Why Electric Motors Are 3X - 4X More Efficient Than Internal Combustion

CO2 is vitally essential to life on the planet earth. Theree is NO actual evidence whatever that increasing levels will cause climate catastrope. That's purely in the minds of of the doom-mongers like the IPCC who are working on paper thin weak hypotheses.

When a hydrocarbon is a fuel , yes. GM's Opel division plan to have a car soon that will emit 40g / km of CO2 on average.

Graham

automobile engine

way.

generation.

the library.

Clearly you have nothing of value to contribute, unless you count insults.

Grahama

Some gutless f****it desperately cowering behind Eeyore wrote just the pathetic excuse for a troll thats all it can ever manage.

Yup. Sounds spot on.

But spin off the road fatally at the least provocation from an inexperienced driver.

I nearly bought an AlfaSud. Now they were fun. Aside from the rust. Yet the biggest engine was only 1500 cc.

Try a Saab again. Ask for the Aero. And find a road you can have fun with it. You can drive a stick shift ? That's what really puts the grin on your face.

Scroll about half way down to 1997 and select Saab 9-5 Development Promo

To its left is Saab 9000 Ad Year: 1997 that may just have been what persuaded me to try one.

Graham

Liquids Coal Natural Gas Renewables Nuclear Total

2005 956 7,152 3,422 3,160 2,630 17,320 2010 858 8,999 4,691 3,703 2,747 20,998 2015 831 10,742 5,925 3,918 2,996 24,412 2020 804 12,134 7,013 4,239 3,283 27,473 2025 791 13,671 7,705 4,640 3,591 30,398 2030 764 15,361 8,389 4,996 3,754 33,264

From the energy information agency eia.doe.gov

In trillions of kilowatt hours...2005 is actuals - the rest projections...

This is global electricity production....

NOTE:

Liquids are oil and other liquid fuels Renewables include all sizes of hydro-electric production

For the US if anyone cares the numbers are: Source 2005 Coal 305.1 Oil and Natural Gas Steam 4/ 120.8 Combined Cycle 137.4 Combustion Turbine/Diesel 127.4 Nuclear Power 5/ 100.2 Pumped Storage 21.5 Fuel Cells 0.0 Renewable Sources 6/ 92.8 Distributed Generation (Natural Gas) 7/ 0.0 Total 905.2 Combined Heat and Power 8/ Coal 4.6 Oil and Natural Gas Steam 4/ 0.4 Combined Cycle 31.9 Combustion Turbine/Diesel 2.9 Renewable Sources 6/ 0.7 Total 40.4

From the energy information agency

In gigawatts of capacity

1/ Net summer capacity is the steady hourly output that generating equipment is expected to supply to system load (exclusive of auxiliary power), as demonstrated by tests during summer peak demand. 2/ Includes electricity-only and combined heat and power plants whose primary business is to sell electricity, or electricity and heat, to the public. 3/ Includes plants that only produce electricity. Includes capacity increases (uprates) at existing units. 4/ Includes oil-, gas-, and dual-fired capacity. 5/ Nuclear capacity includes 2.7 gigawatts of uprates through 2030. 6/ Includes conventional hydroelectric, geothermal, wood, wood waste, all municipal solid waste, landfill gas, other biomass, solar, and wind power. Facilities co-firing biomass and coal are classified as coal. 7/ Primarily peak-load capacity fueled by natural gas. 8/ Includes combined heat and power plants whose primary business is to sell electricity and heat to the public (i.e., those that report North American Industry Classification System code 22). 9/ Cumulative additions after December 31, 2006. 10/ Cumulative retirements after December 31, 2006. 11/ Includes combined heat and power plants and electricity-only plants in the commercial and industrial sectors; and small on-site generating systems in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors used primarily for own-use generation, but which may also sell some power to the grid. - - = Not applicable. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Data for 2005 and 2006 are model results and may differ slightly from official EIA data reports. Sources: 2005 and 2006 capacity and projected planned additions: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report" (preliminary). Projections: EIA, AEO2008 National Energy Modeling System run aeo2008.d030208f.

From EIA...

Actual Production in 2005 by fuel source in billions of KWH

Source 2005 Coal 1956 Petroleum 111 Natural Gas 3/ 554 Nuclear Power 782 Pumped Storage/Other 4/ 1 Renewable Sources 5/ 319 Distributed Generation (Natural Gas) 0 Total 3722 Combined Heat and Power 6/ Coal 37 Petroleum 6 Natural Gas 130 Renewable Sources 4 Total 180 Total Net Generation 3902 Less Direct Use 33

Net Available to the Grid 3869

1/ Includes electricity-only and combined heat and power plants whose primary business is to sell electricity, or electricity and heat, to the public. 2/ Includes plants that only produce electricity. 3/ Includes electricity generation from fuel cells. 4/ Includes non-biogenic municipal waste. The Energy Information Administration estimates approximately 7 billion kilowatthours of electricity were generated from a municipal waste stream containing petroleum-derived plastics and other non-renewable sources. See Energy Information Administration, Methodology for Allocating Municipal Solid Waste to Biogenic and Nono-Biogenic Energy, (Washington, DC, May 2007). 5/ Includes conventional hydroelectric, geothermal, wood, wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, other biomass, solar, and wind power. 6/ Includes combined heat and power plants whose primary business is to sell electricity and heat to the public (i.e., those that report North American Industry Classification System code 22). 7/ Includes combined heat and power plants and electricity-only plants in the commercial and industrial sectors; and small on-site generating systems in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors used primarily for own-use generation, but which may also sell some power to the grid. 8/ Includes refinery gas and still gas. 9/ Includes batteries, chemicals, hydrogen, pitch, purchased steam, sulfur, and miscellaneous technologies. - - = Not applicable. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Data for 2005 and 2006 are model results and may differ slightly from official EIA data reports. Sources: 2005 and 2006 electric power sector generation; sales to utilities; net imports; electricity sales; and emissions: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review 2006, DOE/EIA-0384(2006) (Washington, DC, June 2007) and supporting databases. 2005 and 2006 prices: EIA, AEO2008 National Energy Modeling System run aeo2008.d030208f. Projections: EIA, AEO2008 National Energy Modeling System run aeo2008.d030208f.

Ah, showing your true colours again I see.

Recommendation to serious posters ..... Ignore ALL posts from 'Rod Speed'.. They are purely trolls.

Graham

Some gutless f****it desperately cowering behind Eeyore wrote just the pathetic excuse for a troll thats all it can ever manage.

Francisco.

electric grid is collapsing from a few million

saving and stop building power plants.

charging.

Airconditioning ... overnight ? I would guess they will be full power at noon, not midnight :-)

oil to electriticy

We have:

- cars ... may we say about half of the demand is short range ?

- trucks ... long range could change to railway (ok ... that could be diesel, long lines electrification is costly, but near the cities ?)

Take a MAN 5S50ME-C7 low speed engine.

95 RPM, 3'800 kW power, 159 gr/kWh specific fuel oil consumption

In the MW range, the efficiency of a conventional 1 MW synchronous machine is 95%. So 3800 kW in 1 hour would deliver:

3800 * 0,95 = 3610 kWhe

In a hour, fuel oil consumption is 3800 * 0,159 kg = 604.2 kg Fuel oil lower calorific value is 42,700 kJ/kg Primary energy is 604.2 * 42,700 = 25'799'340 kJ = 7'166,48 kWht

Fuel oil to electricity efficiency is 3610/7167 = 50,37%

In one day, consumption is 14'501 kg fuel oil and electricity production is 86'640 kWh.

Let us forget that fuel oil is neither gasoline nor diesel fuel. Let us say that with 1 kg of fuel we make 10 miles. So with 14'501 kg fuel, we do 145'010 miles

Le us say that we power 1'000 homes, each one with one car. If every home gets 14,5 kg fuel, an ICE engine car could make 145 miles a day.

Instead, say that every home get's 87 kWh of electricity. Tesla Roadster charging efficiency is 86%. That's 87 * 0,86 = 75 kWh, enough to fully charge 1,4 times. Tesla Roadster range is 221 miles on the EPA combined cycle. That's 1,4 * 221 = 309 miles ... double the milage of an ICE engine car.

Or we can power 1'000 cars 221 miles each and 22 kWh free electricity (forgetting the power plant price ;-) for each home. In winter the power plant could additionally give some 40 kWht of waste heat for heating (say about 30 kWht losses) and warm water. In summer, the waste heat could be used for a 300 kW ORC plant, and luke warm water for the homes. That is cogeneration + combined cycle.

May I say: 75% efficiency ?

Replacing oil with nuclear power is not so bad ...

But downhill that massive weight gives back the accumulated potential energy ... And, anyway, how much "massive" are you thinking ? 100 kg ? 200 kg ? How heavy is a ICE engine, complete with automatic drive ?

R.L.Deboni

That's not nice :( What's the reason of your comment ?

bud-- wrote: > snipped-for-privacy@peoplepc.com wrote: > >

Isn't his a throttle plate? Sure looks like it to me.

G=B2

And solar and wind and tidal etc etc etc.

I forgot to finish the sentence. The wheels moved up and down, but the body did not. It takes a gawd-aweful amount of sophisticated and expensive suspension technology to duplicate the effects of a massive car. My clapped out T-bird could be driven on a washboard road without spilling anyone's drink. The track was wide enough and the ride height low enough that it did not corner as badly as you would assume for a nose-heavy, two-and-a-half ton car.

To respond to another poster, the first T-bird was a roadster to compete with the corvette, but sales did not take off, until they added a rear bench. The four-seaters were always full sized cars. Some of the convertibles had a cover that hid the rear seats, giving it a roadster appearance. The '76 was a luxury touring coupe.

Rod Speed wrote: > RLDeboni wrote >> John Larkin wrote >>> RLDeboni wrote >>>> John Larkin wrote >

Airconditioning ... overnight ? I would guess they will be full power at noon, not midnight :-)

We have:

- cars ... may we say about half of the demand is short range ?

- trucks ... long range could change to railway (ok ... that could be diesel, long lines electrification is costly, but near the cities ?)

Take a MAN 5S50ME-C7 low speed engine.

95 RPM, 3'800 kW power, 159 gr/kWh specific fuel oil consumption

In the MW range, the efficiency of a conventional 1 MW synchronous machine is 95%. So 3800 kW in 1 hour would deliver:

3800 * 0,95 = 3610 kWhe

In a hour, fuel oil consumption is 3800 * 0,159 kg = 604.2 kg Fuel oil lower calorific value is 42,700 kJ/kg Primary energy is 604.2 * 42,700 = 25'799'340 kJ = 7'166,48 kWht

Fuel oil to electricity efficiency is 3610/7167 = 50,37%

In one day, consumption is 14'501 kg fuel oil and electricity production is 86'640 kWh.

Let us forget that fuel oil is neither gasoline nor diesel fuel. Let us say that with 1 kg of fuel we make 10 miles. So with 14'501 kg fuel, we do 145'010 miles

Le us say that we power 1'000 homes, each one with one car. If every home gets 14,5 kg fuel, an ICE engine car could make 145 miles a day.

Instead, say that every home get's 87 kWh of electricity. Tesla Roadster charging efficiency is 86%. That's 87 * 0,86 = 75 kWh, enough to fully charge 1,4 times. Tesla Roadster range is 221 miles on the EPA combined cycle. That's 1,4 * 221 = 309 miles ... double the milage of an ICE engine car.

Or we can power 1'000 cars 221 miles each and 22 kWh free electricity (forgetting the power plant price ;-) for each home. In winter the power plant could additionally give some 40 kWht of waste heat for heating (say about 30 kWht losses) and warm water. In summer, the waste heat could be used for a 300 kW ORC plant, and luke warm water for the homes. That is cogeneration + combined cycle.

May I say: 75% efficiency ?

Replacing oil with nuclear power is not so bad ...

But downhill that massive weight gives back the accumulated potential energy ... And, anyway, how much "massive" are you thinking ? 100 kg ? 200 kg ? How heavy is a ICE engine, complete with automatic drive ?

R.L.Deboni

It may be someone trying to pass the Turing test with a sheet of rat neurons.

Whereas yours is using a dog turd.

Pot calling the kettle black... Granted, your trolls are much less juvenile.

Here's another one:

"20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply"

What's really inexplicable is that it's nearly impossible to find anyone, even here on newsgroups, who will deny future advances in battery technology will be significant.

It's common for the majority but rare for _everyone_ to be hopelessly optimistic. Even nuclear has a nut case poster with a junk science "proof" that controlled fusion is impossible on earth.

Where can we find a proof on battery limits?

Bret Cahill

Just a number plucked out of someone's arse. We can tell from the smell.