This guy is late to the game, but better late than never. But suggesting NGVs are the way of the future is absurd. EVs, using power generated by highly efficient nat gas turbines, are 2-3x more efficient (and thus significantly cheaper) than NGVs on full cycle basis. Why? Because turbines convert 50-60% of gas into energy. The most efficient NGV engine will only give 20% with the rest wasted as heat or unburned/incompletely burned fuel (generating significantly more pollution in urban areas)
@ArthurDentZaphodBeeb If a turbine is 50-60% efficient. It's generator 95% efficient, transmission 98% efficient, charging the EV battery 85-95% efficient, discharging the batteries 85-95% efficient, and electric motors 30-85% efficient depending on conditions; EV's then are 10-45% "carbon" efficient depending on some factors, not to mention the carbon impact of the batteries' life cycle. NGV's may not be the magic bullet of the future but they are likely a valuable stepping stone for now.
This guy is late to the game, but better late than never. But suggesting NGVs are the way of the future is absurd. EVs, using power generated by highly efficient nat gas turbines, are 2-3x more efficient (and thus significantly cheaper) than NGVs on full cycle basis. Why? Because turbines convert 50-60% of gas into energy. The most efficient NGV engine will only give 20% with the rest wasted as heat or unburned/incompletely burned fuel (generating significantly more pollution in urban areas)
ArthurDentZaphodBeeb 1 year ago
@ArthurDentZaphodBeeb If a turbine is 50-60% efficient. It's generator 95% efficient, transmission 98% efficient, charging the EV battery 85-95% efficient, discharging the batteries 85-95% efficient, and electric motors 30-85% efficient depending on conditions; EV's then are 10-45% "carbon" efficient depending on some factors, not to mention the carbon impact of the batteries' life cycle. NGV's may not be the magic bullet of the future but they are likely a valuable stepping stone for now.
vermeuliscious 1 year ago