Facts about “CO2 emission”

Home Electrical Engineering Forum General Discussion Facts about “CO2 emission”

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
  • #10272

    vehicle co2 emission

    Facts & figures about CO2 emission

    Generally, the car manufacturers give the “CO2 emission” in g/km.
    Other interesting figures to know is the quantity of CO2 produced per litre of fuel:
    – for diesel:        2.62 kg/litre
    – for gasoline:    2.39 kg/litre.

    So every time you put 50 litres (or 13 gallons) in your tank, you are going to produce around 125kg of CO2.

    Amazing, isn’t it?

    For heating purposes, the relevant figure is the quantity of CO2 emitted per kWh of energy produced. Here are the figures for different heating sources, in kg of CO2 per kWh:
    – Natural gas:    0.19
    – Fuel oil:          0.27
    – Coal:              0.32
    – Electricity:      from 0.08 to 0.8 (0.4 is the European Union average)

    By far, natural gas is the “greener” fossil fuel. Electricity is even better where it is mainly produced by hydro or nuclear power plants.

    Jacques Schonek


    Good day, how can we calculate (assumption if we cannot have the precise calculation) how many CO2 emission are generated in the electricity?

    Does the part who generate CO2 is the kWH value, the kVAR value, or just because the power plant fuel? I’m asking these 2’nd question since I heard that if we installed capacitor (outside kVAR generator) we can reduce CO2 emission. Maybe you know something about that as well?



    The CO2 emission per kWh is of course coming from the power plant fuel. The figures given in the post (0.08 to 0.8 kg/kWh) depend on the percentage of electricity generated by fossil-fuel in the different countries.

    Capacitors installed in order to improve the power factor reduce the line current and also the related power losses. Then, for the same “service”, less kWh are generated, and consequently, less kg of CO2 are produced.


    Funny how one of the cleanest types of fuel, speaking of nuclear, is considered such a horrible thing. I know with what happened in Japan recently people might not think the same way but it is still the cleanest fuel. Something like what happened in Japan does not change that simple fact. As a suggestion maybe give some other examples to compare these against so the number make better sense to people. Other then the lower the better I don’t really understand what the numbers represent.


    How can you say nuclear is still the cleanest fuel if you don’t follow through with the beginning, middle and end of that statement. It has unstoreable toxic waste, but that reality we don’t factor into the “cleanest fuel” equation. It is a “toxic, deadly” process to begin with, but we take that out of the factor of the clean fuel equation. Then I guess exploding bombs are safe and don’t hurt people either because when they are not actually exploding they are not hurting anyone, even if they are right next to someone.


    Hey friend i praise your blog well done!

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.