DOE tool to compare cost of electricity versus gasoline

[corwin]

Would be nice if they actually let you input the local gas and electricity price. Or am I missing something?

I would buy an electric car if they 1: were actually easily available and 2: decently priced. Would be awesome to not have to pay for gas again, and know that I'm reducing my carbon footprint.

Carbon footprint isn't addressed here (that I noticed), just cost per "eGallon"...anybody have a comparison of the carbon emissions to produce an "eGallon" of electricity compared to a gallon of gas?

 

[werepossum]

Power companies have a pretty good handle on demand projected outward and don't build excess capacity until its needed. Otherwise it just wastes their money.

In New York City, iirc, after years of problems meeting peak summertime demand the city bought some diesel generators that cost a lot to run but are only used on the most peak demand times.
There are companies who use a lot of electricity who get a discount because they have agreed to shut down when the electric company asks them to during peak demand.

The enormous amount of electricity that even a few percent total of cars being electric is going to cause great difficulties in some areas.

This is probably true, but in twenty years of AEC engineering work from border to border and coast to coast I've seen exactly one situation where grid capacity came up short and we had to provide peak co-generation. (As opposed to voluntarily adopting co-generation to lower demand charges.) I'd say rather than causing great difficulties, a few percent of cars being all-electric would require a lot more grid-connected solar, which is already more popular than point-of-use solar in my limited experience. As Train points out, solar produces at its peak during traditional peak load periods. Also, conditions such as rain or snow or overcast, which degrade solar output, also degrade load. JTsyo's point about needing practical superconductors is valid, but cheap solar cells at current efficiencies could solve much of our problem.

The real strength of gas/diesel is the incredible energy density.

That's a luxury we'll just have to get away from to get cleaner.

Good point, and I suspect you are correct. At this point no one knows how we'll solve that problem short of high temp superconductors and light weight high-density batteries, so assuming we'll have to live with more inconvenience is reasonable. Although in the short term, plug-in hybrids involve practically no inconvenience, just more up-front cost. Technically of course one can easily get around that using hydrogen ICEs, plug-in hybrids, or fuel cells, although currently the net energy loss between generation and consumption would mandate a lot more generation than we would otherwise need. Unless large scale biological or chemical hydrogen production becomes practical, that won't change.

You completely missed the point. We have capacity issues in part because residential users pay a blended rate where it doesn't matter when the electricity is used. So people air condition their houses when they're not home all day. Or leave their cars plugged in all day.

Instead of a blended rate that people currently pay, if they were exposed to something resembling the actual hourly market rate they would change their behavior so as to not plug in their car at 4 in the afternoon in the middle of july. You're not doing that if you're paying anywhere near the actual rate for that time of $4+ per kwh, rather than just paying the $0.12 blended rate. Just doing that one change solves a lot of capacity issues.

I've never seen a situation where any commercial customer was paying much more than double the wholesale kWh rate for electricity including the demand, and generally it's less. The last demand source to come on line might well be $4/kWh - I can remember a California plant which was $54/kWh including the $50/kWh dirty tax - but remember, those sources comprise a tiny fraction of the total power consumed. Also, the market is moving toward time-of-use demand charges for residential as well - fiber optics, wireless, and modern electronics & computers now make this practical - and that will drive home, commercial, and free-standing grid-connected solar since if you're billed at higher rates during peak demand periods, the utility must also buy power from you at higher rates during peak demand periods. This will also drive smart appliance acceptance rates and time-shifted energy use (e.g. ice-plant refrigeration) and production (e.g. co-generation for commercial demand shaving and solar installations.)

 

[werepossum]

Carbon footprint isn't addressed here (that I noticed), just cost per "eGallon"...anybody have a comparison of the carbon emissions to produce an "eGallon" of electricity compared to a gallon of gas?

It would be extremely difficult to come up with an accurate hard figure for that. For instance, in Tennessee night time electricity is largely generated with hydro and nuclear, neither of which have really significant carbon foot-prints. On the other hand, when the low is 85 (limits or shuts down nuclear production) and there's a drought (limits or shuts down hydro production) we might well be generating most of our night time electricity with coal or natural gas. But in any case, an eGallon almost certainly always has a big advantage over gasoline.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

I wonder how expensive fuel will need to be before people will begin to be open minded about nuclear alternatives? It's not an area I know much about, but NASA can already create small high-power generators. Something like that, even heavily shielded, might serve to power a car or truck and still weigh less than the equivalent storage system.

nuclear materials are pretty cheap (as well as carrying a massive energy density) ; the massive infrastructure and expertise needed certainly are not. the lack of any long-term disposal will prevent almost all growth in that field. also, the nuclear power industry has always been subsidised by the war industry - plutonium, depleted uranium, maybe some medical and scientific customers as well. keep in mind a fuel rod is no good once it reaches about 95% fissile content, and you can burn up that 5% as fast as you like.

RTG's are simply not an option for widespread use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator

forget the materials, you're looking at a couple tons to get 50 watts, and that's with "of course it's safe" military units. 1 horsepower is about 750 watts.

 

[Bacstar]

I think chemical batteries are a dead end, and something completely radical needs to be discovered.

http://gigaom.com/2011/07/12/how-ultracapacitors-work-and-why-they-fall-short/

I was watching Stardust the other night, and thinking of the part where the sky pirates were bottling up lightning for sale.

 

[corwin]

It would be extremely difficult to come up with an accurate hard figure for that. For instance, in Tennessee night time electricity is largely generated with hydro and nuclear, neither of which have really significant carbon foot-prints. On the other hand, when the low is 85 (limits or shuts down nuclear production) and there's a drought (limits or shuts down hydro production) we might well be generating most of our night time electricity with coal or natural gas. But in any case, an eGallon almost certainly always has a big advantage over gasoline.

Maybe...but then you have the production and waste from making the batteries and eventually replacing them etc. Current tech is just not there for them being a viable replacement and the carbon footprint might not be all that much better...at least not significantly so when all things are considered. In any case I couldn't live with the restrictions they have currently in any way, size, power, and distance limitations are all deal breakers.

 

[jagec]

I couldn't disagree more. Large industrial users pay far less than individuals do.

I didn't say that they PAID more, but that they pay closer to the costs of serving them. And I doubt that your average bill for a large industrial user would be less than for a household...on a kWh basis, maybe, but that's only one factor in electricity pricing.

You don't seem to understand how electricity generation works...coal/nuclear/hydro plants can produce large amounts of electricity for very cheaply, but they can't ramp up or down easily, nor do we have enough of them to satisfy peak demand. So the "next" kWh gets produced by a NG plant, which costs more per kWh...and the spot price of electricity goes up. If we could somehow smooth out electricity use so that we used EXACTLY what the coal/hydro/nuclear plants could produce at peak efficiency, 100% of the time, electricity WOULD only cost $0.04/kWh or so. But we can't, so residential customers pay a blended cost, and industrial customers pay that $0.04/kWh, plus a demand charge, plus an infrastructure charge, plus a power factor charge, etc, etc.

If you ran an industrial-sized electric arc furnace at 4PM on weekdays for 3 hours a day, I bet your bill would be higher per kWh than a residence...

Long-haul trains and trucks don't electrify well.

Europe disagrees with you there.

So everybody has to use the same battery...and just hope a station isn't out of charged ones when you happen to drop by...no thanks.

"So everyone has to use the same type of fuel...and just hope that a station doesn't run out when you happen to drop by? No thanks."

Funny, I can't remember the last time that I stopped at a gas station that had run dry, or that was selling xylene when I needed gasoline. Standardization and supply chains work.

 

[techs]

I didn't say that they PAID more, but that they pay closer to the costs of serving them. And I doubt that your average bill for a large industrial user would be less than for a household...on a kWh basis, maybe, but that's only one factor in electricity pricing.

It's probably been six or seven years since I read it, but there was a big piece on electricity pricing by someone like Forbes. Basically companies that use a lot of electricity are given very low rates by power companies. The assumption is that when you use a lot of electricity even a small differential in rates could cause a company to change locations. Unlike a homeowner or even an office building. So its been traditional for electrical producers to charge very cheap prices for businesses with the idea that the more manufacturers, the more people, the more electricity they can sell to homeowners who will not necessarily move based on a small differential in electric prices.

Also, large electrical users have the ability to actually generate their own electricity at far cheaper rates than homeowners due to their large use. So, electrical power companies always must keep their rates below what if would cost for a company to build its own capacity.

 

[jagec]

It's probably been six or seven years since I read it, but there was a big piece on electricity pricing by someone like Forbes. Basically companies that use a lot of electricity are given very low rates by power companies. The assumption is that when you use a lot of electricity even a small differential in rates could cause a company to change locations. Unlike a homeowner or even an office building. So its been traditional for electrical producers to charge very cheap prices for businesses with the idea that the more manufacturers, the more people, the more electricity they can sell to homeowners who will not necessarily move based on a small differential in electric prices.

Also, large electrical users have the ability to actually generate their own electricity at far cheaper rates than homeowners due to their large use. So, electrical power companies always must keep their rates below what if would cost for a company to build its own capacity.

There may well be more of a profit margin with residential accounts, but industrial users aren't getting below-production-cost electricity, that's for damn sure.

 

[techs]

There may well be more of a profit margin with residential accounts, but industrial users aren't getting below-production-cost electricity, that's for damn sure.

Well, many people get below production cost electricity. Power companies make a few percent profit. The cost to deliver electricity is different to different communities and homes and small businesses. Since they rates don't take into account the cost of each individual there are certainly many, many places that cost slightly more to deliver power to and therefore the power company "loses" money on those people and businesses. And large electrical users fall into that category.

 

[Crusty]

So everybody has to use the same battery...and just hope a station isn't out of charged ones when you happen to drop by...no thanks.


And driving to another state 500 miles away you want to stop somewhere for that long? Short distance only driving it's possible but it is nowhere near ready to be a full replacement. And frankly people can't be bothered now to even go inside to pay for their gas, you think anyone really wants to hang around for even 10 minutes someplace?

If it takes 30 minutes to charge a battery and 1.5 minutes to swap them, all you need is a supply of 20 batteries to maintain constant supply for a single swap station.

Simply put, it is faster than filling up with gas. You don't have to get out of your car, you don't have to do anything but drive up, pay, and drive off.

 

[Markbnj]

Europe disagrees with you there.

Nothing in Europe is long-haul, unless you're going to Moscow. And they still use a lot of diesel locos for moving freight, probably because it is prohibitively expensive to electrify every siding and spur.

 

[Markbnj]

nuclear materials are pretty cheap (as well as carrying a massive energy density) ; the massive infrastructure and expertise needed certainly are not. the lack of any long-term disposal will prevent almost all growth in that field. also, the nuclear power industry has always been subsidised by the war industry - plutonium, depleted uranium, maybe some medical and scientific customers as well. keep in mind a fuel rod is no good once it reaches about 95% fissile content, and you can burn up that 5% as fast as you like.

RTG's are simply not an option for widespread use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator

forget the materials, you're looking at a couple tons to get 50 watts, and that's with "of course it's safe" military units. 1 horsepower is about 750 watts.

Meh, didn't realize the outlook for them was so grim. Guess we had best hope for awesome batteries.

 

[Red Squirrel]

It's funny since I was a kid I always said they need to switch to electric cars, have a battery standard, and have battery stations. This should have been done a long time ago and it should be the standard. We are knowingly destroying the planet even though we have the technology to reduce it by a lot. Looking at pictures of high density areas where it's 4 lanes of traffic both ways bumper to bumper just makes me cringe at how much pollution is being pumped into the air by cars alone. Every single day.

Of course the oil industry would never allow something like this to go mainstream. That or they'll just patent all the type of batteries like lithium ion, lead acid etc.

Also every body wants to go super far on a single charge, but how often do you really need to go more than like 10 km in a single drive? Today's electric cars have quite a nice range where most people would not need to charge it more than once a week. While we figure out a better battery tech, we could still have gas vehicles for out of town traveling, or have onboard generators on electric cars, so you only use gas if you need to go far. Otherwise you plug in.

 

[PowerEngineer]

When it comes to the debate over how power systems operate, ElFenix and jagec offer the most accurate descriptions.

I am a bit surprised that electricity is seemingly held in such low esteem because of its storage limitations for transportation. As the means most everyone uses for refrigeration and lighting, for powering most home appliances, for a sizable share of heating and cooling, for the majority of industrial processes, and for posting on ATOT, I think it's due a little more love! :wub:

 

[stormkroe]

My horseshit alarm was tingling so I looked at the methodology to get the 'egallon'.

28.2 mi/gal * .35 kWh/mi * .1233 $/kWh = $1.22/gal

First off, you can get 40+mpg from cars that are larger/more powerful than priuses or leafs.
Second, lol at 350Wh to move a car 1 mile. Maybe in a vacuum with 150psi in the tires on flat polished granite.
Third, wtf do you get electricity for 12.33 cents/kWh? Maybe before federal common duty line rental transmission recouperation fees etc, but then that doean't count either does it.

And just for fun, lets put the heater on quarter-duty. I have a feeling the egallon will be in the double digits with these adjustments.
/pet peeve

 

[stormkroe]

When it comes to the debate over how power systems operate, ElFenix and jagec offer the most accurate descriptions.

I am a bit surprised that electricity is seemingly held in such low esteem because of its storage limitations for transportation. As the means most everyone uses for refrigeration and lighting, for powering most home appliances, for a sizable share of heating and cooling, for the majority of industrial processes, and for posting on ATOT, I think it's due a little more love! :wub:

Electricity isn't the bad guys in most peoples minds, it simply doesn't have a (available) storage medium within the same planet as liquid hydrocarbons. Also, 71% of the electricity we use to run our lights and fridges originates from fossil fuel powered generators.

IMO, turbo diesels are the next step to give EV the decade it needs to be viable.

 

[Markbnj]

When it comes to the debate over how power systems operate, ElFenix and jagec offer the most accurate descriptions.

I am a bit surprised that electricity is seemingly held in such low esteem because of its storage limitations for transportation. As the means most everyone uses for refrigeration and lighting, for powering most home appliances, for a sizable share of heating and cooling, for the majority of industrial processes, and for posting on ATOT, I think it's due a little more love! :wub:

Hey I love electricity, man. After spending twelve days without it after Sandy last year, it's easily one of my favorite things. If there's an afterlife then it holds a special place for linemen (linepersons?).

 

[The Boston Dangler]

no doubt, i'd rather lose oxygen than electricity

 

[holden j caufield]

If electrics reach even 5 percent of new car sales it wouldn't be long before electricity prices soared due to shortages.

Just a guess on the percentage, btw.

don't most cars get charged overnight? I would think that wouldn't have a huge impact on the grid.

edit: doh, mentioned many times already.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

We do. Chevy Volt, for example.



It's not true. Lead-acid is still a useful chemistry for certain things, but they have a much lower charging efficiency, a much lower power density, and a lower energy density than lithium-based technologies. Oh, and you can't leave them at a partial state of charge for long or they permanently lose capacity.

They're cheap, they're well understood, and if you don't care about weight or toxicity these factors make up for the other downsides. For EV usage, however, they are no good.

Yup, the weight to power ratio is WAY too high for it to be usable in a car and the charging is horridly inefficiant compared to the modern batteries. For a home backup system they are the best choice though.

It's interesting to note that the first taxis were all electrical using the lead-acid batteries.

 

[techs]

don't most cars get charged overnight? I would think that wouldn't have a huge impact on the grid.

edit: doh, mentioned many times already.

Yes, but there still would be a lot of charging during the day. Especially for people who travel a longer distance to work and recharge during the day to make sure they can get home.

Also, running power plants at full blast overnight would probably play havoc with maintenance schedules.

Since a substantial portion of electricity comes from coal there would have to be an enormous increase in production and a subsequent huge drop in air quality.

Nuke plants take years to build and if we suddenly wanted to build another one or two hundred of them it would take a while to manufacture and build them. Plus the huge increase in infrastructure to carry the increased amounts of electricity. Not to mention tens of thousands of people who have to be trained to run them safely and perform maintenance and safety inspections.

In the short run, say 30 to 40 years, electrics can be useful to keep the increase in oil use down, or even slightly negative. However, to switch over more than say, 30 percent of cars to full electrics would probably cost a fantastic amount of money and resources.