Anonymous wrote:How on earth is an experimental HCCI car engine relevant to a 2/4 stroke gas mower? You might as well compare a leaf blower to a jet engine in terms of technological gap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Nerd?

Someone explains in perfect, accurate detail why your fetishized electric mowers are 60% LESS energy efficient than a gas mower, and you respond by calling them names.

Let's explain it another way then. A more simple way, that even you can understand:

Your battery powered electric mower is causing 60% MORE carbon pollution than a gasoline powered mower.


I'm a mechanical engineer. I understand things like energy transfer and thermal efficiency. I also have a deep and abiding concern for the health of this planet. And that's why I own a gasoline powered mower. Because it uses less resources and creates less pollution per unit of work than an electric mower. This is SCIENCE.

I haven't run the numbers on carbon pollution, but it's laughable to suggest that a gas mower creates less pollution than an electric mower when you consider other pollutants like NOx. Even taking into account the transmission losses etc, the idea that a single stroke engine can be as efficient as a modern power plant is just nonsense. Even a car is something like 6-10 times cleaner than a lawnmower simply on a per mile basis and the car is doing a lot more work.

And congrats to the OP on getting it resolved at least.

Sorry, but you're wrong.

Thermal efficiency of a gasoline engine is about ~33%

Thermal efficiency of electric battery operated device charged by the power grid is less than 16%.

I think you were just making numbers up. The thermal efficiency of a gasoline-powered engine is 20%. For a battery powered engine, it is 26%. If you are going off of and hydro electric or solar grid, your efficiency is going to be boosted.

I can't find a single source anywhere that backs up your numbers and monkey math.

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/03/f8/deer10_johansson.pdf


This has numbers and graphs, so it might be over your head.

You know - monkey math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Nerd?

Someone explains in perfect, accurate detail why your fetishized electric mowers are 60% LESS energy efficient than a gas mower, and you respond by calling them names.

Let's explain it another way then. A more simple way, that even you can understand:

Your battery powered electric mower is causing 60% MORE carbon pollution than a gasoline powered mower.


I'm a mechanical engineer. I understand things like energy transfer and thermal efficiency. I also have a deep and abiding concern for the health of this planet. And that's why I own a gasoline powered mower. Because it uses less resources and creates less pollution per unit of work than an electric mower. This is SCIENCE.

I haven't run the numbers on carbon pollution, but it's laughable to suggest that a gas mower creates less pollution than an electric mower when you consider other pollutants like NOx. Even taking into account the transmission losses etc, the idea that a single stroke engine can be as efficient as a modern power plant is just nonsense. Even a car is something like 6-10 times cleaner than a lawnmower simply on a per mile basis and the car is doing a lot more work.

And congrats to the OP on getting it resolved at least.

Sorry, but you're wrong.

Thermal efficiency of a gasoline engine is about ~33%

Thermal efficiency of electric battery operated device charged by the power grid is less than 16%.

I think you were just making numbers up. The thermal efficiency of a gasoline-powered engine is 20%. For a battery powered engine, it is 26%. If you are going off of and hydro electric or solar grid, your efficiency is going to be boosted.

I can't find a single source anywhere that backs up your numbers and monkey math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Nerd?

Someone explains in perfect, accurate detail why your fetishized electric mowers are 60% LESS energy efficient than a gas mower, and you respond by calling them names.

Let's explain it another way then. A more simple way, that even you can understand:

Your battery powered electric mower is causing 60% MORE carbon pollution than a gasoline powered mower.


I'm a mechanical engineer. I understand things like energy transfer and thermal efficiency. I also have a deep and abiding concern for the health of this planet. And that's why I own a gasoline powered mower. Because it uses less resources and creates less pollution per unit of work than an electric mower. This is SCIENCE.

I haven't run the numbers on carbon pollution, but it's laughable to suggest that a gas mower creates less pollution than an electric mower when you consider other pollutants like NOx. Even taking into account the transmission losses etc, the idea that a single stroke engine can be as efficient as a modern power plant is just nonsense. Even a car is something like 6-10 times cleaner than a lawnmower simply on a per mile basis and the car is doing a lot more work.

And congrats to the OP on getting it resolved at least.

Sorry, but you're wrong.

Thermal efficiency of a gasoline engine is about ~33%

Thermal efficiency of electric battery operated device charged by the power grid is less than 16%.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Nerd?

Someone explains in perfect, accurate detail why your fetishized electric mowers are 60% LESS energy efficient than a gas mower, and you respond by calling them names.

Let's explain it another way then. A more simple way, that even you can understand:

Your battery powered electric mower is causing 60% MORE carbon pollution than a gasoline powered mower.


I'm a mechanical engineer. I understand things like energy transfer and thermal efficiency. I also have a deep and abiding concern for the health of this planet. And that's why I own a gasoline powered mower. Because it uses less resources and creates less pollution per unit of work than an electric mower. This is SCIENCE.

I haven't run the numbers on carbon pollution, but it's laughable to suggest that a gas mower creates less pollution than an electric mower when you consider other pollutants like NOx. Even taking into account the transmission losses etc, the idea that a single stroke engine can be as efficient as a modern power plant is just nonsense. Even a car is something like 6-10 times cleaner than a lawnmower simply on a per mile basis and the car is doing a lot more work.

And congrats to the OP on getting it resolved at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Nerd?

Someone explains in perfect, accurate detail why your fetishized electric mowers are 60% LESS energy efficient than a gas mower, and you respond by calling them names.

Let's explain it another way then. A more simple way, that even you can understand:

Your battery powered electric mower is causing 60% MORE carbon pollution than a gasoline powered mower.


I'm a mechanical engineer. I understand things like energy transfer and thermal efficiency. I also have a deep and abiding concern for the health of this planet. And that's why I own a gasoline powered mower. Because it uses less resources and creates less pollution per unit of work than an electric mower. This is SCIENCE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Nerd?

Someone explains in perfect, accurate detail why your fetishized electric mowers are 60% LESS energy efficient than a gas mower, and you respond by calling them names.

Let's explain it another way then. A more simple way, that even you can understand:

Your battery powered electric mower is causing 60% MORE carbon pollution than a gasoline powered mower.


I'm a mechanical engineer. I understand things like energy transfer and thermal efficiency. I also have a deep and abiding concern for the health of this planet. And that's why I own a gasoline powered mower. Because it uses less resources and creates less pollution per unit of work than an electric mower. This is SCIENCE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contemplating a typical fossil-fuel-burning plant as the source: 10% is lost in combustion (not transferred to steam), 60% is lost at the turbine, 10% is lost in transmission, 20% is lost charging, 10% is lost discharging, and 10% is lost in the motor… so it ends up about 21% efficient - that is to say, ~79% of the energy in the source oil goes to waste (heat).

Nerd!

Anonymous wrote:Look, every analysis agrees that electric mowers are generally better for the environment than gas mowers.
There seems to be this thought among people that unless it's completely 100% green, then it is not worth it.

Further, the argument that charging it spews pollution is a bit of a chicken and an egg. The power plants already exists and the amount of energy that a battery draws is minimal.

Compare that to the continual refining of fossil fuels for gas to power the mower Plus the pollution generated locally and the energy from the refinery, and electric comes out as a net positive for the environment. In spite of all the talk if " efficiency."

Finally, the battery powered mower has the advantage of moving into the future. That is, as solar panels and more renewable resources become more available for charging, in the long run, the battery is the future