They do make wind and solar plants though. And either way, even with coal feeding a thermal plant as the energy source, it is still more efficient to generate the energy and distribute it to the wheel than it is to refine, transport and burn the fossil fuel the ICE vehicle would use.

> Are we allowed to call these "coal vehicles" yet?

Of course you are!

And we're allowed to think what we will of you, should you choose to do that.

In many places in the US it’s an accurate description for sure, but your getting down voted here because it’s an inconvenient truth. I gave you an upvote, because I appreciate the irony. Where I live it’s an 85% coal, 15% solar vehicle.

The US average is about 21% electricity from coal, a number that's down from over 50% about 20 years ago. And coal is falling over time as well.

It's not an "inconvenient truth", it's outdated information, basically a lie at this point. No one's bothering building new coal plants any more. People ARE building new nuclear plants (Vogtle, etc, not counting the small modular reactors). Nuclear produces about 18-19% of US electricity, nearly as much as coal. Solar is about 4-5% of US electricity (including solar behind-the-meter), hydro is 6-7%. Wind is 10%, geothermal about 0.4%. Wood and biomass waste (including landfill gas, etc) is about 1.3% total. Total renewables and nuclear produce over 40% of US electricity, twice that of coal.

Source: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph... and https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph...

No offense, but just listing out of all of the US energy sources used across the country does not mean that every individual local area derives all of their energy in the same percentages as you specified. You call the “coal powered vehicles” description a “lie”, but you obfuscate the data by choosing to look at it from a generalization point and low data resolution.

So like I said, (and I just checked my utility for these numbers and updated them for accuracy) where I live—EVs are presently being fueled by 86% coal (however, during peak demand periods, natural gas fueled turbines will come online and change the mix to 61%/25% coal/natural gas), and 14% solar. That is 86% of EV power coming from non-renewable fossil fuels with most of that fuel being coal. That’s not a lie, it simply is what it is.

If other areas are doing better with renewables, great. Here, EVs are running on mostly coal.

The US electric grid is well-connected, certainly regionally. You don't get all your electricity in your state. There's no sense in saying they mostly run on coal. And there's no way to refute your claims since you didn't mention what your location is, so I provided the US average, which is the only thing that makes sense as otherwise it's dishonest cherry-picking... which is precisely what you're doing. It's not "obfuscation" to use the national average!

Only 21% of US electricity comes from coal, and likely less than that in areas with the highest percentage of EVs. The future (which is what the Hummer EV will do its driving in) will also have far less than that. So yeah, calling them "coal powered" is dishonest to the point of being a lie.

All electricity I receive from my utility is generated in my state. My utility has excess capacity and provides energy to other utilities within the state. It provided those numbers as to their mix, that is what they have posted. If you want to dispute them with your general percentages, feel free, but you are not arguing from position of strength.

I would suggest instead of doubling down despite not knowing where I am, consider that in certain places within the US that the general mix of energy sources that you have provided could be different. Additionally, is it possible that in certain places within the US that energy sources like nuclear, wind, and hydro are simply not available to the consumers there? Also, is it possible that in those locations with the absence of effective renewable energy sources, that those areas might choose to rely on fossil fuels as their primary source of energy?

I could say nearly every EV roaming around Hawaii is 69% gas powered. I could say nearly every EV roaming around South Carolina is 60% nuclear powered. I could say nearly every EV roaming around West Virginia is 89% fossil fuel powered. I could say nearly every EV roaming around Washington state is 69% hydroelectric powered.

All of those statements are accurate and all are completely different. According to you, they are all lies, because my statement is a lie.

It's not an inconvenient truth. It's a non sequitur designed to make people think gas vehicles are better or equivalent to EVs.

Yes power generation in many parts of the world still produces lots of CO2. We all know that. You're not more clever than the rest of us for pointing it out.

But to decarbonize we have to address both cars and power generation. It's okay for us to talk about electric vehicles in isolation. These problems can be dealt with independently.

Every time there's talk about EVs some smartass is saying "it's pointless cause we're burning coal to power them". Such an attitude of "nothing is worth it unless we fix everything at once" once promotes apathy and inaction, and is just plain annoying.

"Such an attitude of "nothing is worth it unless we fix everything at once" once promotes apathy and inaction, and is just plain annoying."

Weird. I thought such an attitude would promote nuclear. Obviously.

They make wind and solar and hydro and geothermal too. There's not just a couple bad options.