Just returned from the state's and want to just see how bad the co2 km on the car was

 

Chevy Tahoe 5.3l v8.. Avg mpg was 15mpg over 850 miles..

 

The data the the chevy website quotes is below .. Anyone know the formula to switch it to eu ? 

 

Emissions
Tons/yr of CO2 Emissions @ 15K mi/year :	9.8

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiCyavorKLXAhUBvRoKHfMKBIsQFggmMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unitjuggler.com%2Fconvert-fuelconsumption-from-gperkmgasoline-to-mpgimperial.html&usg=AOvVaw3NfzBPsXziHxoSJ6EHgsUa

 

Maybe? Haven't tried it myself.

 

Might have to check that the gallon is the right one; US ones are smaller than ours.

Edited 3 November, 20178 yr by Wino

First convert to the metric standard, then all becomes easy........but no!     Make the kids suffer and waste their time.

US Gallons, no Imperial gallons or metric litres

and then they do not do grams, not even for their drugs.  Imports by the ton not even tonne.

 

Never trust them on a Barrel of Texas Crude.

Edited 3 November, 20178 yr by Headinawayoffski

Lol that's still nearly 9T of carbon for a pretty ordinary mileage.

 

Think of all that tree food you would make.

I think they work it out on the weight of potatoes grown in South America and turned into ethanol, 

or just on how many ton of Tar Sands are needed to produce 3.72 litres of gasoline.

Just tried again to work it out.. I cant figure it out

11 minutes ago, RickTT said:

Just tried again to work it out.. I cant figure it out

 

 

Not as bad as I thought then ! 

35 minutes ago, RickTT said:

Not as bad as I thought then ! 

Pretty good considering the size of the thing, and the size of its engine.

 

That is only the 'Official Figures' is it not? Are the actual emissions not a very different things or does that not matter in the US?

 

Maybe Cylinder Deactivation was fitted..

1 hour ago, Headinawayoffski said:

That is only the 'Official Figures' is it not? Are the actual emissions not a very different things or does that not matter in the US?

 

Maybe Cylinder Deactivation was fitted..

 

In the US they dont seem to care.. This car did have cylinder deactivation up to 10mph if setting off very slow in traffic and sometimes it triggered on slopes ... Which there were not many... 

1 hour ago, Headinawayoffski said:

That is only the 'Official Figures' is it not? Are the actual emissions not a very different things or does that not matter in the US?

 

Maybe Cylinder Deactivation was fitted..

 

Yes.. That were the offical figures from the website.. In reality was was probably double!!

 

Cost around $130 in fuel for that mileage too.... Shows how much we get ripped off here and screwed over .. Kind of seems pointless this little island  making so much effort when the size of the state's dont really make any effort...

 

 

10 hours ago, RickTT said:

Avg mpg was 15mpg over 850 miles

I understood this to mean what you actually experienced from driving it, either by displayed mpg or calculated from pump quantities versus distance travelled?

 

The unit converter I suggested worked directly off that to give the g CO2/km figure.

Nothing to do with official figures, offski?

Don’t forget that the auto industry bought out and dumped the concept of public transport.......imagine Europe without PT

Wino, why all the implausible / irregular / kidology Co2  g/km figures given, testing real world etc, we just need that calculator showing MPG or miles or kilometers per litre and the Governments can charge people for the emissions produced.

Do all vehicles using 1 US Gallon per 15 miles produce the same Co2 ?

Don't understand your first sentence, I wasn't/am never trying to kid anyone.

The answer to your second question is yes, basically, give or take a teeny bit. Diesels may produce slightly different amounts than petrols as the carbon/hydrogen ratio may be a little different (or not, dunno). Fundamentals of ICE chemistry, the carbon in the fuel becomes carbon dioxide, the hydrogen becomes water. Not everyone gets this. So the more fuel you burn (combine with oxygen in the air), the more carbon dioxide and water vapour comes out the back. Simple as that.

Do Mazda frinstance achieve lower CO2/gallon burnt due to a higher burn efficiency rating?.....

otherwise I’ve always thought consumption/emissions were a direct link.

24 minutes ago, Ryeman said:

Do Mazda frinstance achieve lower CO2/gallon burnt due to a higher burn efficiency rating?.....

Probably,  but that would translate straight into more mpg, unless they found a way to waste the extra efficiency before it got to the wheels.

 

Edit: no, changed my mind, more efficient burn probably means more carbon dioxide per unit measure of fuel used, not less. CO2 is the sign of good combustion efficiency, not poor. So (slightly) more CO2 per gallon burnt, but more miles done cos of more efficiency, so less CO2/mile or km.

Edited 3 November, 20178 yr by Wino

Wino, not your Implausible / Irregular / Kidology figures the official EU Test figures for the passed years i meant.

 

If it was as simple as all engines used the same fuel efficiently and you just computed miles and fuel used the tax could just be put on the fuel.

Tax should just be put on fuel.

With a bit of luck @chimaera might help to clarify/correct my muddy thoughts?

Tax on the fuel and road charges on the length / weight of a vehicle during a journey and computed by how many people are in the vehicle.

The technology is available with ANPR and sensors in roads at various points that measures vehicles weight. 

*cracks knuckles and stretches fingers*

 

Measured fuel consumption tells you exactly the quantity of fuel consumed by the vehicle. It's a figure that can be directly compared between two vehicles: if they both have the same measured fuel consumption over the same distance, they both used the same total quantity of fuel.

 

OP's measured average for the trip was 15 mpg (we'll assume US gallons since it was in the US), over a distance of 850 miles. Divide 15 miles/gallon into 850 miles and we get 56.67 gallons; multiply this by 3.78 litres/gallon and we get 214.2 L of fuel used for the trip.

 

From here it gets a little murky since petrol's allowable density varies, as well as its chemical composition. For the sake of the calculation, I'll use a density of 0.755 kg/L and assume it's entirely composed of octane (C8H18).

214.2 L multiplied by 0.755 kg/L gives 161.7 kg of fuel. With the molecular weight of octane being 0.114 kg/mol, we have 152.1 / 0.114 = 1419 mol of fuel consumed.

 

Now for the chemistry bit: C8H18 + 12.5O2 -> 8CO2 + 9H2O. So for every mole of octane burned, 8 moles of CO2 are formed. Burning 1419 mol of fuel results in the production of 11348 mol of CO2.

 

CO2 has a molecular weight of 0.044 kg/mol, so 11348 mol equates to 499 kg of CO2 emitted over the total distance. 850 miles = 1368 km, so average CO2 emitted over the trip is 365 g/km. Close enough to the value given by that website converter: given the assumptions being made that's pretty ok.

 

Consider though that petrol engines tend to operate richer than stoichiometric i.e. not all of the fuel that is consumed is burned, some of it exits the tailpipe unburned. A further portion of the carbon in the fuel exits as soot. These losses are tricky to estimate since they depend on operating conditions such as load, ambient temperature, etc. and these conditions are likely to have varied during the 850 miles travelled.

 

I've also made assumptions about the density and composition of the fuel which are going to affect the result, but right now it's more effort than I can be bothered making to see whether that pushes the estimate up or down.

19 minutes ago, Headinawayoffski said:

Tax on the fuel and road charges on the length / weight of a vehicle during a journey and computed by how many people are in the vehicle.

The technology is available with ANPR and sensors in roads at various points that measures vehicles weight. 

Fuel consumption goes up with vehicle mass, so the length/weight charging seems redundant as well as adding a cost on the part of the government, thus reducing the net benefit to the exchequer.

 

I recall at some point doing a rough calculation for the likely tax obligation if current annual motor tax rates here in Ireland were applied as a fuel levy and it added about 80 % to the pump price as it stands. Not sure what it looks like right now though.