I chuckle when EV advocates talk about "stinking gas stations" because I've loved the smell of gasoline for as long as I can remember. It's the smell of FUN. But I get that not everyone shares my opinion on this.Exactly!!!
I would never buy an ICE again!
1. has always instant tourque
2. can charge over night at home without waiting at a stinking gas station
3. does not vibrate
4. does not stink
5. does not pollute the air inside mega city
10. better for the environment
this is also the basic outline of why hydrogen vehicles in the consumer market are f’d. EV can be powered by anythin, whatever is the most efficient to generate electricity at industrial scale.this is rarely true and is not the generally accepted analysis from the past few years
using existing/common commerical scale efficient fossil fuel power plants to generate/deliver 5,000 usable kWh to the grid uses less fossil fuel than what is required to refine 535 gallons of gasoline - using a 15,000 mile’s driven comparision between a 3 mile/kwh EV and a 28 mpg ICE.
basically consuming the fossil fuels at commercial scale and efficiencies for raw electricity generation trumps consumption of refined gasoline 20 gallons at a time (1 tank of gas) in 12-28% efficient ICE motors trying to turn fossil fuel explosions into kinetic motion rather than heat.
you can do the analysis (I’ve done it as have others) - even when the grid is 100% fossil fuel powered the EV generally comes out ahead - 15,000 miles driven requires 5,000 kWh from the grid (at 3 miles/kwh - the Taycan is closer to 3.2 mile/kWh) for an EV, and 15,000 miles driven in a gasoline (28 mpg) car requires 27 barrels of oil + 5 barrels of oil for the kWh of electricity required for each gallon of gasoline at the refinery…535 gallons of gasoline to drive 15,000 miles.
the above analysis also omits the additional costs/impact of distributing the gasoline post refinement - but that just makes it worse for the gasoline car and improves the EV story even more…
so to determine which is better/worse/equal - we simply need to compare how much fossil fuel is required to generate 5,000 kWh vs. 535 gallons of gas…and it turns out it's super efficient to generate 5,000 kWh - and uses way less fossil fuel than 535 gallons of gasoline. Yet both approaches lead to being able to drive 15,000 miles.
so now we have a budget so we can compare apples to apples
each barrel of oil delivered directly to a 40% efficient power plant (normal commerical yield rates for existing oil fired fossil fuel powered plants) can generate 681 kWh delivered to a residential home - 27 barrels of oil delivered to a fossil fuel oil plant is is 18,387 kWh net to the grid + the 5 barrels of oil no longer used at the refinery yields another 3,405 kWh— for a total of 21,792 kwh from a 100% fossil fuel powered commercial power plant
at 3 miles/kWh power generation of 32 barrels of oil can drive an EV 65,376 miles
you can drive 15,000 miles with the same number of barrels of oil with a 28 mpg vehicle
or to do the analysis another way - the EV uses approximately 7.32 barrels of oil to have 5,000 kWh generated for the grid. So if a gas car were to drive 15,000 for only 7.32 barrels of oil (ignoring the cost of the electricity) you need to only consume 145.48 gallons of gasoline to drive 15,000 miles - that is an MPG rate of 103.1 mpg
so for an EV to have the same impact in terms of fossil fuel as a gasoline vehicle- you need to be driving 103 mpg ICE vehicles - and then we're the same - both cars would consume about the same amount of fossil fuels (barrels of oil) - but the gas car still couldn't be driven using solar, hydro, wind, nuclear, geo thermal or other various forms of kWh production.
103 mpg - and yes the EV is no better than a gasoline vehicle.
scaled across the 10-15 year life of a vehicle and potentially millions of vechicles the savings of driving an EV are substaintial even keeping the grid fossil fuel powered…
but we also know the plan for the grid is _NOT_ fossil fuel based - so the EV already wins and will only get better. very very few places in north america are 100% fossil fuel based with some times of the day now covered 100% by renewables.
5,000 kWh delivered to a residential home is actually pretty low impact vs. 27 barrels of oil for the gasoline required to drive the same 15,000 miles
and as we all know the EV can be powered by non-fossile fuel sources and the ICE can never be powered that way.
basicallly even with fossil fuel powered electricity it’s more efficient to consume it in bulk at efficient large scale commercial facilities vs. refining and consuming it in 12-28% efficient individual motors that spend most of their time idle in traffic…bulk efficient commerical scale production is better than 100’s of millions of little motors of varying efficiencies - this analysis also precludes the comparison of natural gas power (62% thermally efficient for modern plants & here) and one of the cleanest fossil fuels to burn and fairly common for power-plants these days - comparing 62% efficient NG large scale power-plant powering EV’s vs. 28 mpg gasoline cars makes the comparison even more brutal for the gasoline vehicle (some would even say devastating) - even for coal power, the worse case scenario is still slightly better in favor of the EV vs 28% efficient gasoline motors - again due to the efficient commercial scale kwh production involved.
all of this analysis also assumes a static electrical grid with no improvement over time, which is also a false assumption - EV’s don’t care how the kWh’s are manufactures, so they are in essence the ultimate flex fuel vehicles and can run on solar or coal power and everything in between…where as a gasoline vehicle can only run on one thing - gasoline - and still needs electricity to refine the gasoline…
as far as the complexity of battery manufacture - this is typically represented as “embodied” energy analysis - how much power did it require to make the vehicle - well EV’s share a lot in common with gas cars (so the basic embodied energy cost are about the same for any new car), but we swap some components - but not all components - we drop the ICE engine and transmisison (lowering the cost), but we gain EV motor(s) and battery complexity (adding to the cost) - everying I’ve read says the break even point for the “additional” embodied energy costs of EV’s take 6-14 months to break even depending on your grid power mix - and that is getting better over time as battery manufacturing costs come down…we already know EV’s take less labor to assemble (30-40% fewer labor hours according GM/Ford and UAW which part of their GM strike a few years ago directly was due to them seeing the future with EV’s leading to less hours for their members).
It is plausible and foreseeable as manufacturing efficiencies ramp up over time the embodied energy for an EV will actually be less than an ICE vehicle - but that is not the case today, but should occur naturally over time just like the costs for ICE"s have come down over the 100's of years of their development. As battery density increases EV's weight could continue to drop to the point that they are less than an ICE vehicle in comparison for similar capabilities, and then the EV efficiency will see further gains (5, 6, 7 mile/kWh) pushing the EV advantage even further vs the ICE vehicle. ICE that we are comparing EV's to are the results of 100's of years of relentless manufacturing evolution - I'm confident that after 15, 25, 30, 50 years of constant incremental improvement EV's will easily surpass ICE norms for weight, costs and efficiencies to the point that this comparison will be laughable - a bit like comparing steam power to hybrid-F1 vehicles. But even with the EV's current "disadvantages" the impact/cost differences are fractional - not debilitating and in line with advantages to migrate.
Only the most pessimistic (some would say biased) EV analysis claims the EV isn’t better over all at the end of it’s 10-20 year life and even the ones that do claim that typically omit some costly aspect of the fossil fuel chain analysis or ignore embodied energy costs of the ICE vehicle or over inflate the embodied energy costs for the eV (example using battery cost analysis from the Chevy EV1 - LOL).
this is not why I bought hte Taycan, but is why I’m excited by EV’s, and the Taycan is just the cherry on that sundae - and I do love me an ice cream sundae - as long as the refrigeration for it was solar powered
there is another whole analysis to be had about the lost revenues to the oil industry in that each EV sold represents a loss of about 25 barrels of oil consumption per year per vehicle sold for the life of that EV vehicle - multiple this times 100's of thousands of vehicles sold and the revenue forecast for demand and revenue per-barrel is not a rosy scenario for the fossil fuel industry - it is even perhaps such a bad analysis that they might be incentivized to suggest EV's aren't that good, but I'm sure they would never do that being people of science I'm sure they will follow the evidence where it leads rather than produce biased white papers that gloss over the problems of their industry…
if you accept my analysis of of a loss of 20'ish barrels of oil a year for each vehicle sold and multiply that by Porsche's estimated 20,000 Taycan's a year - assume they sell the taycan for 7 years (140,000 vehicles) total - and each Taycan is on the road for 7 years - the 14 year lost barrel of oil revenue is about $1,000,000,000 - if it's a billion $ lost over 14 years for 140,000 cars total - picture the impact of Tesla shipping 500,000 vehicles a year for the next 15 years, and more manufactures coming online also - pushing 10's if not 100's of thousands of vehicles into a market with declining demand for gasoline - I believe it's a real threat and could spur the industry to look to counter that trend.
don't believe me:
Plus, for many in Europe "gas stations" is the smell of diesel.I chuckle when EV advocates talk about "stinking gas stations" because I've loved the smell of gasoline for as long as I can remember. It's the smell of FUN. But I get that not everyone shares my opinion on this.
My wife owned a ‘67 Hemi Roadrunner when I met her, and she loves the smell of gasoline and hydraulic fluid! Luck counts!I chuckle when EV advocates talk about "stinking gas stations" because I've loved the smell of gasoline for as long as I can remember. It's the smell of FUN. But I get that not everyone shares my opinion on this.
I don’t see why the panamera would go electric though. There’s really no point to have two EV sedans. I think the panamera as a hybrid/ ICE fits in its segment wellFor me, the EV factor was the deciding factor. ICE feels very dated and old. This is our first EV and I cannot see myself ever buying a non-EV ever again. The ease of always having it at 85% is amazing, no noise etc. On top of that, the Taycan is a great car. Love it.
That said, had there been an electric Panamera I would have bought that one. The Panamera is (for me) the perfect car. I have loved it since I first saw it at DOH in 2009 and it continues to improve. I've had petrol Panameras and a hybrid Panamera, and once the electric Panamera comes, it will (hopefully) be the only model car I will continue to buy
But, the Taycan is a great step towards it, I love it and I totally understand why the "racing oriented" customers prefer it over the Panamera. Me, I really like the GT luxury feel of the Panamera more.
I kinda share your opinion, so stinking not because how it smells, but because it contains methane and benzene - kinda toxic.I chuckle when EV advocates talk about "stinking gas stations" because I've loved the smell of gasoline for as long as I can remember. It's the smell of FUN. But I get that not everyone shares my opinion on this.
That is what I'm hoping for as well. ICE cars are a dying thing, eventually they will be no more. I also think the success of the Taycan shows that there clearly is a market for Porsche EVs. 911 will likely be last to go electric and Macan is next. 718 is not unlikely - a new segment really except for Tesla Roadster. Cayenne or Panamera? There isn't a true luxury GT EV yet so I'm hoping for thisRegulator in China and EU will make the Panamera an EV.
ironically, I don’t think this is really true, even as fuel standards have been a cudgel. Ultimately market pressure is going to drive the EV transition as prices come down. Except in some niches, ice vehicles don’t actually do basic transportation better. They can‘t provide the same torque / $. ice vehicles are much more expensive to maintain.Regulator in China and EU will make the Panamera an EV.