybrid… or the chevy volt for example. Carry around a diesel generator that all it does is make electricity.

            Another note of intrest… thats how a lot of locomotives do it these days also…. Electric drive with diesel power plants generating electricity.

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

            I’m sure that’s quite an expensive repair/replace decision for something as small as a sedan. Not so much for a 100-car capacity Diesel Locomotive.

          • somewhereintheusa

            Adding a generator does increase complexity and cost no question. I think this is where it all comes down to a persons habits on what is best for them. A built in generator might work for some, while others it might be more economical to rent a “generator trailer” for range extension. The nice thing about electric drive is all these combinations are possible.

          • ehosterman

            Once the batteries run out, tou are just driving and underpowered gasoline car.

          • somewhereintheusa

            I will use myself as an example here.. I have a daily commute of ~10 miles. So assuming I owned the chevy volt I would never use the on board generator for going to/from work…. Or about 99% of the time.

            So yea its an ICE, but its also an electric car… heck its both and neither all at the same time :)

            For me I would actualy worry about the gas in the tank going bad between uses based on my commute… If you want to call _that_ an ICE so be it.

          • Achance

            They’re called diesel-electric locomotives and have one or two diesel engines powering one or two generators or alternators that in turn power electric traction motors on two, four, six, or even more axles. Typically, they generate anywhere from 2000 to 6000 horsepower and many thousands of pounds of tractive effort, the actual pull weight on the locomotive’s drawbar. The big advantage they had over steam was that they were modular; if you had a short or light train, you put on one locomotve or if a long, heavy train, you put on three, four, or more, and you could do it with only one engine crew. If you had to have more horsepower with steam, you either needed a larger, more complex, and more expensive locomotive or multiple locomotives each with its own crew.

            Diesel electric power is becoming increasingly common in large ships. Many of the new Panamax cruise ships have diesel or turbine powered generators and have electric drive pods, some of which steer as well. Diesel-electric was the preferred power system for submarines until largely supplanted by nuclear in the larger navies. Many smaller nations still use diesel electric submarines which can be made to be VERY quiet and thus very dangerous.

            The only place there is any heavy use of pure electric locomotives in the US is in the Northeast Corridor and mostly for passenger service. These railroads made a heavy conversion to electric from steam in the twenties and thirties because of smoke problems in the big city terminals. The swoopy, Raymond Lowey designed Pennsylvania Railroad GG-1 pure electric produced over 8000 horsepower and could pull a heavy passenger train at over 100 mph. The Northeast electrics use either catenary systems to take their power from overhead wire or a powered third rail that delivers power through a shoe on the trucks; that’s the source of the expression, “third rail;” touching it can be a shocking experience. Third rail systems are common where there are many tunnels or in subways or in the underground areas of terminals. Catenary is more common in more open country. All you have to do is look at it and you’ll see how complex and maintenance intensive it is. Also some of it is nearing 100 years old.

            The Great Northern and Milwaukie Road railroads once used many true electric locomotives in heavy freight service in its mountain regions but they had all been replaced by diesel electrics by the ’70s or ’80s.

            Obviously, catenaries or shoes won’t work to power electric cars and they’ve proven uneconomic for the railroads that don’t get an AMTRAK operating subsidy. The diesel-electric excells in steady-state power which makes it great for ships and for long distance trains Most even have dynamic braking where the traction motors become generators on down grades and dump power to a resistance load to brake the train.

            I think that new, light, long-lasting, and cheap battery system for the new Obamacar will rely on pixie dust or maybe nuclear power from the new cold fusion reactors everyone will have in their back yard. It isn’t like navies haven’t been working on better batteries since WWI. Countries like NorKor and Iran, even China, have a powerful interest in very efficient batteries for their diesel-electric submarines which have to contend with US nuke subs that can stay underwater indefinitely.

            I can see a use for pure electric cars for commuting, parcel delivery, and such in compact cities. Frankly, you could get them the way the big eastern cities got electric locomotives; they just banned steam engines in their terminals which forced the railroads to come up with efficient electrics; no subsidies either. They’d have to be little s&*tboxes, but really only your ego needs anything bigger than a SmartCar to commute ten to twenty miles to work. Says he who until last week drove a 140 mph, 5 passenger sedan, that never had more than two and usually only one person in it, and was driven for a 13 mile commute in a town with only 40 miles of road. So, you ain’t likely to git me in one of them things, or in one of those cities, but if ya’ll want ‘em, there’s a way. Just don’t ask me to pay for it.

          • ehosterman

            as they’ve been for the last 100 years as is documented in the attached link.
            http://www.energybulletin.net/node/52736

            This is an interesting article that documents that even with better batteries, electric cars have approximately the same cruising range that they did 100 year ago.

            With regard to the onboard diesel generator, I’d rather just buy a diesel powered car and save in excess of $10,000. Given that you can get diesels that get close to 50 mpg, you’ll never recoup the difference.

        • Common_Cents

          I’m guessin you could operate it as a regular car as the gen that runs on gas would keep the batteries charged. I dont think the gas engine can run the car independently.

          It’s for the early adopters though as far as upfront cost. I’d rather get a new hyundai turbo 4 sonata, 274hp, 269 torque, 35mpg, for 25-30k.

          I hope electric cars compete but want them to do so in the marketplace, not “winners” (usually losers) picked by government. and on top of that, pretty much against nuclear power.

          I think it does all depend on battery technology. Is GM gonna warranty the battery for many many years? That would be a big risk for me having to shell out a few grand for a new battery in a year or two.

          There is a new phase in creating efficiency in gas/diesel engines with better engineering, lighter materials(power to weight), and forced induction (turbo/supercharging) that will serve up new competition to electric efficiency.

          • exitsfunnel

            The drive train warranty on the Volt (including the battery) is 8 years or 100,000 miles.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • exitsfunnel

            I have no idea what its design life is and either does anyone else outside of GM. The drive train warranty on the Volt is more robust than the standard powertrain warranty on any of their conventional vehicles. It’s weird to me that you’d try to use that fact to take a shot at the car.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            It’s weird to me that you have a track record of defending Babs Boxer, attacking the Arizona illegal alien law, attacking Brit Hume for being an outspoken Christian, doggedly defending Government Motors, and now defending a persistent troublemaker below.

            Are you a Republican, exitsfunnel? Yes or no.

          • exitsfunnel

            At this very moment, yes, I am a registered republican. It’s more accurate to say though that I am a libertarian (big and small L), which is how I’ve always identified myself on this site (when the issue has come up).

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            This is a site for conservative Republicans to get active.

            Not a debate club for fringe third party people to come and meddle.

          • exitsfunnel

            And while the other charges you’ve levied above are sketchy and depend a lot on context, the claim that I’ve defended GM, (doggedly or otherwise) is patently false. I am and always have benn 100% unambiguously opposed to the automotive bailouts.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      Go post Democrat propaganda elsewhere.

      • exitsfunnel

        You banned him for posting a technical rebuttal to a really uninformed diary on a technical issue? What posting standards did he violate?

        -exits

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          But really, don’t beclown yourself.