NO_MO_BAMA [High Praise!] left this in the comments, and I thought it deserved a little more attention:
______________
Sources conflict on the number of pounds of coal to create a kWh of electricity:
* Dept. of Energy: 2.1 lbs.
* Arizona Public Service Company: 1.1 lbs.
* CoalEducation.org: 0.8 lbs. (big surprise that the coal industry claims the greatest efficiency)
Transmission and distribution losses are estimated to be 7.2%, so our adjusted figures would be 2.25, 1.18, and 0.86 lbs. per kWh respectively.
An average household uses around 920 kWh/mo. If they got all their electricity from burning coal, that’s 2070 to 791 pounds of coal per month.
(Incidentally, coal-fired plants are only 37-44% efficient at converting coal to electricity.)
The MINI-E has a 35 kWh battery pack but only 80% of the pack is usable which means it has 28kWh of available power. That 28kWh can move the car between 90 and 120 miles depending on how efficiently you drive. It is less in the winter months because the heater uses a lot of energy, but for most of the year these numbers are correct as an average.
Therefore: it takes up to 63 POUNDS of coal to go 90 miles!
hmmmmmmmm… I wonder what pollutes more…burning 63 lbs of coal or 3 gallons of gas?… hmmmmm…
______________
UPDATE: Linked by TexAgs.com
…18 lbs of gas.
The discrepancy in the “sources” you note is due to the wide variation in BTUs (British Thermal Units) per pound of coal. Many plants in the US, in order to comply with EPA regs, use low-sulfur coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming. This coal has a thermal rating of about 8,800 BTU/lb. Appalachian coal, with higher sulfur, is much higher at 13,000 BTU/lb.
And, coal-fired power plants convert this coal to KWH at widely-varying rates, from the low 9000s BTU/KWH to as much as 14,000 BTU/KWH for older plants. So, for example, a 10,000 BTU/KWH plant on 10,000 BTU/lb coal would burn 1 pound of coal for each KWH.
Even in the worst scenario, there’s no way you’d use 2+ pounds of coal to get a KWH. Obviously, the feds are f’d up as usual.
I’m not going to do the math on your final question, but in order for it to be a fair comparison, please factor in the costs and energy of getting the oil out of the ground, transported to a refinery, distilled into gasoline, and distributed to your local gas station. Coal is basically dug up, loaded on a train, and carried to the power plant ready for burning.
And most coal plants are pretty clean-burning, despite what the envirowackos claim. The better you convert coal to KWH, the more profit there is in it. So, I’d just gently suggest that your intended point is not quite so obvious.
It’s funny how the left is all about “natural” sources of energy, like man-made batteries, as an alternative to oil…an entirely natural source of energy.
Weight of gasoline is approximately 6 pounds per gallon, so you are talking about 18 pounds of gasoline compared to 63 pounds of coal. Assuming that gasoline was 100% hydrocarbon (it isn’t, but just for argument’s sake assume it is) the gasoline would turn into water vapor and carbon dioxide. In the 18 pounds of gasoline, we are looking at a maximum weight of 16.6 pounds of carbon and 1.4 pounds of hydrogen. The 16.6 pounds of carbon would produce a maximum amount of 60.9 lbs of carbon dioxide. Now, assume the coal was pure carbon. 63 lbs of coal would produce 237 lbs of carbon dioxide. So, if you are concerned with carbon dioxide emissions, then of course you want to go with the electric car … if and only if you are a brain-dead watermelon environmentalist.
“Coal is basically dug up, loaded on a train, and carried to the power plant ready for burning.” To dig it out of the ground requires diesel fuel for the generators for the air compressors to run the drills, generators for the electrified trains and lifts to get the coal to the surface, diesel for the crushing machines, more diesel for the trains to transport the coal from the mine to the generating plant. That is assuming an underground mine. If the mine is an open pit mine, then you have diesel for the digging machines, diesel for the dump trucks, diesel for the crushing machines, and then for the trains to transport. If you want to add the production costs of the gasoline, add the production costs of the coal, too.
OK, I went back after dinner and checked your math. You have leapt to an error. With my 1 pound ~ 1 KWH note earlier, even with 7% losses (on the high side), you’re only talking about 1.07 pounds per KWH. With your example of the MINI-E using 28 KWH, that’s only 30 pounds of coal, NOT 63 pounds.
And Ogrrre made the assumption that 100% of the pounds of coal burned is hydrocarbons. In reality, a 10,000 BTU coal is only about 60% carbon. So, for 30 pounds of coal burned to power your MINI-E, only 66 pounds of carbon dioxide is generated by the coal that generated it, versus 60.9 for gasoline.
Suddenly, things become much less obvious, don’t you think? My point is not to support the greenie-weenies, but rather to make you understand that electricity is still a really good value, and as environmentally-impactful as other forms of energy.
And for Ogrrre: The energy used to extract the coal is a minor fraction of the energy harvested. It’s a more-significant fraction for oil conversion to gasoline. My point was just to include everything when going from dirt to wheels. I completely agree that all of that mining work is necessary, just as it’s necessary to drill, baby, drill.
If car manufactures cared about efficiency they put out a modified hybrid car with an eclectic motor that runs the whole car and a small gas or diesel generator which only kicks on to recharge the battery when it gets to a set low point such as a 5-10% charge.
That being said, my dream car is still a ’69 Chevelle SS.
Hey, that electricity could come from more green sources, such as wind turbines. Why don’t you re-run the numbers to see how many diced bald eagles that is to go 90 miles?
Let’s cut the bulls**t people…everyone knows 3 gallons of gasoline creates waaay more pollution than 63 lbs. of coal. And if you don’t like diced eagles take that up with the EPA…that’s not my department. ~ Carol Browner, Energy Czar to the stars.
Neither pollutes more. They’re both fine by me!
I just want chrome bumpers, tailfins, and leaded gasoline back.
at the governments claim of 2 lbs per kwh, that’s why I said UP TO 63 lbs
Eliminate the middle-man, coal powered steam-mobiles.