LAND AND SEA AREA FOR VARIOUS ENERGY SOURCES

The areas occupied by power systems for electricity generation by various energy sources for 60 years are shown in table 1. Wind and solar have short lives, i.e., 20 to 25 years, but nuclear has a life of about 60 years. Any large-scale build-out of wind and solar would have a much larger “footprint” area than nuclear.

 

- Nuclear produces 84 times more electricity per acre than solar during 60 years.

- Nuclear produces 612 times more electricity per acre than onshore wind during 60 years

- Nuclear produces 980 times more electricity per acre than offshore wind during 60 years

 

In addition:

 

- All PV panels would be replaced in about year 25 and year 50, which would reduce generation during a 60-y period.

- Onshore wind turbines would require major refurbishment and replacement in about year 25 and year 50, which would reduce generation during a 60-y period, based on European onshore wind experience.

- Offshore wind turbines would require major refurbishment and replacement in about year 20 and year 40, and year 60, which would reduce generation during the 60-y period, based on European offshore wind experience.

http://energyskeptic.com/2018/wind/?fbclid=IwAR3u-kxMrxTGSDHNBS-_-E...

 

Table 1/Land area	Acre/MW	CF	Generation at site	Generation at site	Nuclear
			MWh/acre/y	MWh/acre/60y	Times better
Nuclear	0.5	0.90	15779	946728	1
Solar, field-mounted	7	0.15	188	11271	84
Wind, onshore	102	0.30	26	1547	612
Wind, offshore	245	0.45	16	966	980

CF = capacity factor

Offshore wind has high acreage/MW, due to spacing requirements to minimize shadowing, and onshore wind due to setback requirements to reduce noise impacts on nearby people.

https://www.4coffshore.com/windfarms/vineyard-wind-united-states-us...

 

Table 2/Offshore
Vineyard Wind 1		MW
Project capacity, MW		800
Project area, sq mile		306
Turbine capacity, MW		8 - 10
Turbine height, ft		700 - 750
Area, acre	306 x 640	195840
Area, acre/MW	195840/800	245
.
Onshore, ridgeline
Turbine capacity, MW		3
Turbine height, ft		500
Project turbines		21
Project capacity, MW	3 x 21	63
Turbines/mile		7
Turbine spacing, ft	5280/7	754
Ridgeline length, mile	21/7	3
Ridgeline setback, mile		1
Land area length, mile		5
Land area width, mile		2
Land area, acre	2 x 5 x 640	6400
Area, acre/MW	6400/63	102

 

Area For World Electricity Generation

 

World electricity generation was about 25000 TWh in 2017. An assumed generation mix and areas are shown in table 3. Nuclear would require about 619 sq miles to generated 25% of the world’s electricity generation in 2017. Wind and solar would require much larger areas.

 

- Nuclear would require only 1% of the land area of New York State to generate 25%, of the world's electricity . 

- (Solar 1.1 + Onshore wind 4.01 + Offshore wind 6.43)/2 = 11.54/2 = 5.77 times the land area of New York State to generate 25% of the world's electricity.

- Subsidizing the build-outs of wind and solar, instead of nuclear is lunacy to the nth degree. See table 3

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/electricity/world-electricity-product...

 

Table3/World generation mix
	%	TWh/y
Nuclear	25	6250
Solar	25	6250
Wind, onshore	12.5	3125
Wind, offshore	12.5	3125
Hydro and other	25	6250
Total	100	25000
						47190 sq mi land
	Acre/MW	CF	Generation	Area	Area	New York State
			MWh/acre/y	Acre	Sq mi	Fraction
Nuclear	0.5	0.90	15779	396101	619	0.013
Solar, field-mounted	7	0.15	188	33272492	51988	1.102
Wind, onshore	102	0.30	26	121206936	189386	4.013
Wind, offshore	245	0.45	16	194089538	303265	6.426

Capital Cost Comparison of Nuclear, Solar, Wind onshore, Wind offshore

- Each energy source provides 25% of the world’s electricity generation.

- A standard nuclear plant is assumed at 2000 MW on 1000 acres.

- Nuclear requires 1.31%; solar 110%; wind onshore 803%; and wind offshore 1285% of New York State land area.

- Grid expansion is assumed at 15% of plant capital cost for all energy sources

- Solar and wind require energy storage for peaking, filling in and balancing, or gas turbines that can quickly vary their outputs to compensate for the variable, intermittent outputs of weather/sun-dependent wind and solar. See Appendix.

- Subsidizing the build-outs of wind and solar, instead of nuclear is lunacy to the nth degree. See table 4.

 

Table 4	Nuclear	Solar	Wind, onshore	Wind, offshore
Plant capacity, MW	2000	100	100	250
Acre/MW	0.5	7	102	245
Plant site area, acre	1000	700	10200	61250
h/y	8766	8766	8766	8766
CF	0.90	0.15	0.30	0.45
Plant generation, MWh/y	15778800	131490	262980	986175
Generation, MWh/acre/y	15779	188	26	16
World generation, TWh/y	25000	25000	25000	25000
25% of World, TWh/y	6250	6250	6250	6250
Plant area, acre	396101	33272492	242413872	388179076
Plant area, sq mile	619	51988	378772	606530
New York State land area, sq mi	47190	47190	47190	47190
Percent of NYS land area	1.31	110	803	1285
Number of plants	396	47532	23766	6338
Cost, $million/MW	5.00	2.00	2.50	4.00
Capital cost per plant, $billion	10.00	0.20	0.25	1.00
Grid, 0.15 of plant cost, $billion	1.50	0.03	0.04	0.15
Total plant cost, $billion	11.50	0.23	0.29	1.15
Capital cost, $billion	4555	10932	6833	7288
Energy Storage		Required	Required	Required

Wind and Solar Environmental and Area Footprint Versus Nuclear, Coal and Gas

 

The A to Z path of extracting, processing and transporting the energy and materials to construct, install and replace millions of short-lived wind turbines and solar panels to generate 50% of world generation would require a much larger “footprint”, than the A to Z path for equivalent generation by nuclear, coal and gas, which have lives of 60, 50, and 40 years, respectively, versus about 20 to 25 years for wind and about 25 years for solar.

http://energyskeptic.com/2018/wind/?fbclid=IwAR3u-kxMrxTGSDHNBS-_-E...

Wind, Solar, Hydro Energy Use by Country

 

This article shows graphs of the various sources of energy for various countries for 1965 - 2017.

 

CIS, the former USSR, is now the Commonwealth of Independent States, i.e., Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.

See table 5 and URL

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/21/another-look-at-the-fuel-mix/

 

Table 5	Other*	Fossil
	%	%
China	13.4	86.6
US	16.8	83.2
Total Europe	25.9	74.1
Total CIS	13.0	87.0
Total Middle East	0.8	99.2
India	8.2	91.8
Germany	20.9	79.1
France	47.5	52.5
Norway	68.5	31.5
Denmark	27.0	73.0

* Other = Hydro, nuclear, wind, geothermal /biomass and solar

Area For Replacing US Gasoline With Ethanol, E100, From Corn

 

US Cropland

 

The US planted crops on about 334 million acres in 2017. It would be a miracle, if the US could increase its crop area by 50 million acres. See major crops in table and URLs.

 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Acre/Acre-06-29-2018.pdf

See Summary Table 3 of URL.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/major-land-uses.aspx

 

Table 6/US cropland, 2017	Million acre
Corn	89.1
Soybean	89.6
Hay	55.0
All wheat	47.8
All cotton	13.5

 

US Ethanol from Corn

 

During 2017, the US planted 89.1 million acre in corn, of which 32.214 million acre were for ethanol from corn.

Total ethanol production was 15.936 billion gallon. See table 8.

Click table 10.3, xls of eia URL.

 

https://www.agweb.com/article/usda-2017-corn-production-down-despit...

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=90&t=4

https://www.afdc.energy.gov/data/10339

 

Table 7/Corn	2017
Planted, million acre	89.1
Crop for all uses, billion bushel	14.604
Crop for E100 for blending,  billion bushel	5.280
Yield, bushel/acre	176.6
.
Planted for ethanol, all uses, million acre	32.214
Planted for E100 for blending, million acre	29.913
Ethanol production, all uses, billion gallon	15.936
Yield, gal/acre; 1000 x 15.936/32.214	495
E100 production, blending, billion gallon	14.798

Replace US Petro-Gasoline With Ethanol from Corn

US “gasoline” consumption was 142.298 billion gallon in 2017, per EIA

E100 blended with petro-gasoline was 14.798 billion gallon

Petro-gasoline was 128.182 billion gallon

E100 was about 7.06% of the total Btu of “gasoline” consumption, based on LHV

Additional E100 would be 128.182 x 116090/76330 = 194.952 billion gal

Total E100 would be 14.798 + 194.952 = 209.750 billion gallon

Total cropland for E100 would be about 29.913 x 209.750/14.798 = 423.992 million acre to replace all US petro-gasoline with E100. See table 8

 

https://www.uaex.edu/publications/PDF/FSA-1050.pdf

https://www.statista.com/statistics/189410/us-gasoline-and-diesel-c...

NOTE: A fuel has a higher and lower heating value, Btu/gal. Some of the Btus are used during combustion to create water vapor, leaving only the lower heating value, LHV, Btus to perform useful work. Any replacement of

petro-gasoline would be by replacing its LHV Btus with ethanol having an equal LHV Btus. 

https://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf

 

Table 8/2017	“Gasoline”
Consumption, 1000 barrel/d	9326.81
gal/barrel	42	TBtu, LHV
“Gasoline”, billion gal, per EIA	142.980	16010.180
Petro-gasoline, billion gal	128.182	14880.648
E100, billion gal	14.798	1129.531
Planted for E100 for blending, million acres	29.913
Additional E100 for blending, billion gal	194.952
Total E100 for blending, billion gal	209.750
Total acres in corn, million acres	423.992
E100, as % of total Btu, LHV		7.06

US Biodiesel (B100) From Soybean and Other Sources

 

The US planted about 89.6 million acres in soybeans in 2017.

The soybean crop, all uses, was 4.390 billion bushel, for a yield of about 4.39 x 1000/89.6 = 49 bushel/acre

 

B100 production required 6.230 billion pounds of soybean oil from 0.532 billion bushels in 2017, or 11.654 lb oil/bushel. See URL.

 

https://unitedsoybean.org/media-center/issue-briefs/biodiesel/

https://www.eia.gov/biofuels/biodiesel/production/

 

The soybean crop for B100 required about 0.532, B100/4.39, all uses x 89.6 = 10.857 million acres.  

https://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/2018/01_12_2018.php

 

B100 produced from soybean oil was 0.826 billion gallon in 2017

B100 from other sources was 0.770 billion gallon. See table 9

 

Click on the 10.4, xls, in the URL to see the values in table

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/index.php#renewable

 

NOTE: Renewable diesel is made from used, petro-based grease and used, petro-based lubricating oils. It is not B100. Its CO2eq has to be counted.

 

Table 9	million gallon	Tbtu, LHV
B100 from soybeans	826	98.748
B100 from other sources	770	92.054
B100 total production	1596	190.802
Imports	301	35.985
Inventory	88	10.520
B100, total consumption	1985	237.307

 

Total US diesel fuel consumption was 45.833 billion gallon in 2017, which included 1985 billion gallon of B100. See table 10

https://www.statista.com/statistics/189410/us-gasoline-and-diesel-c...

 

Table 10
B100 from soybeans	2017
Crop, bushel/acre/y	49
Weight, lb/bushel	60
Crop weight, lb/acre	2940
Oil, lb/bushel; see URL	11.654
Oil, lb/acre/y	571
Process yield	0.973
B100 yield , lb/acre/y	556
Weight, lb/gal	7.3
B100 yield, gal/acre/y	76
B100 yield, gal/bu	1.55
.
Soybeans, billion bu; see URL	0.532
Area, million acres	10.857

Area For Replacing US Petro Diesel Fuel With B100 from Soybeans

Replace US Petro-Diesel with B100 from Soybeans

US “diesel” consumption was 45,833 billion gal in 2017, per EIA

B100 blended with petro-diesel was 1,985 billion gal from various sources. See table 6.

Petro-diesel was 43.848 billion gal

B100 was about 4.00% of the total Btu of “diesel” consumption, based on LHV

Additional B100 would be 43.848 x 129488/119550 = 47,493 billion gal, based on LHV.

Total B100 would be 1.985, existing + 47.493, new = 49.478 billion gal

Total cropland for B100 would be about 49.478 billion gal/76 gal/acre = 651 million acres, if no imports. See table 9

https://www.statista.com/statistics/189410/us-gasoline-and-diesel-c...

 

Table 9/2017	"Diesel"	Petro-diesel in blend	Petro-diesel
Consumption, 1000 barrel/d	2989.78
Consumption, 1000 barrel/y	1091270
gal/barrel	42
Consumption, billion gallon/y	45.833	1.985	43.848
Tbtu, LHV	5934.866	237.307	5697.559
B100 in blend, % of Btus	4.00
Additional B100 to replace diesel, b gallon	47.493
Total B100, billion gallon	49.478
Yield, gal/acre	76
Total acres, million	651
.
HHV, Btu/gal	138490	127960
LHV, Btu/gal	129488	119550

Additional Sources of Information:

 

https://ethanolrfa.org/resources/industry/statistics/#1537811482060...

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_psup_a_EPM0F_VPP_mbbl_a.htm

https://www.agmrc.org/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-climate-cha...

https://ethanolrfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2017-U.S.-Ethanol...

 

APPENDIX 1

Increased Renewables per Capita Leads to Higher Household Electric Rates

The below graph shows countries with high levels of wind, solar, etc., also have high levels of household electric rates.

Politicians and bureaucrats find ways to place the cost burden of renewables (such as subsidies, grants, taxes, fees and surcharges) mostly on households, but give a free pass to the industrial and commercial sectors for "competitive reasons"

Industry and commerce are vastly better organized and have vastly more political clout, and are much less easily swayed/bamboozled/conned than households.

APPENDIX 2

"Fossil fuels are essential for making wind turbines, as Robert Wilson explains in Can You Make a Wind Turbine Without Fossil Fuels?"

"Oil is used from start to finish; from mining to crushing ore and smelting it; to delivery to the supply chain fabrication plants for the 8,000 parts in a turbine; to the final delivery to the site and erection.

Cement trucks drive to the delivery site over roads built by diesel powered road equipment.

The roads are paved with asphalt made from refinery tar.

Fossil-made cement and steel rebar is required for the wind turbine foundations.

Diesel trucks haul the components of the turbine to the installation place, and diesel cranes lift the turbine sections and 8,000 parts upward.

There are no electric blast furnaces, only fossil fueled ones to make cement and most steel.

There are no electric mining trucks, electric long haul trucks to deliver the 8,000 parts made all over the world, nor electric cement trucks, electric cranes, etc.

That means, even if a wind turbine could generate enough energy to replicate itself, it wouldn’t matter, the A-to-Z process would need to be electrified."

 

"Not only would windmills have to generate enough power to reproduce themselves, but they have to make enough power above and beyond that to fuel the rest of civilization.

Think of the energy to make the cement and steel of a 300-foot tower with three 150-foot rotor blades sweeping an acre of air at 150 miles per hour. 

The turbine housing alone weighs over 56 tons, the blade assembly 36 tons, and the whole tower assembly over 163 tons. 

Florida Power & Light says a typical turbine site is a 42 by 42 foot area with a 30-foot hole filled with tons of steel rebar-reinforced concrete; about 1,250 tons of foundation to hold the 300-foot tower in place (per Rosenbloom)."

APPENDIX 3

High Levels of Wind and Solar

 

High levels of wind and solar, say 60% of NE grid annual load (the rest supplied by other sources), could not ever stand on their own, without the NE grid having:

 

- Much more robust connections to nearby grids (Canada, New York State), plus

- Gas turbine plants and reservoir/run-of-river hydro plants that could quickly vary their outputs to compensate for the quickly varying outputs of wind and solar, including very lowoutputs of wind and solar, which occur at random, at least 30% of the hours of the year, according to minute-by-minute generation data posted by ISO-NE.

 

If high levels of wind and solar were built out after a few decades, and the gas turbine, nuclear, coal and oil plants were closed down (according to RE proponent wishes), and with existing connections to nearby grids, and with existing reservoir/run-of-river hydro plants, and with existing other sources, the NE grid would require 6 - 8 TWh of storage to cover 5 to 7 day wind/solar lulls, which occur at random, and to cover seasonal variations (storing wind when it is more plentiful during fall, winter and spring, and when solar is more plentiful in summer, so more of their electricity would be available in summer when wind usually is at very low levels). See URLs.

 

That storage would need to have a minimal level at all times (about 10 days of demand coverage), to cover multi-day, scheduled and unscheduled equipment and system outages and unusual multi-day weather events, such as a big snow fall covering the solar panels andminimal wind.

 

- One TWh of storage costs about $400 billion, at $400/kWh, or $100 billion at a Holy Grail $100/kWh.

- Any electricity passing through storage has about a 20% loss, on a high voltage AC-to-high voltage AC basis, to be made up by additional wind, solar and other generation.

- Any electricity fed to EVs and plug-in hybrids has about a 20% charging and resting loss, from wall meter to “in battery”, as indicated by the vehicle meter, to be made up by additional wind, solar, and other generation. See URLs.

 

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/tesla-model-3-long-term...

 http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/daily-shifting-of-wind-...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-england-will-need-t...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-example-of-elec...;

APPENDIX 4

Wind and Solar Conditions in New England: New England has highly variable weather and low-medium quality wind and solar conditions. See NREL wind map and NREL solar map.

 

https://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/100m_wind/awstwspd100onoff3-1.jpg

https://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/solar/national_photovoltaic_2009-01...

 

Wind:

- Wind electricity is zero about 30% of the hours of the year (it takes a wind speed of about 7 mph to start the rotors)

- Wind is minimal most early mornings and most late afternoons/early evenings (peak demand hours), especially during summer

- Wind often is minimal 5 - 7 days in a row in summer and winter, as proven by ISO-NE real-time generation data.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/daily-shifting-of-wind-...

- About 60% is generated at night, when demand is much less than during the late afternoons/early evenings

- About 60% is generated in winter.

- During winter, the best wind month is up to 2.5 times the worst summer month

- New England has the lowest capacity factor (about 0.262) of any US region, except the US South. See URL.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=20112

 

Solar:

- Solar electricity is strictly a midday affair.

- It is zero about 65% of the hours of the year, mostly at night.

- It often is minimal 5 - 7 days in a row in summer and in winter, as proven by ISO-NE real-time generation data.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/daily-shifting-of-wind-...

- It is minimal early mornings and late afternoons/early evenings

- It is minimal much of the winter months

- It is minimal for several days with snow and ice on most of the panels.

- It varies with variable cloudiness, which would excessively disturb distribution grids with many solar systems, as happens in southern California and southern Germany on a daily basis. Utilities use batteries to stabilize their grids.

- During summer, the best solar month is up to 4 times the worst winter month; that ratio is 6 in Germany.

- New England has the lowest capacity factor (about 0.145, under ideal conditions) of any region in the US, except some parts of the US Northwest.

 

NOTE: Even if the NE grid had large capacity connections with Canada and New York, any major NE wind lull and any major NE snowfall likely would affect the entire US northeast, i.e., relying on neighboring grids to "help-out" likely would not be prudent strategy.

 

Wind Plus Solar:

ISO-NE publishes the minute-by-minute outputs off various energy sources contributing their electricity to the grid.

All one has to do is add the wind and solar and one comes rapidly to the conclusion both are minimal many hours of the year, at any time during the year.

 

- Wind plus solar production could be minimal for 5 - 7 days in summer and in winter, especially with snow and ice on most of the panels, as frequently happens during December, January and February, as proven by ISO-NE real-time generation data.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/daily-shifting-of-wind-...

 

If we were to rely on wind and solar for most of our electricity, massive energy storage systems (a few hundred GWh-scale for Vermont, multiple TWh-scale for NE) would be required to cover multi-day wind lulls, multi-day overcast/snowy periods, and seasonal variations. See URLs.

 

Wind and solar cannot ever be expected to charge New England’s EVs, so people can get to work the next day, unless backed up by several TWh of storage, because wind/solar lulls can occur for 5 - 7 days in a row, in summer and in winter. BTW, the turnkey capital cost of one TWH of storage (delivered as AC to the grid) is about $400 billion.

 

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-energy-l...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-example-of-elec...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/seasonal-pumped-hydro-s...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/electricity-storage-to-...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/pumped-storage-hydro-in...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-hype-ver...

APPENDIX 5

Hydro-Quebec Electricity Generation and Purchases: Google this URL for the 2017 facts. The H-Q electricity supply is an order of magnitude cleaner than the Vermont supply.
http://www.hydroquebec.com/sustainable-development/energy-environme...

 

	2017
	GWh
Hydropower generated	177091
Purchased	44006
- Hydro	31610
- Wind	9634
- Biomass and waste reclamation	2021
- Other	741
Total RE generated and purchased	221097

 

NOTE: Gentilly-2 nuclear generating station, plus three thermal generating stations (Tracy, La Citière and Cadillac) were shut down.

 

Hydro-Quebec Export Electricity: H-Q net exports were 34.4 TWh/y in 2017; provided 27% of H-Q net income, or $780 million, i.e., very profitable.

 

H-Q export revenue was $1,651 million in 2017, or 1641/34.4 = 4.8 c/kWh.

See page 24 of Annual Report URL.

This is for a mix of old and new contracts.

Revenue = 1641

Net profit = 780

Cost = 1641 - 780 = 861

Average cost of H-Q generation = 861/34.4 = 2.5 c/kWh

 

GMP buys H-Q electricity, at the Vermont border, for 5.549 c/kWh, under a recent contract. GMP buys at 5.549 c/kWh, per GMP spreadsheet titled “GMP Test Year Power Supply Costs filed as VPSB Docket No: Attachment D, Schedule 2, April 14, 2017”.

H-Q is eager to sell more of its surplus electricity to New England and New York.

 

That is at least 50% less than ridgeline wind and large-scale field-mounted solar, which are heavily subsidized to make their electricity appear to be less costly than reality. 

 

GMP sells to me at 19 c/kWh, per rate schedule. Consumers pricing for electricity is highly political. That is implemented by rate setting, taxes, fees, surcharges, etc., mostly on household electric bills, as in Denmark and Germany, etc. The rate setting is influenced by protecting “RE policy objectives”, which include highly subsidized, expensive microgrids, islanding, batteries and net metered solar and heat pumps.

 

http://www.hydroquebec.com/sustainable-development/energy-environme...

http://news.hydroquebec.com/en/press-releases/1338/annual-report-2917/

http://www.hydroquebec.com/data/documents-donnees/pdf/annual-report...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/green-mountain-power-co...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/increased-canadian-hydr...

APPENDIX 6

Higher and Lower Heating Values of Fuels

The higher heating value, HHV, is the heat content in a fuel, such as Btu/lb

The lower heating value, LHV, is the heat content in a fuel available to an internal combustion engine.

 

Any replacement of petro-diesel fuel and petro-gasoline would be by replacing their total Btus, based on LHVs, with biofuels having an equal total Btus, based on LHVs.

 

- E10, usually called gasoline, also called gasohol, is a blend of 90% gasoline and 10% ethanol, E100, from corn.

- B100 is 100% biodiesel

- B20 is a blend of 80% petro-diesel and 20% B100

See table 3 and URL.

https://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf

https://h2tools.org/hyarc/calculator-tools/lower-and-higher-heating...

Table	Ethanol	Gasoline	E10 (90/10)	Petro-diesel, LS	B100	B20 (80/20)	NG	LNG
HHV, Btu/gal	84530	124340	120359	138490	127960	136384	22453	23735
LHV, Btu/gal	76330	116090	112114	129488	119550	127500	20267	20908