Date:         Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:42:56 -0500
Reply-To:     greg@POTTSFAMILY.CA
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Greg Potts <greg@POTTSFAMILY.CA>
Subject:      Re: vw news
Comments: To: Jahsurf@AOL.COM
In-Reply-To:  <99.554c084b.2f100ca4@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Chris,

Electric motors have better thermally efficiency, but the efficiencies in
generating and distributing electricity vary widely by location and technology.

Case in Point:
Additional load to the electrical grid here in Ontario Canada is currently  ;-)
being supplied by coal-powered generating stations. That means that an electric
vehicle running here in Toronto is actually coal-powered. We also have
hydro-electric, natural gas and nuclear generation up and running, but when
those are already at capacity and a light switch is turned on, the extra load
gets absorbed by coal. And if our coal plants are already at capacity then we
buy our extra power from coal plants in Ohio and PA.

To get electricity from coal you need to convert the coal into heat, convert the
heat to steam, convert steam pressure into motion, convert the motion into
magnetic force and then convert the magnetic force into electricity. Each of
these conversions involves losses. Then you have to distribute the electricity
across a power grid and store in a battery aboard the vehicle, which incurrs
additional losses. In the end you wind up with a vehicle that pollutes more per
mile than if it had an efficient gasoline engine. And even with the substantial
taxes applied to gasoline, the gasoline-powered vehicle winds up cheaper to
operate.

Obviously, the scenario above may not apply to all markets. As they say, YMMV.

If you own your own solar grid, hydroelectric generator or wind farm, then
running an electric vehicle doesn't create additional pollution, but if you
don't then the power has to come from somewhere else.

Perhaps we should simply refer to EV's as "External Combustion" technologies.


Happy Trails,

Greg Potts
Toronto, Ontario Canada
1973/77/79 Westfakia
1977 Sunroof Automatic
www.pottsfamily.ca
www.busesofthecorn.com


Quoting Chris Dixon <Jahsurf@AOL.COM>:

> Andrew
> I know you're a pretty engineering savvy dude, but I have to take exception
> to your statement that electric technology in cars only shifts the pollution
> to
> power plants. That's a misconception that opponents of the technology,
> including automakers, spread with a great deal of success, and it's only
> partially
> true. Sure there are increased emissions, at a power plant from charging up
> an
> EV, but electric motors are so, so, so much more efficient than internal
> combustion engines (ICE's) that there are considerably less end result -- ie
> power
> plant emissions per car than with every car running an ICE. I've written
> about
> EV's at some length for the NYTimes, and if my memory serves, when you figure
> up the cost per mile of gasoline vs electric, drivers of EV's pay something
> on the order of the equivalent of 45 cents per gallon. But that still doesn't
> necessarily tell you anything about the actual efficiency of the motor -- a
> typical electric motor is up to 85 percent efficient, and generally no less
> than
> 50. An excellent gas motor struggles to find 30 percent efficiency as most of
> its energy goes up in the air or thru the radiator as heat. Electric motors
> generate way, way less heat and 100 percent torque from zero to max RPMs.
> With
> regards to diesel or EV's, if you're driving with biodiesel or solar or wind
> power, you're not generating any excess greenhouse gasses. The newest common
> rail diesels are also remarkably clean.   That's not to say that I
> necessarily
> think VW is moving in the right direction domestically.
> CD!
>