20 kg of CO2 produced for 8.5 kg of gas oil consumed?!?!?!

[laurent_boulot]

Or a car that pollutes 200 g of CO2 / km for a consumption of 10 l per 100 km,
either the density of diesel of 850 kg / m3 (lighter than water), ie of 850 grams per liter,

Such a car traveling 100 km will have consumed:
10 liter * 0,850 kg of oil = 8,5 kg of diesel
This same car over 100 km will have produced:
100 * 0.200 kg of CO2 = 20 kg of CO2

Question: how can we produce more carbon than we consume? (difference of 11.5 kg which come from where ???)

Find my error or explain it to me!
HELP!

[Christophe]

There is no mistake ... the difference comes from the mass of oxygen.

By burning oil, the atmosphere is depleted in O2 and enriched with CO2 and H2O ...we therefore reject 3.3 to 3.6 kg of "gas" (including 1 kg of water) for 0.74 to 0.8 kg of burnt oil ...

The precise and detailed equations are here: https://www.econologie.com/equation-de-c ... s-638.html

[Capt_Maloche]

We look forward to seeing you!

It is true that I asked myself the question in front of the figures of civil aviation (in tonnes)

[abyssin3]

SI, there is a BIG error: when you consider that you have consumed 10L / 100Km, you ignore the energy cost of refining and transport (which make memory ~ 1.3L per liter of petroleum fuel consumed (according to the ademe - to be confirmed) ).
Your figures are therefore to be multiplied by two, at least ... or more than 40Kg ...

[abyssin3]

And obviously these figures are not taken into account in the official values.

[jean63]

IF, there is a BIG error: when you consider that you have consumed 10L / 100Km, you ignore the energy cost of refining and transport (which make memory ~ 1.3L per liter of petroleum fuel consumed (according to the ademe - to be confirmed)).
Your figures are therefore to be multiplied by two, at least ... or more than 40Kg ...

And obviously these figures are not taken into account in the official values.

And this is how in the end, the diesel must send more CO2 than the LPG (relatively clean: no NOx, no particles, no sulfur, no benzene, ....) which requires little or no refining ...? ? isn'it? who can answer? abyssin3? Lumberjack STP? where are you ?

Christophe: a comparison between the different fuels, that interests me .... thank you.

[pluesy]

you ignore the energy cost of refining and transport (which make memory ~ 1.3L per liter of petroleum fuel consumed (according to the ademe - to be confirmed)).

it seems to me bisard this story ... we spend 1.3l to extract refine and transport 1l it is not worth it to extract then ... I imagine in my head a machine or I put 1.3l of go I press a button and 10mn after the tank and empty but I extracted 1l of morality go in the history I lost 0.3l of go ...

second hypothesis I always put 1.3l in my machine to extract and refine and 10 min after the tank is empty but this time I extracted 2.3l of these 2.3l I punctured 1.3 l to extract the next 2.3 liter from where I will puncture 1.3l etc ...

in my opinion this last scenario and the good but in this case the real figure is that we spent for each liter extracted (1.3 / 2.3) 0.56l

it is more plausible if I put 0.56l in my machine I recover 1L so I have a gain of 0.44L ... (it is profitable to extract ...)

but it is true that in toltal there will have been 2.3l of burnt in the atmosphere when I will have burned my 1L

[Christophe]

SI, there is a BIG error: when you consider that you have consumed 10L / 100Km, you ignore the energy cost of refining and transport (which make memory ~ 1.3L per liter of petroleum fuel consumed (according to the ademe - to be confirmed) )

This is absolutely true ... but 1.3 is a little exaggerated, in fact the value varies between 1.15 and 1.3 depending on the source (must the energy be reinjected into the well?) And the quality of the oil (the more heavier the more it must be refined and therefore energy cost) and ... the age of the refinery ... (the more modern it is, the better its "efficiency")

In this doc they talk about 1.17:
https://www.econologie.com/agriculture-b ... -3503.html

Your figures are therefore to be multiplied by two, at least ... or more than 40Kg ...

Uh, I don't really understand ... multiply by 1.3 ok but by 2 ???

[Christophe]

it seems to me bisard this story ... we spend 1.3l to extract refine and transport 1l it is not worth it to extract then ...

(...)

but it is true that in toltal there will have been 2.3l of burnt in the atmosphere when I will have burned my 1L

No it's not 1 + 1.3 it's 1.3 "gross" = 1 "use" !!

Obviously because exceeded 2 ca is more "the blow" (at the level of the well only) ... since there would remain only "0" of finished product!

[Christophe]

Christophe: a comparison between the different fuels, that interests me .... thank you.

Well at the pure combustion level, you can very well do it with the combustion equations: https://www.econologie.com/equation-de-c ... s-638.html

Just find the "n" average carbon atom for LPG ...

The advantage of LPG is that, if it is not used in cars, it is burnt in the flares of refineries !! So it's very beneficial to use it at the global CO2 level ... it is still necessary that the refinery is planned to make LPG ... which is not the case for all refineries ...