Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use • Hacker News Board

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#61

Post by try_the_bass » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:10 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #27

The top graph makes it seem much more dramatic than it is. Maritime shipping is very efficient, and consists of a very small fraction of overall petroleum usage. Road transportation uses about 20x as much fuel as ocean shipping, planes use about 2x as much, and trains about the same amount. The typical rule of thumb is that about 40% of the energy in a barrel of petroleum is lost before it goes into your gas tank. An…

> We'll probably notice the reduction in sulfur pollution more than the reduction in CO2.

I feel like I've read something about the effects of reducing sulfur production already: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/feed/unintended-warmin...

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#62

Post by kleiba2 » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:13 PM UTC

bruce511 wrote: post #36

tsss wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares about motor efficiency when you can only take 10% as much fuel. At the end of the day, cost is the only metric that matters.

The cost of EV energy (to the driver) is about half that of the cost of gas energy. And that's if you buy electricity at charging stations [1]. If you charge at home it gets less. If you have solar at home it approaches zero. Yes, the cost of the car itself is a factor, but even there prices are dropping all the time. >> when you can only take 10% as much fuel effeciency makes all the difference when we discuss % of…

Before the Iran war, I did a back of the envelope calculation for the price of gas of your average ICE for a certain fixed range vs. the price of electricity an average EV uses for the same range. This was under the assumption that you buy electricity at a random charging station that you don't have a contract with.

Based on these average values I used, EVs fared slightly worse.

This was not factoring in costs of purchase or repairs etc. And all averages were taken off the internet so everything had to be taken with more than a grain of salt. But the outcome was nowhere near your statement of EV energy costing about half of the cost of gas for the driver.

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#63

Post by lostlogin » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:18 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #27

The top graph makes it seem much more dramatic than it is. Maritime shipping is very efficient, and consists of a very small fraction of overall petroleum usage. Road transportation uses about 20x as much fuel as ocean shipping, planes use about 2x as much, and trains about the same amount. The typical rule of thumb is that about 40% of the energy in a barrel of petroleum is lost before it goes into your gas tank. An…

> Road transportation uses about 20x as much fuel as ocean shipping, planes use about 2x as much, and trains about the same amount.

I’m misunderstanding something. Planes use twice as much fuel while road uses 20x more?

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#64

Post by dalyons » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:21 PM UTC

margalabargala wrote: post #48

braiamp wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To further give context: the article is saying that most of the fuel transported around is done for long distances, so when something removes fuel use in the consumer side it has a double dip effect: less fuel consumed and less fuel used to transport the fuel, since long fuel supplies route diminish. It's a third order of thinking and that's why it's confusing. The article then argues that reducing that consumption i…

I wonder if this actually has the potential to have the opposite effect. If an oil producer electrifies faster than average, for example Norway, then oil that might have been consumed domestically instead is shipped overseas.

There are relatively few oil exporting countries so probably not a big effect

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#65

Post by lostlogin » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:23 PM UTC

kleiba2 wrote: post #62

bruce511 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of EV energy (to the driver) is about half that of the cost of gas energy. And that's if you buy electricity at charging stations [1]. If you charge at home it gets less. If you have solar at home it approaches zero. Yes, the cost of the car itself is a factor, but even there prices are dropping all the time. >> when you can only take 10% as much fuel effeciency makes all the difference when we discuss % of…

Before the Iran war, I did a back of the envelope calculation for the price of gas of your average ICE for a certain fixed range vs. the price of electricity an average EV uses for the same range. This was under the assumption that you buy electricity at a random charging station that you don't have a contract with. Based on these average values I used, EVs fared slightly worse. This was not factoring in costs of pur…

Doing the equation regularly would be interesting.

There are some other parameters to consider too. Stopping for fuel is not something I enjoyed. I can charge at home. You won’t have to stop to refuel in an EV unless you’re going a long way. If you’re going a long way the stop will be longer. Much worse.

You won’t service an EV much, that’s nice.

The silence is bliss.

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#66

Post by sarchertech » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:25 PM UTC

kleiba2 wrote: post #62

bruce511 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of EV energy (to the driver) is about half that of the cost of gas energy. And that's if you buy electricity at charging stations [1]. If you charge at home it gets less. If you have solar at home it approaches zero. Yes, the cost of the car itself is a factor, but even there prices are dropping all the time. >> when you can only take 10% as much fuel effeciency makes all the difference when we discuss % of…

Before the Iran war, I did a back of the envelope calculation for the price of gas of your average ICE for a certain fixed range vs. the price of electricity an average EV uses for the same range. This was under the assumption that you buy electricity at a random charging station that you don't have a contract with. Based on these average values I used, EVs fared slightly worse. This was not factoring in costs of pur…

Were you using DC fast charging stations or level 2? Fast charging is about 2x the price.

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#67

Post by Y-bar » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:27 PM UTC

hvb2 wrote: post #55

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other nice thing is that the batteries on cars can effectively act as grid energy storage even without v2g. Simple offpeak/low rate charging setups can take the most efficiently generated cheap power. In Australia power prices are often negative in the day due to solar and there's various variable rate plans you can get to take advantage (Australia dwarfs all other nations in per capita solar; even China is nowhe…

I don't disagree with you but every country is different. Australia gets a lot of sunshine and is sparsely populated, so plenty of room for solar anyway. This is not the case everywhere though. It can be a good example though of how you overproduce during the day and use that to charge car batteries for example

Australia is at about 3,5 persons per square kilometre and as you say one of the most sparsely populated countries on earth.

Compare to for example Denmark at 149 persons per square kilometre. Denmark needs about 35 TWh per year in electricity, so about 1,7% of their land area would need to to covered with panels to supply that.

(This is obviously napkin math and just a thought exercise)

If they were to convert their sheep pastures to dual-use like this (https://www.americangrassfed.org/solar-grazing-with-sheep-a-...) Denmark would be almost 40% solar powered without giving up any additional land area.

Denmark obviously has a lot of wind power and should not convert to a majority solar power for their grid, but I want to illustrate that the land area use may not necessarily be such a strong argument against significantly increasing solar power in more densely populated countries.

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#68

Post by crote » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:32 PM UTC

kleiba2 wrote: post #62

bruce511 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of EV energy (to the driver) is about half that of the cost of gas energy. And that's if you buy electricity at charging stations [1]. If you charge at home it gets less. If you have solar at home it approaches zero. Yes, the cost of the car itself is a factor, but even there prices are dropping all the time. >> when you can only take 10% as much fuel effeciency makes all the difference when we discuss % of…

Before the Iran war, I did a back of the envelope calculation for the price of gas of your average ICE for a certain fixed range vs. the price of electricity an average EV uses for the same range. This was under the assumption that you buy electricity at a random charging station that you don't have a contract with. Based on these average values I used, EVs fared slightly worse. This was not factoring in costs of pur…

> buy electricity at a random charging station

Well there's your problem. Try doing the same calculation with the average residential electricity cost. Most car use is for commutes after all, so most people can just charge their EV in their driveway every night.

Destination charging and rapid charging are notoriously expensive. It's a luxury product intended for a once-a-year road trip. It is not even remotely representative of your average charging cost. Street-side charging is slightly less excessive, but you're still paying a serious premium.

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#69

Post by crote » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:37 PM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #63

bryanlarsen wrote: post #27

The top graph makes it seem much more dramatic than it is. Maritime shipping is very efficient, and consists of a very small fraction of overall petroleum usage. Road transportation uses about 20x as much fuel as ocean shipping, planes use about 2x as much, and trains about the same amount. The typical rule of thumb is that about 40% of the energy in a barrel of petroleum is lost before it goes into your gas tank. An…

> Road transportation uses about 20x as much fuel as ocean shipping, planes use about 2x as much, and trains about the same amount. I’m misunderstanding something. Planes use twice as much fuel while road uses 20x more?

There are way more cars than planes.

Re: Fossil Fuels Are 40% of Freight Shipping Tonnage, but Half Its Fuel Use

#70

Post by Fwirt » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 7:39 PM UTC

kleiba2 wrote: post #62

bruce511 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of EV energy (to the driver) is about half that of the cost of gas energy. And that's if you buy electricity at charging stations [1]. If you charge at home it gets less. If you have solar at home it approaches zero. Yes, the cost of the car itself is a factor, but even there prices are dropping all the time. >> when you can only take 10% as much fuel effeciency makes all the difference when we discuss % of…

Before the Iran war, I did a back of the envelope calculation for the price of gas of your average ICE for a certain fixed range vs. the price of electricity an average EV uses for the same range. This was under the assumption that you buy electricity at a random charging station that you don't have a contract with. Based on these average values I used, EVs fared slightly worse. This was not factoring in costs of pur…

We just bought our first (used) EV, and charging stations are the Wild West right now. Any random station you pull up to might charge close to the local cost of electricity, or some wild sky-high amount. And hopefully they’ll tell you what that is before you have to swipe your card. There the economics can swing towards gas cars depending on how absurd your local charging station prices are. For people filling their tank every couple days because of a 2 hour commute or something an EV may still not make sense financially. But if you’re putting in under 40 miles and have even a modest 120v 12 amp circuit you can plug into at home (e.g. a dedicated washing machine circuit) you’ll likely only need a charging station on rare occasions such as a road trip. As a matter of fact I am writing this from our first EV road trip. The inconvenience has been comparatively minor and our “fuel” costs should end up being about half of what they would have been in our hybrid SUV.