Are they viable? Discuss pros and cons.
The ‘Electric Vehicles Will Save The Planet’ Farce Is Unraveling Quickly
by Steve MacDonaldAugust 21, 2022
An auto club in Germany that claims 21 million members ran some controlled charging test electric vehicles to see how efficient that process was. The results put another nail in the value coffin. Not only are they expensive to buy and own, but the average charge also wastes up to 13% of the electricity.
Put another way, the consumer is charged for all the electricity required to fully charge the battery, which is as much as 13% more than the battery can hold.
So, imagine pouring two gallons of gasoline on the ground every time you filled a 20-gallon tank. People would lose their collective minds. But that will be standard for every charge of every vehicle in the utopian electric fleet of the future.
ADAC’s Ecotest calculated the kWh needed to fully charge a range of electric vehicle batteries.
The result of the test under the same conditions for all electric car models: E-car drivers have to plan for a particularly large amount of power loss for some models – but everyone has to pay extra. According to the ADAC Ecotest, a 100 kWh battery in a Tesla Model X100D actually needs 108.3 kWh. The Kia e-Niro Spirit has 72.3 kWh for a 64 kWh battery. The Jaguar I-PACE EV400 also needs at least 10 kWh more for a 90 kWh battery.
With electricity prices scheduled to double in New Hampshire (as an example) and with the cost of EVs still out of the range of most middle and lower-income families, throwing money out the window with every charge might just as well be another tax.
Line loss or transformer loss is baked into the infrastructure. There is no way to transmit electricity without waste (primarily) in the form of heat. Anywhere from 8-15% or more of the electricity generated by power stations is lost before it gets to you. A carbon footprint problem we’re supposed to ignore.
But not in the ADAC tests. The consumer pays immediately for the loss of every kWh that exceeded the actual electricity needed to charge the battery.
At present, the infrastructure to charge the existing fleet is inadequate. Rolling brownouts and blackouts are predicted everywhere. There is no plan that puts enough wind or solar into operation, maybe ever, to address the growing demand without EVs. There isn’t enough land for the equipment needed to create that much electricity unless the plan is to need less.
With rates skyrocketing, charging will become unaffordable to all but the most well-off, and we’ve postulated repeatedly that this was always the goal. A point they admit, including after the release of the original Green New Deal, whose author (we can’t ever let you forget this) said, “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti continued. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”
No air travel for you and the end of private transportation.
The goal is to force your mobility profile back into the 19th century. Trains, horses, walking. The only other reasonable explanation is that they are all idiots, and while the rank-and-file prog parrots might be considered that stupid, the people at the top are not.