The Electrostate Revolution Part 2 - Why the Future is Electric

If there is one good way to sum up the leap from petrostate to electrostate, it would be thinking of the shift in terms of transitioning from analog technology to digital systems. Fossil fuels provided power in an era when most technology was mostly mechanical in operation, meaning that power was produced through the movement of pistons, turbines, and other moving parts operating under stress. The coming electrostates, by contrast, are being increasingly defined by technologies which operate at the speed of an electrical impulse. One of the best examples of this analog to digital switch can be found in comparing internal combustion engine cars to modern electric vehicles.

The contrasts between these vehicles begin with their engines. Combustion engines, while powerful and versatile, are a somewhat inefficient technology for producing energy. This is because these engines, as the name implies, derive power by first exerting energy to make their fuel ignite at an explosive, controlled rate. Said combustion then drive pistons and other mechanical components of the engine which produce the energy for moving the vehicle or generating power. This high intensity, analog process is why most internal combustion engines have an energy efficiency rate of 20% to 30% where only a fraction of the energy consumed actually goes to driving the car while the rest is wasted or needed for meeting the energy requirements of operating the engine.

Electric vehicles, by contrast, boast an average efficiency rate of 87% to 95% thanks to utilizing what is essentially a digital engine. At their most basic mechanical level, electric vehicles are driven by batteries that store the electricity which can be then used by the vehicle to power the motor, the vehicle’s systems, or charge other electrical devices. The built-in delays in combustion engines are simply not present for electric engines because the energy is already in a usable form and only needs to be allocated, not generated.

One of best examples of the performance advantages this provides is at the throttle. EVs, on average, boast a zero to sixty miles per hour acceleration time of between two and four seconds and that range includes everything from high-end Porsche sports models to Volvo sedans. Comparable speeds from internal combustion engine vehicles are only usually reached by high-end, purpose-built sports cars with substantial price tags and enormous engines. The lack of moving parts or wasted energy in an electric motor means increasing engine output is a simple matter of increasing energy flow from the battery to the motor. The lack of moving parts are why electric vehicles also, on average, cost about half as much over the life of the vehicle to maintain as combustion engine cars.

Electric vehicles also boast far greater versatility in their energy sourcing than combustion vehicles. For an EV, any source of electricity will do. Even the common wall outlet, though a very slow option, can work in a pinch or if you have time to let your vehicle charge up overnight. Electric vehicles can also, unlike combustion engines, send their electricity directly into local grids, providing an option for powering homes and businesses during blackouts or brownouts as well as an option for energy storage in normal times.

Modern combustion cars, by contrast, need specific grades of fuel to operate properly. A high-octane engine simply doesn’t perform as well on low octane fuel and feeding diesel into a gasoline engine is mostly a good way to break the engine. The only real advantages combustion engines enjoy over electric vehicles are their greater range, faster rates of refueling, and more widely available fuel and support infrastructure yet these advantages may prove fleeting rather than enduring. BYD’s recent announcement of a battery with a six hundred mile range and five minute charging time and the growing availability of charging infrastructure show these edges may already be quite dull.

These micro-level advantages give a pretty good sketch of the macro-level advantages enjoyed by electrostates over petrostates. Beginning with efficiency, electrostates will require significantly less actual energy production to meet their needs. Engineer Saul Griffith, in his seminal work Electrify, estimated as of 2022 that a fully renewable, electrified American economy would consume around half as much energy to meet its energy needs thanks to the greatly increased efficiency of production compared to fossil fuel generation. Such reduced consumption also boasts more stable prices thanks to the lack of vulnerability to external price shocks, an advantage which has been emphasized by the fallout of the ongoing 2026 Oil Shock.

These advantages are further compounded by the ease at which energy can be transferred and allocated in a fully renewable, electrified economy which electric vehicles show in the flexibility of their energy sourcing. Currently, energy is not interchangeable between forms and methods. Coal can only fuel coal powered devices, diesel engines work best with diesel fuel, and natural gas systems require natural gas to operate. Even these systems utilize different grades and types of carbon fuel which means not only can you only use coal to fuel a coal plant, you need specific types of coal or oil depending on what is compatible with your equipment or oil refinery. This also means incredibly complex mechanisms, like the $3.1 trillion dollar energy futures trading industry, are necessary to ensure these disruptions and mismatches are kept to a minimal level.

Renewable energy, by contrast, is far more easily managed at the macro-level than carbon energy. This begins with the electricity generated by solar panels, wind turbines, and hydroelectric plants which flows easily from production to distribution with no inputs needed beyond globally-available wind, sun, and water flows. These greatly simplified conditions are further enhanced by smart metering technology which is already automating electrical grids across the planet and reducing wasted electricity. Just as electric vehicles represent a digital leap ahead of analog combustion engines, so too do digitally-managed and simplified energy markets enjoy a similar advantage over the analog chaos of carbon markets.

All of these substantial, structural benefits will rest on a solid foundation of energy that is so unproductive, it may be too cheap to meter thanks to the consistently falling price of renewable electricity. As the world has already seen, increases in renewable energy capacity have consistently led to cheaper electricity, with wind and solar power becoming cheaper than all carbon-based energy for the first time in 2020. Current trajectories for transition suggest that a net zero economy would result in energy that is so cheap, it would too cheap to charge for on a per-unit basis and instead would be more economical to charge based on rates of flow as is the case for broadband Internet access. This drop in the cost of energy, which on average would be at least 90% cheaper than present energy prices, would bring systemic reductions in the cost of doing business for net zero economies. Electrostates, in short, could do everything a petrostate could but cheaper while using with less energy and enjoying far greater economic stability than their carbon-based competitors.