Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Yeah, of course it is.
The point also stands that even in an electrical system with high hydrocarbon use, an EV results in fewer emissions overall.
An EV in Alberta will result in more emissions than an EV in Ontario. And both will result in fewer emissions than an ICE anywhere.
|
Well, no you haven’t demonstrated conclusively that an EV in a location with a primarily hydrocarbon based electrical generation system will result in less emissions
You pointed out that the EIA estimates 5 percent losses due to transmission. Selecting the most favourable estimate, and basing your argument around it.
They appear to base it on a high level generation statistic and a volume of nationwide electricity sales.
I read something from Schneider Electric that places losses around 8-15%
https://blog.se.com/energy-managemen...r-line-losses/
Quote:
Considering the main parts of a typical Transmission & Distribution network, here are the average values of power losses at the different steps*:
1-2% – Step-up transformer from generator to Transmission line
2-4% – Transmission line
1-2% – Step-down transformer from Transmission line to Distribution network
4-6% – Distribution network transformers and cables
The overall losses between the power plant and consumers is then in the range between 8 and 15%.
|
Probably on the higher side in Alberta
As far as your ‘don’t believe me, ask the EPA’, I see their graphic which likely reflects a lower HC contribution to the mix than Alberta would have. They are arguing the bigger picture case, not the local case in a high HC electricity mix
We agree that in a low carbon electricity environment, the advantage is pronounced
I can accept that they are around the same order of magnitude in a hydrocarbon heavy mix, but there is still work to be done to demonstrate a material advantage
I don’t actually care all that much, I’ve got a hybrid and like it fine.
Just was responding to the comment about EV owners in Alberta flexing and curious to dig a bit deeper