The Stanley Greener ?

In Coal in your stock-car   former  City Journal editor Edward John Craig celebrates Planet Gore's New Math :

Anne Korin from the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security responds to a reader's question about coal:

One pound of coal is about the amount of energy required to light a 40 watt bulb for 24 hours. One pound of coal generates about one kilowatt-hour of power, which depending on the weight of a vehicle will provide 2-6 miles worth of driving in a plug in hybrid.

Since  a gallon of gas weighs about 7 pounds , this seems to be just a restatement of the heat of combustion- and hence the energy content of the fuel, without any attempt to reckon conversion losses.

Were it so simple, a $50 dollar ton of coal would deliver  4,000 to 12,000 miles of driving  equal to roughly $1,000 to $2,500 worth of  gasoline, depending on whether a compact or an SUV is at issue . Since that much gas- say 250 to 750 gallons, far outstrips the realistic yield of less energetic methanol a ton of coal produces-- according to Korin,

" about 121 gallons of methanol. Energy content wise, that's about equivalent to 60 gallons of gasoline. So for a car that gets X miles per gallon of gasoline, running on coal to methanol yields about X/33 miles per pound of coal. Less miles per pound than electricity"

Clearly her argument is confused-  if coal electricity could function as the equivalent of twenty cent a gallon gasoline,  America would get around in a mixed fleet of electrics and Stanley Steamers. If we had gigajoule batteries weighing under a ton, and a good five cent  gearbox for a turbofan.

Comments

[profligatewaste]

I look forward to the pulverized coal-fired internal combustion engine as well as the pulverized coal-fired Gulfstream.

[Henry Barth]

Prior to WW II, following the UK/US oil embargo on Japan, Japanese cars used a charcoal burner installed in the trunk as the source of propulsion.

It was slow but reasonably fast on level ground; for going up hills the passengers would get behind and push.

I cannot imagine widespread use by drivers burning charcoal in the US, but I’m sure that should sufficient celebrities back the scheme as helping to “save the planet,” it will catch on and probably be mandated in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
RESPONSE

Really , Henry, these are modern times . If ecologically conscientious Cambridge auto-mobile owners are late for a coaching event, or come to a hill, they instruct the mechanician to have the footman add a judicious mixture of thermite, liquid ozone and radium bromide to the fuel-tank.

[Mr Rudi O'Neil]

This is something that makes you realise how much people in PR and Marketing are treating consumers like a bunch of dummies. Fine, tell us that we're going to pay less to drive around in an EV, but don't make us feel guilty about the environment when EV's (for now), cause just about as much pollution as cars which use petrol and diesel.

[Liam Falbo]

I can't believe that one pound of coal can generate about one kilowatt-hour of power. This means it can make a car really move! This could be a possible substitute to fuel since the cost for fuel escalates for almost every day. I hope there will be a car invented to run by coals.