labiau išvestinis skaičiavimas nieko bendro su elektros tinklo apkrovimu ir pralaidumu bei eletors poreikiais.

ps. reiktų nepamiršti kad stirpiai populiarėja el. šildymas oras-vanduo.
kas ir labai apkrauna el. tinklus.


On 2021.10.17 11:42, neratoblogo wrote:
> Aišku, čia tie ekspertai nieko neišmano, bet ekspertų paskaičiavimai > maždaug tokie:
> > Examining several studies on the impact of EVs, Redburn expects average > global electricity consumption from EVs to grow from around 8TWh in 2017 > to 1,800TWh by 2040. While this is a massive increase, it represents > only 5% of projected global electricity consumption in 2040 – not a huge > percentage.
> > Why so little? The simple answer – which must be most annoying to > utility executives the world over – is that EVs are incredibly > efficient, certainly compared to internal combustion engines (ICEs).
> > According to Redburn: “Filling a vehicle with oil is one of the most > expensive ways to purchase a usable unit of mobility: by a factor of > 4-5x. This is because ICE vehicles are inefficient and fuel taxes are > high, especially in Europe.
> > “Moreover, driving 100km in a conventional vehicle requires roughly > 80kWh of energy, because ICEs waste some 75-80% of their fuel generating > heat rather than mechanical energy – the clue is in the word > ‘combustion’. Moreover, a typical ICE has as many as 1,000 moving parts > as opposed to 70-80 or fewer for an EV.
> > “This means that the average EV needs as little as 25kWh to travel > 100km, even after accounting for the energy lost during charging and > ‘vampire losses’ as the battery mildly depletes over time. Divide > 80kWh/100km by 25kWh100 km and the result shows EVs are 3.3x more > efficient if not better.”
> > > > On 2021-10-17 10:32, VaidotasN wrote:
>>
>> įdomus skaičiavimai.. prie esamo elektros poreikio (dabr suvartojamos >> elektros) pridedame naują elektros poreiki ty 80proc. elektromobilių
>> ir rezultate tik 15-20proc padidejimas?
>