"nightjar .uk.com" nightjar@insert my surname here wrote in message
...

Modern generating equipment, transmissions, localised power stations,
modern batteries in cars etc, proves that is total balls.

You appear to be talking about efficiency of energy conversion, which is
not the same as the type or amount of pollution produced in converting
that energy.

Energy used to propel n amount of cars of same size x number of miles.
1. Using electric
2. Using petrol.

Also factor in the energy sued in the refining and distribution process for
car fuel too.

That is what it is about. EVs win. They also don't ruin millions of lungs
in towns and cities too.

OTOH, car manufacturers are also continually improving their products

They are? That's new to me.

Perhaps you should read more.

Your idea of improving cars is another sunroof.

so that driving a modern five litre vehicle I am producing far less
pollution than I was when driving around in my average saloon car in the
1960s.

It still wastes 75% of the energy in the tank. No change there.

Current petrol engine efficiency averages 32%,

Nope. 25% You are on about peak.

not the 25% you seem to think. If compression ratios were raised to around
12:1, the efficiency could exceed 50%.

In your dreams. External combustion Stirlings can only just reach 50%

OTOH best power station efficiency today is about 60%,

25% of a cars fuel tank vs. 60% is big leap. That 60% can be more if local
power stations are used using CHP.

although most generating plant in use is nearer 40% efficient.

The old stuff.

Transmission losses in the UK average around 7.4% and the non-zero charge
recharging efficiency of traction batteries is around 80-85%, although
that can drop off dramatically as the charge level approaches 90%.

Not with the Tesla. Read what they have done to make it viable and double
range.

snip out of date stuff about EV efficiencies