Skip to content
Aussieveedubbers

Aircooled, 0 – 100 in about 4sec, 135mpg!!

0 likes
Share Share on Facebook Share on X Share on Reddit
Log in to reply

pete wood 23 Windows of Awesome

6,828 posts · joined Jan 2004 ·

#566815
mmm, interesting. they are fooling themselves if they think that electric means not burning fossil fuel, in reality you are just swapping petrol for coal.

but as you rightly say, easily replaced with something aircooled. 😉
"stoopid is stronger than axles"
http://drivingnotpolishing.blogspot.com.au/

woz_mnskmobi Casual Dubber

32 posts · joined Sep 2006 ·

#566851
pete wood wrote:mmm, interesting. they are fooling themselves if they think that electric means not burning fossil fuel, in reality you are just swapping petrol for coal...
Funny. All my power comes from the wind!🙄🙄🙄

aggri1 Insano Dub Head

824 posts · joined Dec 2003 ·

#566857
Yeah I don't know what the environmental argument might be.

Hmmm, say we charge with electricity produced by coal. Assume the coal power is 17% efficient by the time it reaches a home (old mate of mine from SEC). Assume then that the vehicle is 100% efficient (not realistic). Modern efficient petrol (or diesel) is... what 25%-30% efficient?

The electric power therefore produces more emissions, assuming similar driving behaviour (speeds).

Further, the burning of coal produces lots of horrid SOx (makes acid rain) and other stuff which is not present in most fuels. Especially now that extra-low-sulphur diesel is available.

Seems like a bit of a daft concept to me, wank factor "look at me I'm environmental", at least here in Australia. Unless you have a 'renewable' energy power contract. Then it's nice. I guess nuclear might result in lower CO2 emissions, but that has other problems all of its own.

Not trying to be negative mind. Ride a bike if you're worried. I do.

Cheers, A.

modulus Veteran Volks Folk

2,009 posts · joined Jul 2003 ·

#566879
>>Assume the coal power is 17% efficient by the time it reaches a home
Fossil-fueled steam-generating power stations (like those in Yallourn) are about 33-35% thermal efficient. Line losses in the US and UK are 7-8% - let's say 8% for Australia -> 31% overall thermal efficiency at point of delivery

>>Assume then that the vehicle is 100% efficient (not realistic).
It's not realistic, but it doesn't matter that much since the same or similar vehicle efficiency would need to be applied to the petroleum-powered car as well, not just to the electric car

>>Modern efficient petrol (or diesel) is... what 25%-30% efficient?
That's about right - diesels might get up into the 35% range. But now you're comparing apples with bicycles; you need to determine the overall thermal efficiency of gasoline/diesel production from well-head through refinery to bowser to have an equivalent basis for comparison to the thermal efficiency of coal-fired electricity - this will be substantially less than 25%

Looks like the electric comes out ahead on the basis of thermal efficiency and, possibly, emissions. Still, as you say, coal burning is a nasty business.


>>Ride a bike if you're worried.
Amen to that! (although I let fly a fair bit of methane on steep hills).
Peter Hill
1975 Type 2 Double Cab
modulus.com.au

sinecure Want another... :(

1,031 posts · joined Mar 2006 ·

#566923
MMMMMMMMMM, Tesla Roadster, YES PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A POSSE AD ESSE.

I live in my own little world, but it's okay, they know me here.

Che Castro ankle straps

1,945 posts · joined Aug 2002 ·

#566937
nicecar. re the environmental argument: what about the environmental cost of extracting crude oil and refining that into petrol though? Then also the environmental cost associated with the infrastructure needed to deliver it to it's source?
Jon

shaihulud Custom Title Time!

1,448 posts · joined Nov 2005 ·

#566987
Good point Che. We must take into account the greenhouse gasses produced in international trade, especially the transshipment of liquid and gasseous fuels. Even the amount of pollution caused to create the steel or plastic for a gas or oil pipiline and then putting it in the ground, must be in the calculations.

On TV recently, I recently saw Peter Costello question world trade and therefore globalism on environmental grounds. I could hardly believe my ears. He's a true believer in globalism. Hopefully they will eventually get the message. Faint hope!