More "Miles Per Acre" From Bioelectricity Than Ethanol

CarnegieScience writes "Scientist calculate that, compared to ethanol used for internal combustion engines, bioelectricity used for battery-powered vehicles would deliver an average of 80% more miles of transportation per acre of crops, while also providing double the greenhouse gas offsets to mitigate climate change."

Comments

Why the study is worthless, condensed:

[benjamindees]

America -> has lots of space

Electric cars -> expensive

So, is this kind of like Mr. Fusion?

[EveryNickIsTaken]

I can only hope so, because I refuse to RTFA since it's clearly a professor trying to get himself research grants.

This is stupid

[bluefoxlucid]

Electric vehicles suck, plain and simple. To get them to be "good" you have to make them too damn complex; and even then, you have hub motors with a computer-simulated differential that doesn't feel quite right (yes, I'm one of those people that drives the car like I'm wired into it front to back; I feel what's happening around me). Electric motors are also inefficient anyway, nevermind fuel-to-electricity is fuel-to-heat-to-motion-to-electricity, so you have fuel-to-heat-to-motion-to-electricity-to-motion and loss all over the place; the generators are probably (bio)diesel generators or some other combustion-based high-torque engine turning a dynamo, which means we could use a smaller combustion-based high-torque engine turning the wheels of my freaking car for fuel-to-heat-to-motion reaction (cut two big loss stages).