https://electreon.com/blog/debunking-wireless-ev-charging-myths/ Hand waving with no sources https://www.energysage.com/ev-charging/wireless-ev-charging/ This only cites the witricity article, we'll get to that but it didnt add anything https://www.witricity.com/blogs/comparing-efficiency.php They claim that a regular wall charger is 90% efficient with no sources and that their wireless one is 96%, basically marketing hype. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1876291 Finally a source, it literally says their charger is 90% efficient, their coil to coil efficiency is 96% so that's pretty good but still about 4% lost in transmission, in lab conditions with the coils 6" apart. https://www.ornl.gov/news/ornl-demonstrates-120-kilowatt-wireless-charging-vehicles#:~:text=97%20percent%20efficiency%2C%20which%20is%20comparable%20to%20conventional%2C%20wired%20high%2Dpower%20fast%20chargers This is just summarizing that paper on osti.gov https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/perspectives-on-wireless-and-automated-charging-for-electric-vehicles#:~:text=A%20wireless%20inductive%20charging%20system%20is%20at%20least%20one%20or%20two%20percentage%20points%20more%20efficient%20than%20a%20DC%20%5Bdirect%20current%5D%20fast%20charger%20at%20the%20same%20power%20level Literally marketing hype from the people that sell it, no actual useful data.

So that whole wall of text had one source that showed 4% losses in a lab with coils really close together, which is still a lot more loss than a copper conducter.

The marketing hype basically says if you factor in all of the losses from the power generation and transmission all the way to the wall then our additional 10% loss is no big deal so you can ignore that 1kW of lost heat you have to pay for on top of the grid's losses that are already a part of your costs.