it's an interesting argument and well presented. only thing i'd add is that while the production of electricity was included, the cost of refining gasoline was not.
it takes about 4kwh of electricity to produce a gallon of gasoline (at some refineries this is all electric, others use only 1 or 2 kwh of electricity and power the rest of the process by burning some of the oil), so when you're already using so much juice to make the gasoline in the first place, it makes even more sense to go electric.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
Interesting. I asume you mean the CO2 "cost" i.e. the pollution. In this sense the "cost" of harvesting fossil or other fuel is not included in the calculation neither.....
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato (Old Spike)
i meant the power cost, but yeah that's related to CO2 emissions.
the cost of harvesting the fuel is included in the fossil fuels calculations, which is why nuclear is so much higher than you'd expect even though there are no emissions, because the power required the refine the fuel is so high.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
All the monetary cost is reflected in the price of any fuel (unless they are subsidised). The CO2 balance (or general environmental impact) may not be recognised. Nuclear also has the storage after use problem, which makes it expensive.
Comments
(Old Spike)
it's an interesting argument and well presented. only thing i'd add is that while the production of electricity was included, the cost of refining gasoline was not.
it takes about 4kwh of electricity to produce a gallon of gasoline (at some refineries this is all electric, others use only 1 or 2 kwh of electricity and power the rest of the process by burning some of the oil), so when you're already using so much juice to make the gasoline in the first place, it makes even more sense to go electric.
(Old Spike)
Interesting. I asume you mean the CO2 "cost" i.e. the pollution. In this sense the "cost" of harvesting fossil or other fuel is not included in the calculation neither.....
(Old Spike)
i meant the power cost, but yeah that's related to CO2 emissions.
the cost of harvesting the fuel is included in the fossil fuels calculations, which is why nuclear is so much higher than you'd expect even though there are no emissions, because the power required the refine the fuel is so high.
(Old Spike)
All the monetary cost is reflected in the price of any fuel (unless they are subsidised). The CO2 balance (or general environmental impact) may not be recognised. Nuclear also has the storage after use problem, which makes it expensive.