The all-electric F150 has an overall realistic range of 278 miles, which decreases to 210 miles with a 1400 lb load. Given that it has a 170kW-H battery that most likely weighs in over a ton of weight, what we're saying is that the vehicle is really, really badly designed.
To draw a picture, burning a kG of coal releases about 22MJ of energy, sufficient with 35% efficiency to generate about two kW-H of energy. It's about 60% carbon, so what we've got is about 1.2kG of carbon dioxide emitted per kW-H, or about 200kG of carbon dioxide emitted per charge.
In contrast, my 1997 GMC (5.7 l V-8, 5 speed manual) has gotten 15mpg with about the same load, which means in that same 210 miles, I'd burn 14 gallons of gasoline and produce 120kG of carbon dioxide. Even a one ton pickup will, at ~10mpg, burn only 21 gallons and produce only 180kG of carbon dioxide.
Yes, you read it here. My 26 year old truck with 265,000 miles is more efficient than an electric F150 in terms of carbon emissions as the truck will typically be charged--with coal. The numbers are better with natural gas generation--about 100kG of carbon dioxide per charge--but even that ignores the ~60,000 lbs of carbon dioxide emissions to make the battery (my estimate).
Put the electric F150 against a gas powered F150 from today, and the numbers are not even close. Or, for that matter, against my 2014 GMC Acadia under the same load. And so I've got to wonder; is the EPA even working these numbers to figure out how bad of an environmental disaster we have on our hands with electric vehicles?
No comments:
Post a Comment