Carbon footprint clarification

[kgb]

I'm sure it's somewhere here in the forums, but I wasn't able to find it. I wanted clarification about the carbon emissions question.

The statement that an electric vehicle emits less carbon per mile is backed up by what evidence?

Specifically, I realize that the coal burning power plant emits a certain amount of carbon for each kwatt produced. And I realize that the EV uses a certain amount of kwatt to move the EV each mile. On the other hand, an ICE has certain tailpipe emissions.

I would like a start to finish comparison of the cabon footprint for EV vs. ICE.

Starting with the assumption that we are using existing coal mines and existing oil wells.

FOR ICE: Carbon emitted...
extracting and storing the oil,
shipping the oil by tanker,
refining the oil to gasoline,
shipping the gasoline to the gas station, then
burning it in the ICE

FOR EV: Carbon emitted...
extracting the coal,
shipping the coal,
burning the coal to make electricity,
transmitting the electricity via power lines through transformers etc...,
energy loss via charging the battery, then
energy used in the electric engine

Let's start with that, later we can discuss the amount of carbon used in the manufacture and recycling of ICE vs. electric engine & battery.

[Kevin Sharpe]

Starting with the assumption that we are using existing coal mines and existing oil wells.

Why? Some of us drive electric because we can use 100% renewable energy...

[kgb]

Why? Some of us drive electric because we can use 100% renewable energy...

Worst case scenario. Also, I live in USA where we pay more to have our coal electricity branded as "renewable."

[felix the cat]

This has been discussed before several times. Latest thread see here:

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showt...-vs-Diesel?hig

But many of the comparisons doesn't take into account the energy, which is needed to produce oil, refine it and transport. If you know that more and more of the oil is coming from non conventional sources like deep seawater oil, canadas oil sands the energy invested to produce the oil is increasing steadily, worldwide! Hence things are getting worse and worse for the petrol powered cars, while for the electric car it's getting better and better, as we are scaling up renewable energy sources.

I'm driving an electric scooter. It "burns" 40wh per km or 60 wh per mile. For the E-scooter driven with electricity from coal this would come down to 40gCO2/km or 60gCO2/mile. which is considerably less than a gaz-scooter (100gCO2/km), taking into account the energy to produce and refine the oil even 130gCO2/km or 195g/mile.

As the electric drivetrains gets into the mass market, lightweight vehicles with better drag coefficent as the roadster - or my electric scooter - will be developed, the efficiency can even be two times better than now. Those vehicles will also have a better range as a further advantage to conventional electrified vehicles.

The electric drivetrain is definitely the way to go, as it will induce the development of cars and vehicles with higher efficiency!

[rolosrevenge]

The fallacy with comparisons with coal is that there is no utility in North America that is powered 100% by coal. This is because of interconnection and this little thing known as Kirchhoff's Current Law. From this law we learn that because of interconnection, a hydro plant some 500 miles away from your outlet is providing some small fraction of the power that you receive. The same goes for any power plant in the US. Therefore, 100% coal is not only a worst case analysis, but an unattainable worst case analysis. The same also goes for anyone's claim of 100% renewable energy. Unless they are in a stand alone system, not connected to the grid in any way, they are getting some dirty power.

[Kevin Sharpe]

The same also goes for anyone's claim of 100% renewable energy. Unless they are in a stand alone system, not connected to the grid in any way, they are getting some dirty power.

I only purchase 100% renewable energy from a company who only sells 100% renewable energy, so I think I can claim to be using 100% renewable's.... I appreciate that the electrons I receive from the grid come from multiple sources (including some that are 'dirty') but if that's your argument then I don't really know what to say...

Personally, I just wish that users of 'my' grid would stop contaminating it by purchasing 'dirty' electricity

[kgb]

Although this isn't the direction I wanted this thread to go, I'll bite...

I find it disappointing, yet slightly humorous, that my electric provider will sell electricity to me at one price if I agree that it is from coal, but they will sell me the same electricity to me at a higher price if I agree that it is from renewable sources. Believe me, I want renewable sources, but it is all the same electricity... so I opt for the less expensive electricity. That is, until I get my solar panels installed!

[kgb]

This has been discussed before several times. Latest thread see here:

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showt...-vs-Diesel?hig

That thread does not take into consideration the production and distribution of hydrocarbon vs. electricity. I was just wondering if someone actually did the analysis of carbon/mile for each natural resource from the time it is pulled from the earth through the time it pushes a car. If we only look at part of the supply chain, we get a distorted picture. The prime example, if we look at the carbon foot print from tailpipes only, the EV has 0 carbon exhaust.

Let me be more clear, I could look up all the numbers and do the basic multiplication, but that would take hours. So, does anyone actually know the numbers next to each step...

FOR ICE: Carbon emitted...
extracting and storing the oil,
shipping the oil by tanker,
refining the oil to gasoline,
shipping the gasoline to the gas station, then
burning it in the ICE

FOR EV: Carbon emitted...
extracting the coal,
shipping the coal,
burning the coal to make electricity,
transmitting the electricity via power lines through transformers etc...,
energy loss via charging the battery, then
energy used in the electric engine

If you know one chime in... I'll do the multiplication. Thanks.

[ChadS]

Here's a meta-analysis of about 40 studies: http://www.sherryboschert.com/Downloads/Emissions.pdf

[mt2]

What you are talking about is the old "long tailpipe" argument and it's counterpoint, the "well to wheel" analysis. No need for you to do the math. A Google search for "well to wheel" will give you tons of conflicting research papers. I find this presentation on the GREET model cuts to the chase, http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/273.pdf. Page three summarizes nicely.

Note that the presentation was done in 2003 and our dependence on coal has dropped five or six percentage points since then. I don't have exact numbers but 48% coal is often quoted based on the DoE 2008 statistics. It continues to drop as older plants are modernized or taken off line.