The Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory recently released a study titled, “Assessment of Light-Duty Plug-in Electric Vehicles in the United States, 2010 – 2021,” which shows that in 2021, privately-owned plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and electric vehicles (EVs) “saved about 690 million gallons of gasoline.”
However, that is a huge exaggeration because fossil fuels provide 61 percent of the electricity in the United States. [emphasis, links added]
This means we have to include the inefficiency of burning coal or natural gas to make electricity (around 45 percent), transmission losses (about 5 percent), and losses in the inverter to charge the battery (another 5 percent).
Considering those losses, less than 33 percent of that apparent savings is a real reduction in fossil fuel use, the equivalent of roughly 230 million gallons of gasoline.
The Argonne study also says that from 2010 to 2021, EVs saved 2.1 billion gallons of gas. So, using the guideline of 61 percent from above, let’s be generous and say that over 11 years, EVs have saved about a third of that, the equivalent of about 750 million gallons of gasoline.
Although 750 million gallons of gasoline sounds like a huge amount, when you put into perspective the larger picture of gasoline use, that savings is actually a drop in the bucket.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), “In 2021, about 134.83 billion gallons (or about 3.21 billion barrels) of finished motor gasoline were consumed in the United States, an average of about 369 million gallons per day (or about 8.80 million barrels per day).”
Using simple arithmetic, dividing those 750 million gallons of gasoline saved from 2010 to 2021 according to the Argonne Lab study, by the daily U.S. consumption of gasoline, we get 750/369 = 2.03 days.
Let that sink in. Just two days of U.S. gasoline consumption can be attributed to EVs over 11 years.
Direct taxpayer subsidies for EVs have cost $10 billion to date. The U.S. government also just approved spending an additional $7.5 billion on EV charging stations.
The subsidy math shows: $10 billion + $7.5 billion = $17.5 billion. Divide that into the 750 million gallons (.750 billion gallons – BG) reportedly saved based on the Argonne Lab study and we get .750 BG/$17.5 billion = $23.3 dollars per gallon.
The verdict is: thanks to government EV subsidies, we’re spending $23 for each gallon of gasoline saved.
Who knew government could finagle such a great deal?
Better yet, who is benefitting from this massive waste of taxpayer money?
According to research from the University of California at Berkeley, 90 percent of the tax credits for EVs go to America’s top income earners.
A May 2019 Congressional Research Service study found that 78 percent of the tax credit recipients had an annual adjusted gross income of $100,000 or more.
Yet, there’s a much larger problem with EVs. We’re rapidly running out of both the generation capacity and the electric grid capacity to recharge them.
California can’t even keep the lights on some days. In fact, during the Golden State’s last major heatwave, the California Independent System Operator, the agency charged with managing the state’s electric grid, sent out a tweet suggesting electric car owners refrain from charging their electric vehicles during a Flex Alert (4 pm to 9 pm).
California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s response is to forbid selling gasoline-powered cars after 2035 while hoping there is enough electricity and delivery infrastructure to keep EVs on the road.
The Argonne National Laboratory study shows the growth of electricity consumption for Personal Electric Vehicles (PEV) in the United States over the past decade has grown exponentially. Today, it is six times higher than in 2011.
According to the EIA, while electricity demand for charging PEVs is increasing by leaps and bounds, electric generation from all sources has remained flat.
This isn’t just an American problem. Due to a lack of electricity, Switzerland recently banned EVs from the roads in a bid to reduce energy consumption.
In reality, transitioning to a “net-zero” all-electric economy by 2050 is economically, physically, and politically impossible, as noted in “Bright Green Impossibilities.”
The problem with electric vehicles is that they are an extremely expensive solution to a nonexistent problem. There is plenty of evidence to support that there is no “existential climate crisis.”
Unless we stop this irrational war on fossil fuels, energy prices will continue to skyrocket, leaving low-income people shivering in the winter, and denying poor countries the resources they need to alleviate poverty.
Read more at American Thinker
It’s crucial to take into account all potential solutions to the climate challenge, and while electric cars might not be the perfect answer, they can undoubtedly help cut emissions from the transportation industry. Despite the fact that the phrase implies that electric cars are useless, the truth is that the technology is advancing and becoming more accessible, making them a feasible option for many people.
The source of electricity used to charge these electric vehicles is another crucial consideration. Electricity derived from renewable energy sources has the potential to significantly reduce emissions. Older cars, even “”junk cars,”” are often less fuel-efficient and generate more pollutants than modern vehicles, which is another crucial point to keep in mind. By switching to electric vehicles, we can lessen pollution and the amount of aging, inefficient vehicles on the road.
It’s also important to note that using electric vehicles has advantages beyond only lowering emissions, such as reducing reliance on fossil fuels and noise pollution.
https://cashcashcars.com/areas-served/junk-car-removals-los-angeles-ca/
Will Elon Musk reveal Twitter’s suppression of the truth about EV’s and green energy? That would be bad for Tesla and him. He’s not finished turning over the stones at Twitter but I expect that he’ll stop short.
Google sends such information to the back pages.
I will repeat my past post. “Where I live 87 percent of our power is from hydroelectric. Does that mean if a thousand of my neighbors purchase electric cars that they will be using 87 hydroelectric? The answer is no. In reality these new cars would be using 100 percent fossil fuel power. That is because hydroelectric power is at its maximum capacity. Increasing the load on the grid has to come from ramping up fossil fuel power.”
The same concept applies to the rest of country. Whether the power is wind, solar, nuclear, or hydroelectric, these sources will be running at maximum capacity to keep the lights on. To support additional requirements imposed by electric vehicles, fossil fuel power has to be ramped up.