Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-07-2010, 11:03 PM   #1 (permalink)
Left Lane Ecodriver
 
RobertSmalls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 2,258

Prius C - '12 Toyota Prius C
Thanks: 79
Thanked 283 Times in 196 Posts
Miles Per Gallon Equivalent by Four Different Methods

...and why EVs alone are of doubtful environmental benefit.

As more of us, myself included, are transitioning to plug-in vehicles of some type or another, the controversial topic of mpge is being discussed with increasing frequency. It's a complicated but important subject, as people will use mpge as a factor when deciding which car to buy and which mods to make.

We all have different goals and values. Some people want to reduce their carbon footprint, or reduce the rate at which we are depleting fossil energy resources, or rely less on petroleum, or just to save money. We won't all agree on a single KWh/gal factor because we have different values, but below I present four KWh/gal figures, and I recommend you use a figure somewhere in the middle. I will use 16KWh/gal.

24KWh/galCost Equivalencevaries with time and location
16.18KWh/galCO2 Equivalencefor US grid average
12.307KWh/galEnergy Equivalencefor US grid average
hundreds of KWh/galResource Depletion Potential for Renewable Electricityrenewable electricity is THE long-term solution to the transportation problem


The least contentious figure is cost equivalence. I pay $3.00 for a gallon of gas, and $0.12 for a KWh of electricity. 25KWh/gal.

The simplest KWh/gal figure is direct BTU equivalence: buring a gallon of gas releases 33.4KWh of heat. However, that's not a useful figure: it does not represent resource depletion, CO2 emissions, or any other item people care about.

If you wish to measure resource depletion or CO2 emissions, you must consider the entire life cycle of the fuel. The least efficient step in this life cycle is buring fossil fuels and converting heat to torque in a heat engine. For the EV, this happens in a power plant. For gassers, it happens under the hood. Direct BTU equivalence fails to capture this least efficient step for electrics but captures it for gas engines.

Using numbers from the DoE (see p3 column 2 which cites but does not include "Docket No. EE–RM–99–PEF"), the US grid average power plant is around 33% efficient, and transmission is 92% efficient, thus giving 30.3% efficiency for electric. Refining and distributing petroleum is 83% efficient per the same source. Thus the DoE finds a 12.307 KWh/gal figure by the life-cycle energy equivalence method. This is probably the right figure for academic comparisons of the overall efficiency of one architecture versus another. Unfortunately, it values a coal and petroleum equally, even though one is more versatile, rare, and troublesome than the other.

Take the above efficiency numbers and multiply by the values of 608g CO2/KWh and 8877g CO2/gal, and you have 16.18KWh/gal by CO2 equivalence. This varies with the carbon intensity of the grid. The number would be much higher in nuclear-powered France, and lower in coal-fired China.

If you're purchasing renewable electricity, then the CO2/KWh figure is very low (but certainly not zero; it takes diesel fuel to put up a windmill or to turn Si into a PV panel and ship it from Taiwan). Likewise, the resource depletion per KWh is very low. Unfortunately, we do not have a renewable-rich grid, and mass adoption of EVs at present would be a massive fleet of predominantly coal-fired vehicles with a massive CO2 footprint.

Consider a car that uses 250Wh/mi at the battery and 324Wh/mi at the wall. It gets:

38.0mpgeLife Cycle Energy Equivalence
49.9mpgeCO2 Equivalence
74.1mpgeCost Equivalence
107.1mpgeDirect BTU Equivalence


You can imagine which of these metrics EV advocates are pushing for, but in fact, they would underestimate the GHG emissions of a fleet of EVs by a factor of two.

If the X-Prize had used the more appropriate 16KWh/gal metric, only the X-Tracer electric Dalniks, the Li-ion EV, and the gas-fired Spira and Edison2 VLC's would still be standing. Aptera would have been eliminated with 67.8mpge before penalties.

Once more plug-in cars hit the market, we'll be able to make more direct comparisons between EV and HEV variants of the same car. Until then, study after study suggests a BEV with 100mi range (BEV-100) will be carrying enough weight in batteries to increase its CO2 footprint to larger than that of a HEV. A short-range plug in hybrid is a good compromise, with a recent Carnegie-Mellon study suggesting a PHEV-7 was optimal for minimum CO2 emissions.

There are other factors in the EV versus gasser debate that are beyond the scope of MPGe. These include the higher smog forming emissions of a gasser, the environmtental impact of oil spills, and mining for coal and rare metals to make batteries. There is also the matter of the cost of electric vehicles and windmills, and the rapid depreciation of current-generation high-density batteries.



It's wrong of the X-Prize Foundation to fail to look at the big picture when calculating MPGe. It's also incorrect to call EV's "zero emissions" (yes, that claim has been made) or even that they're low-carbon. EV's will allow us to burn diverse fuels and weather a petroleum crisis with less disruption (which is bad news for environmentalists, as fuel crises drive conservation).

We need renewable electric generation FIRST, and EV's afterward. I am voting with my dollars by selecting my utility's renewable electricity plan, and I'd encourage you to do the same. Your representatives in government also need to hear that it's an important issue to you, as I hope it is.

When confronted with an MPGe figure, I hope you'll be a little skeptical and dig for a Wh/mi figure. Then consider which KWh/gal figure makes sense to you, and come up with your own mpge figure. I recommend 16KWh/gal as a weighted average.

  Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to RobertSmalls For This Useful Post:
Daox (07-09-2010), Laurentiu (07-09-2010), NachtRitter (07-10-2010), user removed (07-12-2010)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-09-2010, 09:09 AM   #2 (permalink)
dcb
needs more cowbell
 
dcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 5,032

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 156
Thanked 264 Times in 207 Posts
There was a note in the DOE paper, and I'm not sure of the entirety of its scope, but they skipped all non-fossil fuel sources in their analysis?
Comment 7: The U.S. Average
Electricity Generation factor (Tg = 0.328)
is based only on fossil fuel generation,


But that leaves out like almost 1/3 of the grid, at least as of 2009
(I'm rooting for the renewable section and gladly give my local windfarm a couple extra bucks)
__________________
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 10:19 AM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
comptiger5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544

RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited
90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
Even if an EV emits the same amount of pollution per mile as an ICE car, it's still beneficial, as they're often cheaper to run, and their pollution can be lowered without replacing the vehicle, as the power grid changes over time.
__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:



Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 01:56 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 222
Thanked 782 Times in 575 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertSmalls View Post
...and why EVs alone are of doubtful environmental benefit.
But who said they were? They're one component: IF you have electric cars in place, then anything done to clean up the generation grid also cleans up transportation. And worst case - when charged by 100% coal-fired generation - they're no worse than gas/diesel.

Quote:
Unfortunately, we do not have a renewable-rich grid, and mass adoption of EVs at present would be a massive fleet of predominantly coal-fired vehicles with a massive CO2 footprint.
But in fact we do. As the pie chart that dcb posted makes clear, almost 1/3 of the grid is non-fossil, and a good chunk of the rest is natural gas, which produces significantly less CO2 per MWatt generated. So right there, today, you're getting at least a 1/3 improvement. As more non-fossil generation is added, the improvement automatically applies to the whole transportation system.

And of course, if you have an electric/plugin car, you've now got more incentive to install those solar panels on your roof :-)
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 03:18 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,277

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,466
Thanked 2,286 Times in 1,405 Posts
Matt,

You are conflating energy equivalence with carbon footprint.

1 gallon of typical gasoline = 33.4kWh of electricity.

If you are applying all the embedded energy for electricity, then you also need to do the same for gasoline. Gasoline has emissions from the tailpipe *and* from the refinery, and the wellhead, and from the transportation. Electricity has it from the source and the generation stage. All use of carbon for both must be counted in order for the comparison to be fair.

Because, if I have solar panels on my roof, or a wind turbine in my yard, then your numbers are no longer accurate. I'd like to see someone try to refine gasoline from oil at home!
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/

Last edited by NeilBlanchard; 07-09-2010 at 03:25 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to NeilBlanchard For This Useful Post:
IamIan (12-21-2010)
Old 07-09-2010, 03:31 PM   #6 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,191
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,517 Times in 1,120 Posts
"...passing..." the carbon 'bucket-brigade' back to it's source = where does/did the original energy come from that now creates the electricity that we use?
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 03:51 PM   #7 (permalink)
Left Lane Ecodriver
 
RobertSmalls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 2,258

Prius C - '12 Toyota Prius C
Thanks: 79
Thanked 283 Times in 196 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb View Post
There was a note in the DOE paper, and I'm not sure of the entirety of its scope, but they skipped all non-fossil fuel sources in their analysis?
Comment 7: The U.S. Average
Electricity Generation factor (Tg = 0.328)
is based only on fossil fuel generation,


But that leaves out like almost 1/3 of the grid, at least as of 2009
(I'm rooting for the renewable section and gladly give my local windfarm a couple extra bucks)
I am also rooting for renewables, but we're still around 70% fossil-fueled. Those power plants have a service life of over fourty years, so they'll be with us for a looong time.

Regarding "The U.S. Average
Electricity Generation factor (Tg = 0.328)
is based only on fossil fuel generation". Efficiency of nuclear is around 30%. But how do you measure efficiency of hydro, solar, and wind? PV panels catch perhaps 8% of the sunlight hitting them, and windmills catch only a tiny fraction of the kinetic energy passing their swept area. But you can call them 100% efficient, because if the hydro dam weren't there, then zero percent of the energy would have been captured.

So if you want to use 14.8KWh/gal by an energy-equivalence method, that sounds fine with me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by comptiger5000 View Post
Even if an EV emits the same amount of pollution per mile as an ICE car, it's still beneficial, as they're often cheaper to run, and their pollution can be lowered without replacing the vehicle, as the power grid changes over time.
There are pros and cons to EVs aside from the MPGe and total cost of ownership. Lots of those ended up being discussed here. My favorite pro: it's fun to play with electric drive. Converting a car to PHEV or EV can be a rewarding hobby. The issue of CO2 is separate.



James,

Unfortunately, the extra battery weight (and resultant extra structural and motor weight), and the added inefficiency of the battery and charger shifts the electric vehicle to parity with a conventional vehicle, and behind a hybrid.

There's a very cool sensitivity analysis on page seven here: http://www.cmu.edu/me/ddl/publicatio...t-Charging.pdf , and a few other corroborating studies I can't put my fingers on right now.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RobertSmalls For This Useful Post:
Patrick (07-09-2010), user removed (07-12-2010)
Old 07-09-2010, 06:48 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Patrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Northern Florida, USA
Posts: 510

Hot Tamale - '10 Toyota Prius III
Thanks: 27
Thanked 96 Times in 70 Posts
Nuclear is renewable?
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 06:59 PM   #9 (permalink)
Hypermiling rookie
 
Laurentiu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Limassol , CY
Posts: 288

Opel Corsa B - '96 Opel Corsa 1.2 8V
90 day: 47.27 mpg (US)

VW Bora 1.6 16V - '02 Volkswagen Bora/Jetta
90 day: 35.84 mpg (US)
Thanks: 17
Thanked 36 Times in 21 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Nuclear is renewable?
This might answer your question..
__________________






"It has been my observation that most people get ahead during the time that others waste" Henry Ford
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 07:58 PM   #10 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,191
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,517 Times in 1,120 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Nuclear is renewable?
...just like "life" is renewable...just gotta have "faith," that's all.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New personal record: 632 miles on 1 tank. 48 MPG in my Auomatic 05 Corolla blackjackel Success Stories 6 11-30-2009 02:02 PM
About 4 miles per gallon RandomFact314 Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 21 08-30-2009 06:24 PM
Various transportation methods, how many gallons to go 350 miles Daox General Efficiency Discussion 27 04-06-2009 02:56 AM
Why SUV fuel economy is so much more important than small car fuel economy... SVOboy General Efficiency Discussion 30 02-23-2009 07:26 PM
What's your best bet for an automatic? Crono EcoModding Central 16 10-22-2008 02:14 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com