| Author |
Message |
    
Sifo
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 10:54 am: | 
|
I do agree that cost should also be a factor that is discussed. At just $0.08/KWH here in East Texas, a plug in commuter vehicle might make a lot of sense.
Of course when you compare cost of various fuels you should be looking at actual costs, not cost at the point of purchase. Just looking at electrical generation, there are different tax schemes for each type of generation. Just because you don't see the numbers on the bill you pay doesn't mean that you aren't paying the cost. This doesn't even begin to cover the different tax structures between electricity and gas.
Blake, at this point it's clear that Barts(n) is being willfully ignorant in his arguments. He wishes to ignore the facts provided to frame the argument to his liking. Nothing but troll, and I think we know who he really is. Seems pretty sad to me. |
Doerman
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 11:44 am: |
|
Interesting article in USAtoday on this topic:
Quote:
Why don't plug-in electric cars win hands-down?
"Vehicles running on electricity emit nothing from the tailpipe, but their 'upstream' emissions can be substantial, depending on where they're charged. As U.S. power generation becomes cleaner, these vehicles' scores will rise," said Therese Langer, ACEEE's transportation director.
Maybe that's the quote you have been looking to use for WikiPedia? |
Barts2
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 11:57 am: |
|
Or, what you could do is just combine the 30.3% and the 83%, and redefine MPGe for an electric car to be 36.5% of the tank-to-wheel number (.303 / .83)
(Message edited by barts2 on February 15, 2011) |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 12:06 pm: |
|
That logic falls flat.
Pulling oil from the ground is not converting it into energy. Refining it into gasoline is not converting it into energy. Burning it in the engine converts it into energy.
The conversion of resource to energy happens in the combustion chamber. For an electric vehicle, the combustion chamber is at the power plant, not in the battery. |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 12:20 pm: |
|
Goodness, how can anyone argue with Blake's points?
Consider the following scenario...
1) I put 10 gallons of gasoline into my 2001 Saab 9-3, and drive it 330 miles.
2) I put 10 gallons of gasoline into a Honda generator, and use it to charge a Nissan Leaf (pure electric), and drive that vehicle 200 miles.
Common sense would say the Saab gets 33 MPG (which it does on the highway, now that I replaced the crank position sensor). It would also say the Leaf gets 20 miles per gallon.
That's the honest measurement. From there you can come up with some sound conversion factors based on measured achievable energy density, for example the weight in coal equivalent to a gallon of gas, or the volume of ethanol equivalent to a gallon of gas. That's still an "honest" calculation.
You then have an honest answer to your MPG question.
From there, trying to take it a step further and calculate "total cost to point of utilization" doesn't make sense. That will be a lot squishier, and is really a measure of the type of fuel you are consuming, and your geographic locality it's source. At that point, it's really a conversation about the energy source and consumers geographic proximity to it, it's not really about the vehicle anymore. It may be important to your decision on the vehicle and technology to buy, but it ain't MPG. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 12:36 pm: |
|
Yeah, the battery stores the energy the gasoline (or whatever fuel was burned to make the heat to make the steam to turn the turbine to turn the generator) generated by being burned.
You can't escape the fact that the combustion chamber on an electric vehicle is the power plant. If you can't grasp the difference between generating energy and storing it, I can't help you any further.
The ball on the hill by the way is storing the energy it took to move the ball up the hill. It doesn't produce energy. |
Fast1075
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:21 pm: |
|
Stationary mass hold potential energy...compressed gas holds potential energy...as long as gravity still works, energy stored in mass does not dissipate...as long as the gas stays compressed, the energy does not dissipate.
Direct acting (single stage) such as an I.C. engine (even though is is horribly inefficient) is more efficient than making electricity (at, say 33% efficiency), then losing energy transmitting it, losing energy when the electricity is used to charge a battery, losing it from the inefficiency of the storage battery, to losing it powering the electric motor due to the motor's inefficiency....(we will assume equal frictional and aerodynamic losses whether I.C. or electric...
Now if someone can figure out how to "do" a bio chemical analogy where the energy is directly converted to mechanical force, we are on to something....sort of a synthetic "muscle"....I know I can walk a long ways on a couple of burritos and produce usable methane as a productive addition... |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:31 pm: |
|
A gasoline piston engine is an example of an internal combustion engine.
A steam engine is an example of an external combustion engine.
An electric car is also an example of an external combustion engine, the combustion chamber being the power plant.
What's not to get? Unless you're being intentionally obtuse, which I suspect is the case.
Where does our energy ultimately come from? I suppose the answer you're searching for is the sun.
The planet's core is warmed by radioactive decay, which is not from the sun. You could argue that the elements that are decaying were created in a sun, and that would be true, but not our sun.
Happy?
edited for embarassing typos
(Message edited by hootowl on February 15, 2011) |
Scottorious
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:48 pm: |
|
I love this thread. What is the efficiency of an IC engine? Could any one of you smart guys out there figure out the actual percentage of energy that makes it to the pavement in both a standard sedan and an EV? |
Sifo
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:57 pm: |
|
Unless you being intentionally obtuse, which I suspect is the case.
|
Fast1075
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 02:03 pm: |
|
About 80% of the heat energy from combustion is lost out the tailpipe and radiator (or other cooling method).
Late in his career (before illness stopped his progress) Smokey Yunick was working on an I.C. engine design that, by using ceramic composite materials and synthetic lubricants would operate at temperatures much higher than conventional engines. The design used a small turbo that served two purposes A: Improve V.E. to 100% and B: serve as a "homoginizer" to more effectively mix the fuel/air. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 02:30 pm: |
|
Some of the more efficient engine configurations fixing to hit the market, like direct injection gasoline engines, are pushing 40% efficiency per the EPA. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 02:34 pm: |
|
Added some edits and new info, but not in a wholesale addition, just added to existing sections. They are standing so far. It's amazing how ideologically driven some folks are. Makes you wonder if someone in the white house is working wikipedia articles all day, every day. LOL. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 02:37 pm: |
|
Barts,
>>> Or, what you could do is just combine the 30.3% and the 83%, and redefine MPGe for an electric car to be 36.5% of the tank-to-wheel number (.303 / .83)
Uh gee, that's just EXACTLY what I stated yesterday in this very thread and on wikipedia. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 02:47 pm: |
|
"Makes you wonder if someone in the white house is working wikipedia articles all day, every day."
I would not be surprised.
Controlling the media is one of the planks of the progressive movement. They're doing a fine job of it. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 02:49 pm: |
|
>>> The battery pack on the vehicle is the "tank".
No, it isn't. A tank contains fuel. Electricity is not fuel, it is energy.
>>> But the Wiki article very clearly describes that and even gives the numbers:
Yes they do, but they bury it at the very bottom long after touting the EPA's electric vehicle MPGe ratings, which are misleading.
Bottom line is that the EPA MPGe rating VIOLATES the governing equation, the one provided on the wiki article. It clearly states "total energy of all fuels consumed."
That is further clarified by the wiki article statment that
quote:with electrically powered vehicles, a full accounting of total energy consumption would include the efficiency factor for conversion of primary fuels into electricity (the energy of the fuel used to generate and transmit electricity)
>>> Really what this means is that the whole concept of tank-to-wheel MPG ought to be tossed out for both gasoline and electric vehicles, because tank-to-wheel destroys the whole concept of "equivalent".
I agree! Use either well-to-wheel, or fuel-to-wheel. Well-to-wheel seems to have the most integrity built into it.
Please tell the EPA! 
>>> Gasoline does have energy.
No, gasoline contains energy. The energy itself is heat energy which is released through combination with oxygen via a source of ignition (concentrated heat energy). |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 06:53 pm: |
|
OK Bart, so if I put an electric motor in my Saab, and power it from a Honda Generator, which is burning gas from my gas tank, is my Saab now magically going to go 1000 miles on it's 15 gallon tank? Sweet! |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 07:27 pm: |
|
Where does all the energy on this planet actually come from, do you know?
yep. Supernovas. ( every element heavier that Iron ) That covers nuclear, and the important bits of much of the machines that convert stored solar ( plant based... ethanol to oil ) or convert radiant solar or solar driven wind. ( solar also covers hydro, if you want to be first principal silly )
Makes you wonder if someone in the white house is working wikipedia articles all day, every day. LOL.
Yep. Also Google. Want documentation?
Reepicheep. I saw an article of an Aussie who has a small Aero trailer with a honda generator to power his electric car when he want to leave town and do some miles. Works.
Most electric cars ( since the old Edisons, and until the Leaf & Tesla ) were built uber light and frail to get maximum range. Your Saab is probably not a good candidate for conversion. But, I'd bet no more than 400 miles depending on the switching gear. ( the really complicated and expensive part of an Electric car... the throttle. )
So, we agree that the EPA numbers are bogus.
I have stated my opinion, that it's deliberate to push an agenda.
Does anyone disagree with that? |
Sifo
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 07:38 pm: |
|
I'm so glad I spent the last couple of hours reloading ammo instead of trying to explain to one stubborn individual why everyone else thinks he's wrong.  |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 08:09 pm: |
|
Good idea, thanks. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 09:12 pm: |
|
Please, if he returns, ignore the troll. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 09:21 pm: |
|
Ya gotta like the United States Department of Energy.
Gasoline-Equivalent Energy Content of Electricity Factor
When comparing gasoline vehicles with electric vehicles, it is essential to consider the efficiency of the respective ‘‘upstream’’ processes in the two fuel cycles. A full description of the differences in the processes is beyond the scope of this rulemaking, but the critical difference is that a gasoline vehicle burns its fuel on-board the vehicle, and an electric vehicle burns its fuel (the majority of electricity in the U.S. is generated at fossil fuel burning powerplants) off-board the vehicle. In both cases, the burning of fuels to produce work is the least efficient step of the respective energy cycles. Therefore, the PEF includes a term for expressing the relative energy efficiency of the full energy cycles of gasoline and electricity. This term, the gasoline equivalent energy content of electricity factor, abbreviated as Eg, is defined as:
Eg = gasoline-equivalent energy content of electricity = (Tg * Tt * C) Tp
where:
Tg = U.S. average fossil-fuel electricity generation efficiency = 0.328
Tt = U.S. average electricity transmission efficiency = 0.924
Tp = Petroleum refining and distribution efficiency = 0.830
C = Watt-hours of energy per gallon of gasoline conversion factor = 33,705 Wh/gal
Eg = (0.328 * 0.924 * 33,705)/0.830 = 12,307 Wh/gal
0.328*0.924/0.830 = 12,307/33,705 = 0.365
Gee, where've we seen that number before?  |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 16, 2011 - 09:36 am: |
|
They're not including the cost of coal mining and transportation operations in their equations, which they did do for gasoline. Or did I miss something? |
|
