Years ago, as I was trying to understand the reality of electric vehicles, among other things, I put together a model that simulates a fleet of 300 million electric vehicles charging across our various time zones. The model accounts for various percentages of vehicles slow charging overnight (typical at-home charging scenario) and the balance fast-charging. The model uses Tesla charging data (rate of charge, energy requirements, miles per kWh, etc.).
The result indicated we need 900 to 1400 GW in order to support a full transition to electric charging.
This is IN ADDTION TO what we produce today, which is in the order of 1200 GW. In other words, we need to ADD capacity, we can't magic-wand our way into this reality. In essence, we have to produce the effective energy provided today by gasoline and diesel. By this I mean, once you account for efficiency, the bottom line is gasoline/diesel are used to move a certain mass of vehicles a certain distance in a certain time every day. Whatever is required to do the same with electrics, that's what we need. This is new energy, we can't pull it out of the existing infrastructure.
And, speaking of infrastructure, it is important that this is, in many ways more about power than energy.
Why?
Because it takes power to charge N cars simultaneously in a given geographic region. Even if everyone slow-charges, the time period is finite, say, 8 hours max. This still translates to a requirement for power. The energy is what fills the bucket. Power is how fast you fill it. With so many vehicles plugged in at the same time, you need power over a reasonable period of time. Our grid cannot currently handle such a step change in power transportation. To put it simply: We need larger pipes.
This could also mean we need far more than the 900 to 1400 GW I think we do. That is because you have to deliver power, not energy over 24 hours.
Solar?
No. Not really. It can help, but, at scale, at the scale we need, I think I can very easily make the argument that if the goal is to have clean energy, solar at this scale is far from clean. I can't even imagine the billions of batteries we would need. And then, every N years, you have to deal with recycling or disposing of them.
This isn't a simple problem at all. Yet nuclear is, in my opinion, the ONLY technology that can actually deliver on a future vision of an all-electric transportation system.
Here's the problem: I don't know about Europe. In the US, in the time it would take us to build a single nuclear reactor (30 years?), China will likely build 300 of them, if not more. The efficiency and focus with which they execute on the obvious plan to achieve economic and technical superiority across the board is nothing less than awe-inspiring. While our politicians burn clock cycles with stupid power games and nonsense, China wakes up every day and puts one foot in front of the other. The only way to think of this is that they deserve the success they have achieved through hard work, focus and perhaps the most impressive national-scale entrepreneurial drive in the history of humanity.
I work with Chinese companies (as suppliers in the context of manufacturing) every day. The difference between us and them is absolutely unimaginable to anyone who isn't in this business. All I can say is that, if people in the West don't wake up and start voting for politicians who actually know what they fuck they are doing, the story of what's ahead isn't a good one. Notice that I am not identifying any specific party. In fact, a good starting point would be to fire almost everyone in government and bring in new blood with a new mandate.
I better stop here. I get too worked-up about this stuff. It pains me to see so many hard-working people suffer because the people in command of the ship are constantly engaged in power games and bullshit and ignore the fact that the boat is filling with water and will eventually sink.