Post by Paul Aubrin
Indeed. If those MIT guys had examined the numbers, they would have
observed that batteries are not a solution: replacing high energy density
fuel with ten times heavier energy in batteries increases the weight to
be lifted at take-off.
I can burn less than a gallon of fuel per hour,
weighing in at about 6 pounds per gallon, in an
Accord or Camry. A tank full of gas nets about
400 miles on my room mate's Accord -- sometimes
more, sometimes a little less -- all for some
84 pounds, maybe.
...the Tesla Model 3 has two batteries that
weigh 191 pounds each, and two batteries that
weigh 207 pounds each, for a grand total of 796
Interesting to note: The weight of fossil fuels
diminishes as the vehicle travels, while the weight
of batteries is a constant even when stone cold dead.
Oh. Honda's 2.4L engine only weighs in at about 300
pounds, so the batteries on the Model 3 clearly weigh
more than the fossil fuel AND the motor in the Accord!
...the Accord is much faster to "Recharge," too.
Plus there is no proprietary technology involved. You
can fuel up an Accord anywhere.
So you can save A LOT of weight and travel much further,
if you drive a fossil fuel car.