EVs vs. ICE: Unveiling the Energy Efficiency Divide 

It'd be interesting to calculate efficiency from energy production up to the wheels. For electricity, it'd include electricity production and transportation losses. For petrol, extraction and transportation energy. Can also compare with hydrogen cars.

You forgot to mention that brakes last >200k miles on an EV or hybrid HV, because regenerative braking slows the car instead of mechanical brakes. This is also how a hybrid car can go 50% farther on the same amount of gas: regenerative braking gets back energy that would have been lost wearing out the brakes, and no idling while coasting or stopped or slow-&-go traffic

Getting around all the abstractions, in order to get 1 KwH of electricity into my EV I need to get 1.1 KwH from the grid -- at $0.20/KwH here in NY, that works out to $16.50 to take my Tesla's 75 KwH battery from zero to full -- not bad! If my trip of 341 miles takes it back down to zero, then it costs $0.0484 per mile for the trip. If I drive my Prius at 52 miles/gallon the same distance, I'd use 6.56 gallons of gas, costing $22.95 in total at $3.50/gal or $0.0673 per mile -- also not bad! Prices vary, of course, over time and between places, and the actual source of energy (solar, water, wind, gas, nuclear) makes a difference not only in cost but also in environmental impacts -- but when I'm looking at what I drive, this is a calculation that I can make on my own without a physics lab and has a real impact on my bottom line. Love my EV for lots of reasons, energy efficiency is just one more!

You forgot to count the initial production. You're unlikely to get enough miles out of an EV to equalize the waste, toxicity, and energy consumption of producing the battery. There is also the generational toxicity in the landfill or the toxic cobalt dust that settle everywhere when the battery spontaneously ignites, as they often do.

Ev 1. Dead weight battery heavy 2. Tyre wear and tear 4 times accelerated 3. Range 4. Battery life 5yrs after that buying new battery is half the price of a new car 5. Energy density of charged battery is 20% of same weight fuel 6. Battery thermal over run for incident consumes 10 to 20 times the water to douse, if parked in house house for cannot be doused easily 7. Initial cost to buy an ev is high 8. Toxic waste created for mining battery doesn't justify if you don't drive ev much quickly

The truth is, since WWII, the physical form-factor and energy density of batteries of today, have only been reduced to 1/5 of there original size (there are only so many molecules of materials available for anodes and cathodes). On the other hand, the smallest single function vacuum tube's glass envelope in 1945, will hold more than thirty billion transistors, batteries will never catch up!

You forgot to mention many gas generators used to charge EV cars and buses in many "green" energy locations. Or the fact coal power plant is used to generate electricity to charge these EV. Simply put, just a shift of pollution from the gas tail pipe to gas powered charging station or "dirty" coal power plant.

Ev use oils. To run other components. E.g brakes, some transmissions, diff etc

I'll still take an ICE...

booo ai

Pound for pound, ICE vehicles are more efficient than EV. Compare a Silverado EV. 9k lbs total weight required to travel 450 miles. My 6K lb Silverado travels 450 miles. Why so much? The storage medium. Simple gas tank with fuel or a complex, and toxic battery media. Replace the battery media with more energy density at less weight and less danger of runaway fires. Then, we can talk efficiency.

That heat energy loss is kinda nice when its -40 degrees outside and people cant even start their EVs

My model 3 uses 17 kwh per 100 km 17 times %0.13 = $2.21 per 100 km. BUS ASS UV burns 12 l/100 km 12 times %1.60 in Canada = $19.2 Soooo you drive electric almost for free😂😂😂😂😂

This kind of comparisons are totaly pointless when they failed to include how the electricity is produced.

Many car owners still prefere gasoline engines. There are many good reasons for this choice. Energy efficiency of the car is not the whole story. How is the electricity produced? In many countries electricity is produced by power plants that combust coal or gas. When the production of electricity is included in the calculation, then both types of car are equal when greenhouse gasses are calculated. The ideal world is a nice place to be, but we are far away today and in many years ahead.

Efficiency is not the same as cost. Cost to buy, insure, run, repair, sell, etc. This is all very nice idealist propaganda but energy efficiency means nothing when your focus is the cost and convenience of getting from A to B. The reason why no-one but the few remaining idealists, early adopters and virtue signallers want to buy them now is because most car owners have one car, not two, and they need it to be able to do the job conveniently and at a reasonable cost, without range anxiety or depreciation anxiety or being at the mercy of an unscalable infrastructure.

La la land. It's only ever about the money.

Well put : "EVs are much more energy efficient when used on the road" - forget where the energy (electricity) came from, just focus on the on-road efficiency - maybe one day electricity production in sufficient quantities for all the increasing electricity needs will be from non-fossil fuel sources, but not yet - until then many EVs run on fossil fuels - fossil fuels will be around for a long long time to come...

Most can't afford a virtue signaling, over priced toy. Most just want reliable transportation. Enough of the dishonest EV propaganda.