Progressive Automotive X Prize Calculating MPGe

[pgfpro]

I'm not sure if this has been posted or not I did a search on here but didn't find it. Heres the link for their spreadsheet for MPGe.

Progressive Automotive X PRIZE: Calculating MPGe

[SVOboy]

Here's a direct link to the spreadsheet: http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org...Calculator.xls

[RobertSmalls]

As we've discussed at length in other threads, I strongly disapprove of this energy-equivalence method of MPGe. It doesn't take into account CO2, and it ignores the energy lost when converting fossil fuels to electricity at a power plant and transmitting them to the charging station.

PAX is correct to adopt a single conversion factor for each fuel type, but they should use a weighted average of well-to-wall energy-equivalent MPG and CO2 equivalent MPG.

Their MPGe method has basically handed the prize to battery-electric cars.

[JackMcCornack]

As RobertSmalls pointed out:
> Their MPGe method has basically handed the prize to battery-electric cars.

I'll have to agree with you there. A number of us internal combustion driven competitors have withdrawn, and the plug-in electric bias has certainly been a factor. Understand that the X Prize Foundation's MPGe assesment of plug-ins wasn't declaired at the outset of the competition, and while we were anticipating the electrics would have a bit of a bonus because large scale conversion of fuel to power has advantages over small scale conversion (under-the-hood powerplants aren't as efficient as large stationary powerplants, or even large mobile powerplants as found in large ocean going ships, for a variety of reasons), none of the early-entry IC guys I talked with even imagined they'd give the electrics a 100% efficiency factor at the wall plug. Oh well, it's the X Prize Foundation and Progressive Insurance's ten million dollars, and they can give it to whoever they want, but it would have been a more interesting competition if it had remained as technology neutral as it was originally presented.

I think this competition will exacerbate the problem of laymen confusing electricity with a power source. Electricity is a way of transmitting power, not of generating power. At present in America, plug-in electric cars are really coal burning cars with invisible extension cords.

[pgfpro]

Originally Posted by JackMcCornack

As RobertSmalls pointed out:
> Their MPGe method has basically handed the prize to battery-electric cars.

I'll have to agree with you there. A number of us internal combustion driven competitors have withdrawn, and the plug-in electric bias has certainly been a factor. Understand that the X Prize Foundation's MPGe assesment of plug-ins wasn't declaired at the outset of the competition, and while we were anticipating the electrics would have a bit of a bonus because large scale conversion of fuel to power has advantages over small scale conversion (under-the-hood powerplants aren't as efficient as large stationary powerplants, or even large mobile powerplants as found in large ocean going ships, for a variety of reasons), none of the early-entry IC guys I talked with even imagined they'd give the electrics a 100% efficiency factor at the wall plug. Oh well, it's the X Prize Foundation and Progressive Insurance's ten million dollars, and they can give it to whoever they want, but it would have been a more interesting competition if it had remained as technology neutral as it was originally presented.

I think this competition will exacerbate the problem of laymen confusing electricity with a power source. Electricity is a way of transmitting power, not of generating power. At present in America, plug-in electric cars are really coal burning cars with invisible extension cords.

I agree with you both 100%. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well put!!!!

[orange4boy]

They had to draw a line somewhere. I think the problem here is the debatable variable nature of fuels. They are trying to avoid that issue as there is no way to set a standard for the different fuels as compared to electricity.

It doesn't take into account CO2, and it ignores the energy lost when converting fossil fuels to electricity at a power plant and transmitting them to the charging station.

They are also not taking not account the Co2 emissions from the production of gasoline which is no small thing and varies depending on where the oil comes from.

Calculating the use of electricity from the plug before charging losses seems fair to me. They seem to be trying to reward the most energy efficient vehicle regardless of fuel used. How else would you measure this accurately? It should be pointed out that in some areas like British Columbia, all electricity is generated from hydroelectricity and that in the future electricity could be supplied by clean sources to varying degrees. Not so with gasoline the production of which will most probably consume more fuel and emit more Co2 in the future:

The carbon content of the fuel Shell produced in 2008 was broadly in line with the rest of the industry at 33.8 kilograms of CO2 per barrel of oil equivalent, but its total resource base that will underpin future developments contains almost twice as much CO2, the report said.

Coal produced electricity is still "cleaner" than the most efficient gasoline engine. Solar panels are cheaper than wars for oil. Other forms of electrical generation may be more "expensive" than oil but they are far cleaner and those costs will go down while oil costs will go up.

Personally , I'm glad that liquid fuels are at a disadvantage but that's the nature of the beast.

At present in America, plug-in electric cars are really coal burning cars with invisible extension cords.

That may be true but they are still more efficient and cleaner than gas burning cars.