Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
That's not quite what this is about. It is the Primary Energy Fallacy, that if you are to replace eg coal, you need to replicate its original energy content.

If 1kg of coal represents 1000 Wh, your generator loses 1/2 to waste heat, you only generate 500 Wh of usable electricity. Some analyses will state that renewable power has to replace the 1000 Wh of embedded energy within the coal, when it only needs to output 500 Wh.

If you use solar panels and generate 500 Wh directly, you have cut your energy use in half, even though the output has remained the same. An EV has a battery of ~80 kWh, equal to 2-3 gallons of gas, yet it can go a few hundred miles, a 3-4x ratio of efficiency, compared to an ICE.

loading story #50324058
I think your EV example is a better example than your coal one.

I’ve never seen anyone measure coal power by the amount of chemical energy stored inside, unless they are specifically referring to using it as a heating source. For electricity generated by coal it’s always measured as output.

The battery loses 10% just by charging it.

I figured an EV is worth about 60mpg with a fair comparison to a gas car.

A good visualisation for this I think are linked. Petrol/diesel use about 20% of the available energy and electric vehicles use about 80-90% for moving the vehicle.

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2024/01/electric-vehicles...

Oil also loses quite a bit during refining and transport.
loading story #50324063
> An EV has a battery of ~80 kWh, equal to 2-3 gallons of gas, yet it can go a few hundred miles, a 3-4x ratio of efficiency, compared to an ICE.

Now compare size and weight of the battery with 3 gallons of gas. I can carry hundreds of miles of travel on my person if it's gas, I can't carry much battery though.

loading story #50323832
loading story #50323192