What? Article says Hybrids/Electrics could strain water supplies

[Fibb222]

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

Actually the article didn't appear to be as alarmist as most of the man-made GW poop that is spread over the media. It just points out that more plug-ins means the need for more power. Something I commented on in another post regarding the fragility of the power grid being able to handle a large increase in power demand.

You made the comment on another thread Hydrogen Highway's Dead End. FINALLY !
and then I posted this: Technology Review: How Plug-in Hybrids Will Save the Grid and nerfer, burritos and chogan all weighed in too. You can run to another thread but you can't hide.

[finman]

Okay, just to ask the question again....how much electricity is used to make gasoline...and then burned in an ICE, the least efficient use of the juice?

Maybe, just maybe, if repeated as many times as possible, the message that EVs are better than gasoline might sink in.

Thanks to all those on this forum that continually state the studies and data to support an alternative to 'that's always how it's been, why change' attitude. I've learned much and am passing along all pertinent info to those who'll listen.

[TonyPSchaefer]

Originally Posted by F8L

People are stupid.

Wake me up when you have something new to report.

[chogan2]

Originally Posted by finman

Okay, just to ask the question again....how much electricity is used to make gasoline...

I looked up Darelldd's analysis on his website, (evnut.com), but his calculation was for extraction and refining of oil in California, which I think is not representative (California wells are marginal high-cost wells).

Other calculations shown on that page provide national average statistics. There, the answers are far less impressive than you might suppose. Direct purchases of electricity for refining oil, for example, amount to just a fraction of a KWH per gallon of gasoline. Adding in the energy value of the natural gas burned to power oil refineries and you still come up with just over (the equivalent of) a KWH of electricty per gallon. But that's just refining.

Let me take a stab at it based on the wheel-to-well calculations performed by the US Sandia National Laboratories. Looking at their reports, for gasoline cars in the US, the well-to-tank fossil fuel inputs looks to average about 18% of the tank-to-wheels fossil fuel inputs. In other words, roughly, for every gallon of gas burned in a car (tank-to-wheels), another 0.18 gallons is burned in production-distillation-distribution of the fuel (well-to-tank). (That's much lower energy overhead than California oil, where the net free energy of oil production/refining appears to be less than half the energy value of the oil, per darelldd's website.)

Assuming that's about right, it's fairly straightforward to ask how much electricity you'd get if you burned 0.18 gallons of gasoline (equivalent) and used it to produce electricity. Based on a few random internet sources, the US grid is right now about 30% efficient in the conversion of fossil fuels to electricity, though the best available technologies can more than double that. So, assume that 60% of the energy value of the 0.18 gallons was converted to electricity. Taking a gallon of gas to have 35 KWH of energy, that would amount to (call it roughly) 4 KWH of electricity, or enough to power a relative efficient EV for (say) 20 miles. Half that, if I used actual US average grid efficiency.

So, I don't come up with as high a number as EV advocates will show, but I think I see the point. If you took the energy now used to extract and refine petroleum, and converted that efficiently to electricity, you could power a significant number of EV miles from that. I don't get full replacement of the gasoline miles, but it's enough to make that an interesting point.

The only other downside I see to the calculation is that much of the energy input appears to come from oil and natural gas itself. So, .... in effect, you wouldn't have that energy available if you weren't in the process of extracting and refining gasoline. So it's more of a theoretical than a practical calculation.

[finman]

Ultimately, it's the whole choice thing. I'd like (as would MANY others) a choice when it comes to my transport needs. We choose what we like, what makes sense for each individual. Some will not do the math and choose an SUV in a world of $100/barrel oil. some will do the math and choose a lower-emission car, but higher intitial cost with overall lower total expense (both green $$$ and green environmentally).

I appreciate all the calulations that people run here on PriusChat. It certainly helps to choose. And to weed out the unworthy choices, based on studies and stats.

But, if you like the color of that 15-MPG vehicle, then there's not alot one can do. Or convincing people they don't need 4WD 365 days a year, when only 3-4 days a year they actually feel it's necessary. (just talked to a co-worker, and they think this way, since I mentioned the Prius is not AWD..."Nope, gotta have 4WD"...whatever)

Getting a viable EV choice is like 12 years past...I'd like to see that choice again. Especially with the new battery tech, the renewables available.

[hill]

Originally Posted by finman

Ultimately, it's the whole choice thing. I'd like
(as snip . . .

I appreciate all the calulations that people run here on PriusChat. It certainly helps to choose. And to weed out the unworthy choices, based on studies and stats.

But, if you like the color of that 15-MPG vehicle, then there's not alot one can do. Or convincing people they don't need 4WD 365 days a year, when only 3-4 days a year they actually feel it's necessary. (just talked to a co-worker, and they think this way, since I mentioned the Prius is not AWD..."Nope, gotta have 4WD"...whatever)

snip . . .

What's disturbing though, is that for (conservativly, as evidenced by european / asian vehicles) probably over 95% of the U.S. population, for most of their driving, a 15-20mpg vehicle is not only unnecessary, but having one ultimately wastes the dwindling fuel commodity. So it hurts us all. Pointing that truth out, some will still say, F everybody else ... I want what I want. That, in turn, is in part because of the ad man. The ad man doesn't lay down MILLIONS for a 30 second superbowel slot for nothng ... but because people buy into it.

Ive made the smoking analogy before, but it's true ... yes, you got a right to smoke ... but when your thing is the 2nd largest cause of lung cancer ... you put others at risk. Similarly, the smoker's med insurance costs get passed on to the rest of us. Yep, we are the ME ME ME generation.