I'm not against electric cars ...
but I do not want to make bougli bougla ...
the efficiency of the fuel energy chain at the wheel is unfavorable to electric traction
https://www.econologie.com/forums/bilan-envi ... 71-10.html
on the other hand, it is true that the heat engine is badly used in the city for example, so that roughly VE, powered by carbonaceous electricity and VT are kif kif emissions CO2 and, including the nuke, thermal release of primary energy.
NEVER mix thermal kWh and electric kWh to compare a VT and an EV.
Now, it is not in 3 posts that we can decide the VT / VE comparative question ...
The EV has a clear advantage only in the case of a 100% renewable (or highly "carbon-free") electricity mix, which is hardly the case in developed countries.
If we take into account the complete life cycle of the vehicle, the situation is even more complex because the gray energy of the batteries is not negligible, even supposing the recycling, it is necessary to produce them a first time with heavy metal sampling / refining.
Cogeneration is a different subject, but I do not like to go from cock to donkey ...
@+
Electric car: power, autonomy, consumption?
Remundo wrote:The EV has a clear advantage only in the case of a 100% renewable (or highly "carbon-free") electricity mix, which is hardly the case in developed countries.
So really look what's happening in developed countries:
VTs run in traffic jams and / or cold.
They have a yield of less than 10%. Even the worst power plants have better performance.
That's the reality.
You give un link on the comparison of the VT / VE yields, but this link gives a VT yield of the tank at the 35% wheel.
If this were the case, we would not have VTs that consume 10l / 100 (~ 100kwh / 100). And yet VT that consume that there are every morning in the streets.
Remundo wrote:Cogeneration is a different subject, but I do not like to go from cock to donkey ...
The energy problem is a global problem ...
But be it. Why are you buying a Golf GTE
You will inevitably deteriorate the performance of your engine, since you weigh down your car with a very big battery ... If the thermal is so good, no need for him add 200kg battery and motor ...
You also deteriorate the performance of an electric car (which, you say, would not be good) since you weigh down your car with a big heat engine.
I do not see the logic ...
0 x
Solar Production + VE + VAE = short cycle electricity
bamboo wrote:Remundo wrote:The EV has a clear advantage only in the case of a 100% renewable (or highly "carbon-free") electricity mix, which is hardly the case in developed countries.
So really look what's happening in developed countries:
VTs run in traffic jams and / or cold.
They have a yield of less than 10%. Even the worst power plants have better performance.
That's the reality.
In town, yes,
but we do not always drive in town. An engine with full load and half speed has an optimal specific fuel consumption in g / kWh (also results in optimum emissions in g CO2 / kWh).
The problem is that the current engines are too powerful, to put them in full load and mid-speed, we drive too fast (and we consume energy to overcome aerodynamic friction.
That's why you have to hybridize a SMALL motor to charge the battery pack. 35% is the efficiency of a diesel engine at full load and half speed. No more than 30 or 40 Ch. Allow you to drive without stopping at a good pace (90 km / h)
.
Remundo wrote:Cogeneration is a different subject, but I do not like to go from cock to donkey ...
The energy problem is a global problem ...
But be it. Why are you buying a Golf GTE
You will inevitably deteriorate the performance of your engine, since you weigh down your car with a very big battery ... If the thermal is so good, no need for him add 200kg battery and motor ...
You also deteriorate the performance of an electric car (which, you say, would not be good) since you weigh down your car with a big heat engine.
I do not see the logic ...
the Golf GTE is not perfect. It is not that heavy (1520 kg). It is a "half" sport ... which consumes 2L / 100 km in the uses that I will make of it, + electrical energy (which I have, renewable). That's why I took this car. But I don't make it a religion ...
You're just looking for lice and you're constantly changing the subject ...
The starting subject is:
1) we do not confuse thermal and electrical kWh
2) VE and VT are in the current electric mix, and a fortiori on their life cycle about as polluting each other.
VE advantage in terms of silence and no polluting emissions in the city ...
0 x
- chatelot16
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6960
- Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
- Location: Angouleme
- x 264
a good thermal power station can have a yield of 50% at its optimum power, but is not all the day at the maximum ... there is still the advantage that EDF manages the powering of the power plants to do the best possible , while with the engine of his car we do what we can
there is a more serious problem: the weight of the battery that requires energy to transport ... it does not figure in performance! a super battery that will have a yield of 99% but would be very heavy would be catastrophic: the battery will have no loss of energy but would lose a lot for the trainer
the weight of the battery can not be compared to a yield because it depends on the autonomy neccessaire
when you need a little autonomy the battery weight can be low and the electricity is perfect
the longer one wants a long autonomy the more the electricity is absurd because one increases the power to transport the battery: one arrives at electric cars which are profitable only thanks to the low price of the electricity less taxed that the essence
it would be enough to tax electricity equal to gasoline to stop all electric cars!
battery power should be used mainly for low-power vehicles: lawn tractor, forklift, electric-assisted bike ... this is not the future solution for an all-purpose car, but it is a solution for those who make some use of their car
there is a more serious problem: the weight of the battery that requires energy to transport ... it does not figure in performance! a super battery that will have a yield of 99% but would be very heavy would be catastrophic: the battery will have no loss of energy but would lose a lot for the trainer
the weight of the battery can not be compared to a yield because it depends on the autonomy neccessaire
when you need a little autonomy the battery weight can be low and the electricity is perfect
the longer one wants a long autonomy the more the electricity is absurd because one increases the power to transport the battery: one arrives at electric cars which are profitable only thanks to the low price of the electricity less taxed that the essence
it would be enough to tax electricity equal to gasoline to stop all electric cars!
battery power should be used mainly for low-power vehicles: lawn tractor, forklift, electric-assisted bike ... this is not the future solution for an all-purpose car, but it is a solution for those who make some use of their car
0 x
chatelot16 wrote:a good thermal power plant can have a yield of 50% at its optimum power, but is not every day at most ...
a little optimistic anyway, possible with combined cycle plants ... Most power plants revolve around 35% at best.
there is a more serious problem: the weight of the battery that requires energy to transport ... it does not figure in performance! a super battery that will have a yield of 99% but would be very heavy would be catastrophic: the battery will have no loss of energy but would lose a lot for the trainer
the weight of the battery can not be compared to a yield because it depends on the autonomy neccessaire
when you need a little autonomy the battery weight can be low and the electricity is perfect
the longer one wants a long autonomy the more the electricity is absurd because one increases the power to transport the battery: one arrives at electric cars which are profitable only thanks to the low price of the electricity less taxed that the essence
You can move a lot of weight with very little energy. See eg the railway. The car equivalent is a very hard tire and neat bearings.
That said I agree that we should not want too many batteries. Beyond 100 / 150km autnomy (between 24 and 36 kWh of batteries) the thermal generator is preferred. With only 30 Ch., You can drive from 70 to 80 km / h average in a typical car.
it would be enough to tax electricity equal to gasoline to stop all electric cars!
it is true that most of the attractiveness of EV is on electricity that is not taxed at the same height as transport hydrocarbons.
0 x
- elephant
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6646
- Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
- Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
- x 7
Basically, what do you think of this opinion:
http://www.franceinfo.fr/emission/le-vr ... 2015-07-41
in particular, what makes me doubt is the end: 22 tons of CO2 on 150.000 km.
With the current consos, it only takes 9 tons of GO to make 150.000 km. it makes 22 tons of CO2 ???
http://www.franceinfo.fr/emission/le-vr ... 2015-07-41
in particular, what makes me doubt is the end: 22 tons of CO2 on 150.000 km.
With the current consos, it only takes 9 tons of GO to make 150.000 km. it makes 22 tons of CO2 ???
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
The chemical equation gives 3,16 kg of CO2 per kg of GO (it is heavy oxygen).elephant wrote:With the current consos, it only takes 9 tons of GO to make 150.000 km. it makes 22 tons of CO2 ???
So it takes "only" 7 tonnes of GO to produce 22 tonnes of CO2 (an average consumption of 5,5 liters / 100 km over 150000 km)
0 x
+ 1 Gaston
And for gasoline, if you consider the isooctane C8H18
Molar mass: 8 x 12 + 18 = 96 + 18 = 114 g / mol
8 carbons will generate 8 CO2: either 8 x (12 + 2x16) = 8 x 46 = 368 g / mol
So the ratio: mass CO2 emitted / mass caburant is of the order of 368 / 114 = 3.22
In addition to clear, 10 tons of gasoline produce 32 tons of CO2 after combustion.
elephant wrote:Basically, what do you think of this opinion:
http://www.franceinfo.fr/emission/le-vr ... 2015-07-41
in particular, what makes me doubt is the end: 22 tons of CO2 on 150.000 km.
With the current consos, it only takes 9 tons of GO to make 150.000 km. it makes 22 tons of CO2 ???
And for gasoline, if you consider the isooctane C8H18
Molar mass: 8 x 12 + 18 = 96 + 18 = 114 g / mol
8 carbons will generate 8 CO2: either 8 x (12 + 2x16) = 8 x 46 = 368 g / mol
So the ratio: mass CO2 emitted / mass caburant is of the order of 368 / 114 = 3.22
In addition to clear, 10 tons of gasoline produce 32 tons of CO2 after combustion.
0 x
- elephant
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6646
- Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
- Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
- x 7
OK, thanks
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
-
- Similar topics
- Replies
- views
- Last message
-
- 8 Replies
- 735 views
-
Last message by izentrop
View the latest post
14/02/24, 21:50A subject posted in the forum : electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ...
-
- 9 Replies
- 1738 views
-
Last message by phil59
View the latest post
06/05/23, 13:39A subject posted in the forum : electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ...
-
- 10 Replies
- 3196 views
-
Last message by Christophe
View the latest post
18/10/22, 00:08A subject posted in the forum : electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ...
-
- 61 Replies
- 9746 views
-
Last message by phil59
View the latest post
13/08/22, 17:08A subject posted in the forum : electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ...
-
- 3 Replies
- 6856 views
-
Last message by phil59
View the latest post
16/02/22, 14:54A subject posted in the forum : electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ...
Back to "Electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ..."
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 175 guests