Anti-grid power arguments
#1
03-11-2008, 06:12 AM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 5,613
Anti-grid power arguments
Hi folks,
As plug-in vehicles become real, the next set of skeptics will be using grid-power criticisms to complain about just the plug-in and EV vehicles. A double-standard, they don't see these as just another load on the grid like swimming pool motors, air-conditioners and dryers, but instead are trying to find fault with the plug-ins just as others narrow their complaints to just hybrids:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0310094555.htm
One technique of the skeptic is to change the units to unfamiliar terms:
The other technique is to ignore critical factors such as the cost of a gallon of gasoline versus a gallon of water. In Huntsville AL, we pay $0.00467 per gallon of water including sewer fee, only $0.0015 for water alone, and gasoline is running about $3.00 per gallon. There is about a 1,000 fold difference in the cost per gallon.
I'm posting this note because this is the second time I've seen this paper referenced. This means it will be picked up by the "sound machine" and echoed until enough comments come in to make it 'go away.' In the meanwhile, we are likely to see more of this paper's mischief in the future.
BTW, the original announcement about the pending paper is what is being 'edited' by the skeptics:
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journa...terplugin.html
Too often the skeptics take things out of context and fail to include facts and data that don't match their propaganda goals and objectives:
The original study authors are asking a fair question but the skeptics will pass over these "inconvenient truths" and failing to address the relative cost of water vs. gasoline. Worse, the skeptics will only see the PHEV load and ignore the other loads.
Bob Wilson
As plug-in vehicles become real, the next set of skeptics will be using grid-power criticisms to complain about just the plug-in and EV vehicles. A double-standard, they don't see these as just another load on the grid like swimming pool motors, air-conditioners and dryers, but instead are trying to find fault with the plug-ins just as others narrow their complaints to just hybrids:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0310094555.htm
Thirsty Hybrid And Electric Cars Could Triple Demands On Scarce Water Resources
ScienceDaily (Mar. 10, 2008) — Eco-minded drivers in drought-prone states take note: A new study concludes that producing electricity for hybrid and fully electric vehicles could sharply increase water consumption in the United States.
. . .
Each mile driven with electricity consumes about three times more water (0.32 versus 0.07-0.14 gallons per mile) than with gasoline, the study found.
. . .
ScienceDaily (Mar. 10, 2008) — Eco-minded drivers in drought-prone states take note: A new study concludes that producing electricity for hybrid and fully electric vehicles could sharply increase water consumption in the United States.
. . .
Each mile driven with electricity consumes about three times more water (0.32 versus 0.07-0.14 gallons per mile) than with gasoline, the study found.
. . .
0.07 gal/mile -> 14.28 MPG of water for gasoline
0.14 gal/mile -> 7.14 MPG of water for gasoline
0.32 gal/mile -> 3.125 MPG of water for electric power
Opps, corrected the numbers.0.14 gal/mile -> 7.14 MPG of water for gasoline
0.32 gal/mile -> 3.125 MPG of water for electric power
The other technique is to ignore critical factors such as the cost of a gallon of gasoline versus a gallon of water. In Huntsville AL, we pay $0.00467 per gallon of water including sewer fee, only $0.0015 for water alone, and gasoline is running about $3.00 per gallon. There is about a 1,000 fold difference in the cost per gallon.
I'm posting this note because this is the second time I've seen this paper referenced. This means it will be picked up by the "sound machine" and echoed until enough comments come in to make it 'go away.' In the meanwhile, we are likely to see more of this paper's mischief in the future.
BTW, the original announcement about the pending paper is what is being 'edited' by the skeptics:
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journa...terplugin.html
Too often the skeptics take things out of context and fail to include facts and data that don't match their propaganda goals and objectives:
Originally Posted by original_release
. . .
In California, state programs and utilities are working to bump up the number of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which would reduce air pollution and greenhouse-gas emissions. But the state is also water-stressed and its water consumption for generating electricity could grow more than 60% from 2000 to 2020, according to the Electric Power Research Institute. For example, "if Southern California Edison is going to be running a lot more power at night for plug-in hybrids, they're going to need more cooling water," Webber says. He notes that generating the electricity should not be a major problem for utilities. This squares with a recent study in ES&T, which found that "the U.S. currently has sufficient spare nighttime electricity capacity to charge a large fleet of PHEVs," enough to easily accommodate a light-duty fleet of one-third PHEVs.
"We're not trying to put a black eye on plug-ins," Webber says. "They're very appealing for a lot of reasons." They take advantage of off-peak power capacity, he notes, and they replace oil. Gleick agrees, adding that water use "is only one of the trade-offs, the most important being the emission of greenhouse gases and dependence on foreign oil."
. . .
In California, state programs and utilities are working to bump up the number of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which would reduce air pollution and greenhouse-gas emissions. But the state is also water-stressed and its water consumption for generating electricity could grow more than 60% from 2000 to 2020, according to the Electric Power Research Institute. For example, "if Southern California Edison is going to be running a lot more power at night for plug-in hybrids, they're going to need more cooling water," Webber says. He notes that generating the electricity should not be a major problem for utilities. This squares with a recent study in ES&T, which found that "the U.S. currently has sufficient spare nighttime electricity capacity to charge a large fleet of PHEVs," enough to easily accommodate a light-duty fleet of one-third PHEVs.
"We're not trying to put a black eye on plug-ins," Webber says. "They're very appealing for a lot of reasons." They take advantage of off-peak power capacity, he notes, and they replace oil. Gleick agrees, adding that water use "is only one of the trade-offs, the most important being the emission of greenhouse gases and dependence on foreign oil."
. . .
Bob Wilson
Last edited by bwilson4web; 03-11-2008 at 06:29 PM.
#2
03-11-2008, 08:19 AM
Re: Anti-grid power arguments
Hi folks,
One technique of the skeptic is to change the units to unfamiliar terms:
One technique of the skeptic is to change the units to unfamiliar terms:
0.07 gal/mile -> 14.28 MPG of gasoline
0.14 gal/mile -> 7.14 MPG of gasoline
0.32 gal/mile -> 3.125 MPG of water
This immediately calls in suspect the math as these are the mileage numbers expected from trucks, not cars. If they can't get the mileage right, how accurate could the water usage be?0.14 gal/mile -> 7.14 MPG of gasoline
0.32 gal/mile -> 3.125 MPG of water
It is important that we really explore the impact of switching to plug-in hybrids before doing it. Unexplored solutions rarely solve our problems.
#3
03-11-2008, 09:00 AM
Re: Anti-grid power arguments
Once this is realized, the question is reduced considerably. What is the most efficient use of the energy? If you turn that around a little, which way is the most efficient way to produce the energy -- on the vehicle or by utilization of a ground infrastructure? And how much of a load reduction on that ground infrastructure can be achedive by eliminating gas pumps, tanker trucks, tanker trains, pipelines and pipeline pumps, fuel producted to compensate for system losses, etc.?
#4
03-11-2008, 09:41 AM
Re: Anti-grid power arguments
It's not even water consumption. How much water does a hydro plant consume? It extracts energy from the water, but it consumes very little. In most hydrogeneration schemes, the chances are very good that the same water will be used again and again to drive an entire chain of generators at dams downstream.
Since the article won't be available until June 1, it is hard to know what the author has in mind by the term 'consumed'.
#5
03-11-2008, 06:32 PM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 5,613
Re: Anti-grid power arguments
14.28 MPG of gasoline? The article isn't talking about gasoline consumption, it is talking about water consumption. So all three of your conversions should be "of water". The difficulty here is that in neither case is the water directly consumed by the vehicle, but in the process of getting its fuel, so it is hard to see the impact.
It is important that we really explore the impact of switching to plug-in hybrids before doing it. Unexplored solutions rarely solve our problems.
It is important that we really explore the impact of switching to plug-in hybrids before doing it. Unexplored solutions rarely solve our problems.
Bob Wilson
#6
03-11-2008, 08:25 PM
Re: Anti-grid power arguments
If you want to see the paper, then click here.
After their explanation of water consumption and water withdrawal, with examples of closed-loop and open-loop cooling systems, I'm not confident that the authors even understand whether water consumption is applicable. They do not make it clear that water is being made to disappear. Certainly existing consumption in the generation of energy seems absurdly bloated. For example, in closed-loop cooling, the same water is being reused over and over again, whereas the report suggests there is a steady rate of consumption in proportion to the output. Nonsense?
Water is a pretty renewable resource. Did I miss something in my interpretation?
After their explanation of water consumption and water withdrawal, with examples of closed-loop and open-loop cooling systems, I'm not confident that the authors even understand whether water consumption is applicable. They do not make it clear that water is being made to disappear. Certainly existing consumption in the generation of energy seems absurdly bloated. For example, in closed-loop cooling, the same water is being reused over and over again, whereas the report suggests there is a steady rate of consumption in proportion to the output. Nonsense?
Water is a pretty renewable resource. Did I miss something in my interpretation?
#7
03-12-2008, 04:48 AM
Re: Anti-grid power arguments
If you want to see the paper, then click here.
After their explanation of water consumption and water withdrawal, with examples of closed-loop and open-loop cooling systems, I'm not confident that the authors even understand whether water consumption is applicable. They do not make it clear that water is being made to disappear. Certainly existing consumption in the generation of energy seems absurdly bloated. For example, in closed-loop cooling, the same water is being reused over and over again, whereas the report suggests there is a steady rate of consumption in proportion to the output. Nonsense?
Water is a pretty renewable resource. Did I miss something in my interpretation?
After their explanation of water consumption and water withdrawal, with examples of closed-loop and open-loop cooling systems, I'm not confident that the authors even understand whether water consumption is applicable. They do not make it clear that water is being made to disappear. Certainly existing consumption in the generation of energy seems absurdly bloated. For example, in closed-loop cooling, the same water is being reused over and over again, whereas the report suggests there is a steady rate of consumption in proportion to the output. Nonsense?
Water is a pretty renewable resource. Did I miss something in my interpretation?
After reading the article, it seems the authors can definitively say that water consumption applies to the mining of coal, natural gas, and uranium as well as the operation of power plants that use these fuels based on the 1995 figures they quote.
In my opinion, their suggestion to research means to use non-fresh water for power plant cooling is the most likely to relieve this problem.
Thread
Topic Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Curated Content Editor
Journalism & The Media
1
06-11-2014 11:08 PM
Jason
Hybrid & Related News
5
07-28-2007 10:15 PM
