View Single Post
Old 11-03-2010, 09:20 PM   #39 (permalink)
rmay635703
home of the odd vehicles
 
rmay635703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere in WI
Posts: 3,891

Silver - '10 Chevy Cobalt XFE
Thanks: 506
Thanked 867 Times in 654 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertSmalls View Post
Neil,

This is terribly incorrect. Total carbon is comparable because electricty is far more carbon-intense per MJ than gasoline. Unsurprising if you understand that on the other end of the power lines is a heat engine that, sadly, is probably about 35% efficient. We can do better.
??? Even in the 1960's efficient power generation was VERY important and costs were considered high from an industrial standpoint as a result
Even inefficent coal plants run very efficiently compared to an ice typically in the 35-40% area, china's newest plants operate at 44% efficiency. Other plants running on diesel and natural gas tend to be above 45% due to the cost of fuel with the most efficient units a tad over 50%.

If there was enough demand and push I believe it would go even higher nearing the theoretical maximum which is somewhere around 59% with full recovery in place.

A lot of people foo foo me but they don't seem to realize how inefficient the normal driving cycle really is, most drivers are cars only about 5% eff. due to the motor operating in poor eff. range and due to poor habits. Although some ICE engines approach 25% they rarely operate in that narrow region for more than a few seconds during the normal driving cycle. I have always believed a series hybrid ev would be more efficient than a standard ICE if the motor were a single speed 40-50% eff. turbine type, even with losses it would still do better than a typical driving cycle which spends a lot of time in very very inefficient areas of the motor torque band.

That isn't to say these same drivers with electric or series hybred would do much better but at least they would have regen.

Cheers
Ryan
  Reply With Quote