EagleAye
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2011
- Messages
- 5,697
- Reaction score
- 3,241
- Location
- Austin, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
You are only taking in EVs as a replacement for gasoline. You are leaving out hydrogen and bio-fuels. EVs are dependent upon battery technologies which have yet to reach a practical usage level.
EVs are a future technology, not truly an existing one. I do not know the current state of nuclear batteries, if it is developed enough, then we might be able to produce practical use EVs now.
I see great promise in algeal bio-fuel. It could be very handy in providing fuel for long haul trucks and commercial airlines. They need to get the cost down, but I expect that will happen as they expand operations. For commuter vehicles, EVs are indeed practical. The Nissan Leaf, for instance, has a 100 mile range. Easily enough to get to work and back with a stop for groceries and a nip at the pub. Fuel it up at home while you sleep, and you're fully charged for the next day. And this costs 70% less for 100 miles over a conventional ICE car. That's plenty practical.
Hydrogen has lots of problems. The fuel cells are currently ridiculously expensive, making EV batteries look positively thrifty. The best way to get hydrogen is from natural gas, but then that begs the point, why not just burn the natural gas and avoid an extra step? Storing hydrogen is also very difficult and expensive. The molecules are so small they can seep through most containers. Stopping that requires very expensive containers and then you still need to crack it out of NG or water. This is an energy expensive process. You need electricity for this. Why not just use the electricity directly?