Study: Cars Running Corn-Based E85 Outperform Telsa
The Biofuels Digest has reported that a new study found that cars running on corn-based E85 have 30 percent lower CO2 emissions over the car’s lifetime than the Tesla Roadster, an all electric vehicle running on coal-based electricity. These results are based on the new CAFE standards that were passed this summer. But maybe more interesting, the study found that the Tesla will actually create 21 percent more C02 emissions than a car running on conventional gas.
The full study, based on the GREET model for corn ethanol emissions, can be downloaded here. Additional criteria used included the e85 fuel economy figures as established in the most recent University of Nebraska study; Tesla’s reports on miles per KWh, Department of Transportation figures on auto lifespan, EIA data on electricity prices, E85 price data from e85prices.com, and EPA figures on emissions from coal-fired power generation.
Although the operating costs of driving a car vary from state to state, the Digest also found that, “based on current ethanol prices, the total increase in cost of ownership for running an E85 vehicle in the US is $19 per year, compared to a non-flex fuel vehicle running conventional gasoline (with up to 10 percent ethanol content). E85 saves an average of 6 tons of CO2 emissions over the average life of a vehicle, when utilizing corn ethanol, and up to 36 tons of CO2 when running on cellulosic ethanol derived from waste biomass.”
7 Comments
Frank
What about hydro electricity to fuel the tesla or wind electricity or solar panel or any other clean electricity??? There is no point in this study…
Dennis Makarov
Why did they consider only coal-based electricity? Where I live, the Tesla would be running on electricity generated at a nuclear reactor.
That Tesla would have no CO2 emissions.
Mitch
The article is reasonable in its assessment because today over 75% of our electrical power comes from coal fired plants. I personally believe that this needs to change, but like what we’ve seen time and time again change is very slow to happen. According to what I’ve read it would take fifty years to convert over to nuclear power.
The other problem with electric vehicles is the environmentally unfriendly process of producing the batteries for electric cars. The process requires mining extremely hazardous materials used in the production of the batteries, and on top of that are the costs involved to dispose of used batteries without creating more environemental problems.
Mitch
rob
Mitch,
Just two things: the US power grid is just a touch over 50% coal, not 75%. look here for a start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_power_in_the_United_States
and the whole ‘disposal’ argument for batteries is a complete red herring. Lion batteries for dedicated use are in the upper 90% recycle category. Heck, even since you were a kid [no matter how old you are] your lead-acid batteries bought down the street at the auto parts store have been on and exchange-core basis. The FUD scare tactic of mountains of evil batteries thrown in the trash is a joke.
final note. In california, the overall mix is only 20% coal, with only 2% coal-fired electricity in the PG&E district of Northern california where Tesla is located [as are most of their current sales] Look this up….please.
Book Review – Turning Oil Into Salt - Domestic Fuel
[...] authors offer other suggestions, such as Plug-In Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) that are flex-fuel compatible as a transition to an all electric grid (but account for the [...]
Book Review - Turning Oil into Salt | EcoChamber
[...] authors offer other suggestions, such as Plug-In Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) that are flex-fuel compatible as a transition to an all electric grid (but account for the [...]
“Oz Goes Electric” Tour Kicks Off - Domestic Fuel
[...] to Tesla, the handmade, carbon fiber Roadster is the only car that delivers supercar performance with zero tailpipe emissions. The Roadster is [...]
Comments RSS feed —