On Jan 26, 2009, at 4:56 PM, Mike Carrell wrote:
It is assumed that a utility plant, running under continuous load
and intelligent management, can burn fuel more efficiently than an
accelerating auto engine. So far, so good. But there are losses in
transmission to the user household, and in charging the battery --
as well as discharging it.
Q1 Where are reasoned estimate of the total carbon footprint of Los
Angeles with all eletric cars during a typical commuting day,
including the carbon emission of the utilities during the night
charging cycle?
Q2 Also: is it true that the electric utilities supplying Los
Angeles could support the charging load of all the cars for the
next day's commute?
Mike Carrell
It should be noted that much of the energy is or will be coming
coming from Mexico. That merely moves some of the carbon footprint,
but, surprisingly, renewable energy is a big thing in Mexico right
now. Google (Mexico renewable energy). You'll see that they are
building quite a wind farm at La Ventosa, for example, and the US is
involved with Mexico in renewable energy research.
Much of the problem with getting the solar and wind energy to
California cities lies in getting the transmission lines permitted.
Nobody wants high tension lines in his back yard. I think some
effort should be made to develop economically viable HVDC underground
transmission. Also, existing high tension lines would carry more
capacity if operated as HVDC, and probably would have less biological
effects, if any.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
