Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee
I've never looked into how the X-Prize mpge system is configgered. Maybe it is ****ed. 
You got something better? Your example was more than 100% off for me... |
I've got three things better.
24KWh/gal - cost equivalence at $0.12/KWh and $3/gal
16KWh/gal - by CO2 equivalence
15KWh/gal - by life cycle energy content
If I understand miket correctly here, he considers direct BTU equivalence to be an EV-inflating number, and he's proposing cost equivalence in ... Saudi Arabia? ... as an EV-deflating figure. Maybe you should use $3/gal vs. the price of electricity for an off-grid solar customer instead.
I think that's silly, but if you want an arguably justifiable EV-deflating figure, consider the potential of each fuel for heating a house. The house could be equipped with a furnace with an AFUE of .95 (humor me and pretend it could be run on gasoline), or a heat pump with a CoP of 3.5. You arrive at an unflattering, and perhaps unfair, 9KWh/gal.
So there you go, whether you're heating a house, generating electricity, or turning a shaft, electricity is a form of energy that has been "improved" 2-4 times beyond what its KWh content would suggest.
I would encourage everyone to take any direct BTU mpge figures they encounter and divide by two.