EV's..... not good.

[Amateurish]

STEVENSON-KAATSCH said:

Simple stuff. Petrol cars, around 30% efficient (30 out of every 100 units of energy makes it move along). Humans, around 30% efficient. Mains electric, about12% efficiency between power-station and outlet socket.

Source for your 12% figure?

Typical power station efficiency = 35%.
Total distribution losses in UK grid = 7%.
So efficiency from power station to consumer is approx 33%.

And for petrol cars, true efficiency is nearer 20% than 30%. However, you have to compare like with like, so for your petrol car example you need to take into account energy losses in refining, storing and distributing the petrol. This takes your "well to wheel" petrol efficiency from 20% to 16%.

[98elise]

STEVENSON-KAATSCH said:

Simple stuff. Petrol cars, around 30% efficient (30 out of every 100 units of energy makes it move along). Humans, around 30% efficient. Mains electric, about12% efficiency between power-station and outlet socket. Dunno the mechanical efficiency of electric cars, but even the best batteries currently available are pretty crap, they leak electric out and go flat faster than a tank of petrol dries away certainly. Lets be generous and say they are 80% efficient which means 80% of 12% is how efficient electric cars are. Electric is made from either burning fossil fuels to make steam to drive turbines... or nuclear reaction to do exactly the same..... or various windmills and the like. The 'clean' power from the windmills is not much in the great scheme of things. It is unreliable and the NIMBY's won't let us smother the country in them for some reason. Nuclear power is lovely until the generator is worn out.... then it's a multi-thousand year nightmare. Filthy old fossil fuel is the current only practical option until we've invented ambient super-conductors and an artificial copycat of a leaf to convert carbon dioxide back into oxygen before we have to vent it into the atmosphere. So, as I said, EV's not good.

Are you just making stuff up? 12% is bks.

Production of a gallon of petrol consumes about 7kWh before you've even turned a wheel. Stick that in an EV and you will get about 25 miles, and you haven't consumed any more energy. That's a fact.

Well to wheel EV's are far more efficient than ICE's. You can't beat something that can be powered from renewables, can regen on braking, can be super slippery, and has negligible parasitic and heat losses. That's just simple physics.

[JonV8V]

I think the OP has left these parts.

[Legacywr]

JonV8V said:

I think the OP has left these parts.

It was Clarkson!

[anonymous-user]

LordFlathead said:

gangzoom said:

^^ I wouldn't waste time on some people.

The numbers are there for eveyone to see, if some one wants to keep on throwing money away on ICE cars let them....The government has to fund the EV grants some how

Yes I agree but wanted to see what dithering old fool (OP) would say in reply but I doubt if he can remember which site he posted on or what country he lives in

JonV8V said:

,I agree to an extent and the money is one of the reasons I'm going EV, plus the desire to drive something different, but a Zoe is not a Jag.

I'm moving from a BMW 640d gran coupe to a tesla.

The BMW has cost
800 month in dep
50 in tax an insurance
150 in tyres and servicing (25k miles a year)
Fuel is 300
Call it roughly 1300 a month


The tesla is through the company
Lease net if tax but inclusive of bik is 1100
Maybe a bit of home charging but may be only 50 a month

I'm still better off but it's hardly free. My point is that to be fair to both sides of the argument we need to compare like for like size cars. Be interesting to see other maths

Edited to correct my ipads mind of its own!

I was almost there with the Tesla as they are on my doorstep (BMW in West Drayton is their service centre with a supercharger) but just could not justify the £18k deposit. I would be buying a Tesla as my own personal car and the company would not contribute at that level of deposit. It was the only reason I decided it was not for me. So I am fortunate that I have a classic 928GT locked away for summer use and the Zoe is purely a commuting tool.

I will garage the Jag (it's a diesel anyway) as I would miss it for longer distances so best of all worlds?

Slightly off topic/

I'm really hoping that insurance companies can deliver a stop start insurance policy whereby you can swap cover from an EV to other cars for summer use for example. It would be great if I could use the Zoe for winter months then use the Porsche for some summer fun or even to be able to swap cover for a weekend without having both cars on "full risk" at the same time. I seriously doubt it will happen but I think it would be a neat idea!

No axe to grind here, I'm trying to justify an EV to replace my 530D, just can't make the figures anything like work, but if EVs are so good, why do they need subsidising?

[gangzoom]

REALIST123 said:

No axe to grind here, I'm trying to justify an EV to replace my 530D, just can't make the figures anything like work, but if EVs are so good, why do they need subsidising?

EVs are new tech so ofcourse they cost more. Comparing ANY EV to a diesel is like comparing an early iPhone/Samsung to a Nokia 3310. One is the future and one belong in a museum/car boot-sale

Edited by gangzoom on Sunday 25th October 00:06

[JonV8V]

My 90D as a company car costs about the same as my outgoing 640d gran coupe. My tesla is still a 70k+ car so the maths is never going to work against a 40k BMW.