Yesterday, what many had warned about for a long time and others thought was just a bad joke - the European Parliament approved a ban on the sale of cars with internal combustion engines from 2035
"The approved proposal assumes that the sale of new cars and light commercial vehicles with internal combustion engines would end from 2035. The measure should only apply to new cars, people should continue to be able to use older vehicles with internal combustion engines and continue to buy such cars on the second-hand market." (source)
About being with us 41% electricity is produced by burning coal wrote recently, but I would like to look at the nonsense with electric cars from another point of view. That view is the sheer amount of electricity that would need to be produced.
Recently, Martin Vozka wrote to me about it in the discussion, so I am reprinting his opinion:
People only see a secondary problem with cars (range, price, battery wear, etc.), but this is only the tip of the iceberg of problems with the widespread introduction of electricity. cars I used to do a superficial analysis of what it would mean if all cars were to change to electric…
My reasoning for why electric cars are a dead end, or at most only a local solution:
Anyone who didn't sleep in high school physics classes can calculate this by himself from the available materials.
I am based on:
Temelín Nuclear Power Plant, 2 blocks each with a capacity of 1082 MW (source)
Hyundai Kona ECO version
Why Hyundai Kona? Because it has such acceptable range parameters (among electric cars) and such a rather lower battery capacity (40kW) that no one would accuse me of handling it. For example, the Tesla has a capacity of around 75 kWh, and the Kona is also made in a version with 56 kWh.
Interestingly, the Škoda Citygo car has a range of only 256 km and a battery capacity of almost 37 kWh.
So the Kona has a range of up to 345 km per charge, batteries with a capacity of 39.2 kWh, (note for women: this is like using 40 irons with a power of 1000 W at home at once for 1 hour).
Number of registered passenger cars in the Czech Republic: 5,592,738 (in 2017, when the tendency is to increase by approx. 200,000 units/year, so in 2020 the number is undeniably higher, although I expect a lower value from 2017)
So, if all passenger cars were replaced by an electric car with Hyundai Kona parameters, the installed battery capacity of all passenger cars in the Czech Republic would be:
5,592,738 pcs x 39.2 kWh = 219,235,329.6 kWh, which is 219,329.6 MWh (which corresponds to approx. 203 Temelín NPP blocks running 1h).
I will be more moderate again and I will calculate that each car will discharge only 1/2 per day, and that only 2/3 of the cars will leave daily, so it would be necessary to charge a capacity of 73,110 MWh per day.
If this capacity were divided into 8 hours of charging, an immediate output of 9,139 MW would be needed, which corresponds to 8.4 blocks of Temelín, i.e. add another 7 blocks.
We are a household of 2 people in a 2-room apartment, we consume approximately 1.7 MWh per year (ceramic hob, electric oven, other common appliances). If we had the mentioned electric car and charged (again, I'll be more moderate) only 3 days a week, the car would claim about 6.24 MWh per year. That is, an electric car for the family, even with these modest parameters, it is like another 3.7 households.
Other problems related to car charging are:
1. the main problem is that the increased power consumption would be felt mainly at night when everyone would be charging. In the morning, when everyone would disconnect their cars from the chargers, the produced power would have to be consumed somewhere, because it is impossible to regulate the power of nuclear power plants and other power plants from day to day, let alone from hour to hour. So we only charge the cars overnight, but the power would have to be produced for a full 24 hours (how ecological).
2. Increased demands on the transmission system related to incredibly higher energy transmission:
● larger conductor cross-sections – more copper needed, more mined
● more powerful substations – again greater demands on material, more to extract
● higher losses – the need to produce more energy than the calculated consumption
3. number of charging racks for all cars for both charging and maintaining current. Again, material costs.
4. a car that you don't charge and drive is self-discharging anyway, so it would have to be on trickle charge. Again higher consumption than the calculated performance.
5. Self-discharge destroys batteries, so even if you are not driving, you will change the battery sooner. Again, additional material costs.
6. etc., etc.
Perhaps I can only add that a few days ago Prague was hit by a massive blackout - not even the trams were running, people stayed in the elevators.
And reason? – old and congested substation in Chodov. And that's all we have for now, just a few electric cars...
But we do have solar panels…
But in order not to sound like a complete opponent of electromobility - I myself recently bought an electric scooter, I ride it around Prague and I also bought several solar panels and charge it with them. But I know it's just fun and more of a geek hobby.
Just for comparison - 2 panels with a power of 190W will charge the scooter in a day without any problem - if it's nice. However, the scooter has a 1 kWh battery and the mentioned cars 37-75 kWh. – so you would need to JUST 37x-75x more panels to charge your car - i.e. 74-150 large panels on each family house... In reality, about 20-30 panels can fit on the roof...
Either it is calculated that cars will be driven - in a left-wing way - shared - so that it will be necessary ONLY one in a street of five houses, or it won't be driven at all, or that really VERY SIGNIFICANT our population will decrease…
It is hard to imagine that otherwise, without any numbers, someone would be able to approve such stupidity.