Re: Efficiency numbers
- From: nospam@xxxxxxxxxx (Paul Ciszek)
- Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:34:51 +0000 (UTC)
In article <4768B09E.8CA9FE79@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Electrical around 75-85%. The actual electrical motor is better than that but
recharging a battery has losses too.
ICE maybe 15-20% for a gasoline engine and 20-30% for a diesel engine. Large
marine diesels are ~ 50% efficient btw.
Wow. Do they run at higher temperatures or something?
When you consider that electrical generation is only about 30-35% efficient
by the time you get power at a wall socket, overall the EV is no more energy
efficient that a modern turbo-diesel car. In fact the diesel probably has the
edge.
Well, there is no reason the US couldn't get 75% of its power from fission
the way France does. If only we would pull our heads out of our butts on
that one subject, then EV's really could be less carbony than ICE's.
Also, the waste heat from an ICE is very useful for cabin heating in cold
weather. An EV has to provide that power from its batteries, thus reducing
the effective km / MJ (very considerably btw).
There is that.
--
Please reply to: | "One of the hardest parts of my job is to
pciszek at panix dot com | connect Iraq to the War on Terror."
Autoreply is disabled | -- G. W. Bush, 9/7/2006
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Efficiency numbers
- From: Dan Bloomquist
- Re: Efficiency numbers
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Efficiency numbers
- References:
- Breakthrough lithium battery charges to 90% in just 5 minutes
- From: xnichols
- Re: Breakthrough lithium battery charges to 90% in just 5 minutes
- From: Bill Ghrist
- Efficiency numbers
- From: Paul Ciszek
- Re: Efficiency numbers
- From: Eeyore
- Breakthrough lithium battery charges to 90% in just 5 minutes
- Prev by Date: Re: Efficiency numbers
- Next by Date: Re: Efficiency numbers
- Previous by thread: Re: Efficiency numbers
- Next by thread: Re: Efficiency numbers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|