🚀 go-pugleaf

In <4d27er$qmd@crl6.crl.com> knolle@crl.com (Ernst G. Knolle) writes: 

>: Don't forget the losses for oil exploration, drilling,
transportation,
>: refining (significant), and other transportation and pumping
>: requirements.
>
>The fossil fuel production costs are the same, whether the fuel is 
>turned into gasoline or whether it is burned to produce electricity. 

Coal does not have to be refined, and is moved much less frequently (it
normally goes directly from the mine to the power plant).

>However, here in California we require low-sulfur oil for power 
>production, which costs almost twice as much as the oil for gasoline.

I'd like to see some confirmation of those figures.

>In the refining process to make gasoline there is a loss of about 20% 
>in  volume, but a gain of 10% in heat value. 

There are also losses in the power needed to  support the refining
process itself.

>The byproducts, like 
>lubricating  oils and tars, are are marketed separately. In 
>comparison, of the highly  expensive low-sulfur oil for electric 
>generation, 70% shoots up the stack for an instant total loss.

I'd like to see some confirmation the latter, as well.  Odd that these
oils and tars don't combust...

>In energy generation projections, it is important to apply the 
>marginal  supply/cost concept. For example, France has nuclear plants,
>which are cheap and clean, and therefore run at full capacity before 
>more costly and more dirty coal plants come on like. The coal plants 
>are thus the marginal producers. Hence, when anyone wants more 
>electricity, like EV people for 
>instance, it needs to come from the coal plants. 

Renewable energy sources can also be employed in the generation of
electricity.

Cheers,

Will Stewart