How much gas would it take??? Great article

[69Sman]

http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.co...rge-an-iphone/

[ttweed]

That is a very deceptive article, and simply a promo piece for Exxon. Yes, it is true that gasoline is a very high-density energy source, but if you read through the comments, you will see many valid points made that the conclusion is false. The most obvious is alluded to by the author when he states at the beginning: "This may seem like a strange question to ask, considering iPhones obviously are charged with electricity, not gasoline." How can the total energy content of that gasoline be used to charge an iPhone directly? It cannot be. It must be transformed into electricity by running it through an internal combustion engine to drive a generator, whereby it will waste 75-80% of its energy content in the process through inefficiencies. And the energy cost of producing that gallon of gasoline from "well to wheels" is also completely ignored. This cost has been estimated to be between 6-7.5 kWh for each gallon of gasoline produced. The iPhone battery capacity is around 5 Wh, so it could have been charged over 1000 times (or for over 3 years) simply on the electricity it took to produce the gallon of gas. That same 6-7.5 kWh could be used to drive an electric car 30-40 miles, about the same distance the gallon of gas it produced will propel the average economy car. The final straw is that this whole argument completely omits the political and environmental costs of obtaining and using these fuels and therefore is fundamentally flawed.

I am as much of a gearhead as anybody, and they will have to pry my ICE cars out of my cold, dead, hands. There is no doubt that fossil fuels will be powering the majority of our transportation needs for many, many years into the future. But the FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) being spread by the oil companies about EVs is self-serving, to say the least. It is the same technique used to try to discredit global warming as an "unproven, disputed theory," and that the tobacco industry used to try to discredit the growing scientific evidence that using its products causes cancer. My wife insisted that her next car would be an EV, when her Mazda Miata had to be retired after 200K miles. After 10 months of living with a Nissan Leaf in the family, I can say unequivocally that the convenience and affordability of an EV, even though they are in their infancy, is quite acceptable right now and will only become more so in the future, as battery technologies improve and the infrastructure for "refueling" them grows. She has not been to a gas station since last April, and the range of the car is adequate for 99% of her needs. We plug it in at night in the garage and it costs us ~$25/month to drive an average of 1000 miles. That is 2.5 cents per mile for "fuel," or the equivalent of 160 mpg if gasoline is at $4/gal., with the added benefit of zero emissions from the vehicle. With 480V charging stations, the "time to charge" is approx. 20 minutes, not the "hours" that the article claims, making long trips a possibility with the growth of proper infrastructure. While the current energy density of batteries cannot compete with that of gasoline, instead of wasting 75% of that energy out the tailpipe, the electric motor turns 80-90% of the stored energy into useful motive power. This relative efficiency must be considered in the equation, and it is not in this article.

No, the Leaf is not as much fun to drive as a Porsche, and it will never be the only car in our stable, but I can say from personal experience that EVs are real, they are here now, and they are remarkably efficient and practical. Their use needs to be encouraged, not disparaged.

TT

[Bullethead]

Excellent post, Tom. And may I add a selfish interest in promoting EVs (which I genuinely see as the future of transportation)... is to guarantee that proper fuels (without ethanol!!!) for older cars be available for a loooong time. Charge an iPhone with fossil fuel?
Hell, that's what the 10kW PV system on my roof is for!