Factorio Forums

I thought it was interesting to calculate the pollution of the Electric furnace and Steel furnace and see which one creates more pollution. I have used 100% steam based electricity generation for the calculation.

Some pollution calculations (all pollution is per tic)
Pollution boiler

• Pollution boiler at full power - 6
• Full power boiler - 390kW
• Pollution per KW Boiler - 0,0154/KW

edit: However as lxl said the coal needed for the boiler also gives pollution.

Pollution coal mining

• Boiler - 390kW
• Boiller eff - 0,5
• Boiler input - 780kW
• Coal energy - 8000kJ
• Speed req coal - 0,0975 coal/sec
• Drill - 90kW
• Poll per tic - 9
• Speed - 0,5 coal/sec
• % output mine for boiler -19.5%
• % output mine for kw power - 0,05%
  
  So the pollution from mining
• Pollution mining per output KW boiler- 0,0045/KW
• Pollution mining electricity per output KW boiler- 0,000693/KW
• Pollution mining total per output KW boiler - 0,0052/KW

Direct pollution electric furnace

• Pollution Electric furnace - 0,9
• Pollution Electric furnace per KW - 0,005/KW

Total pollution electric furnace

• Pollution Total Electric furnace per KW- 0,0256/KW
• Pollution Total Electric furnace- 4,61

Steel furnace

• Pollution steel furnace per KW- 0,02/KW
Pollution coal mining is half of electric furnace since the steel furnace is 100% efficient
• Pollution mining per KW - 0,0026/KW
• Pollution total steel furnace per KW - 0,0226/KW
• Pollution full power - 4,068

They have the same production speed, so with 100% steam generated electricity the steel furnaces generated less pollution then the electric ones.
One level 1 efficiency module for the electric furnace will reduce all the pollution with 30% giving 4,61*0.7=3,27, so 1 efficiency module is enough for the electric furnace to be less polluting than the steel furnace.

sebas wrote:Since it's no longer possible to use energy saving modules in Electric furnaces

This was a bug that should be fixed in 0.11.2 (https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =30&t=6337)

This was a bug that should be fixed in 0.11.2

Oh. I do however think that energy saving modules should not be in electric furnaces. The reason being that the heat which is is used in an electric furnace is technically energy waste. So by reducing the energy waste with an energy saving module you would in reality be reducing the heat for the furnace, which would hamper production.

That doesn't make any sense, sebas. The energy saving modules could just enhance the insulation of the furnace, or make anything else which saves energy, but doesn't reduce the production.

Thanks for the numbers. I wondered this too but was to lazy to calculate it.

But I like to point out that efficiency modules still work in furnaces. You just need to put them in via crtl-clicking directly from the inventory instead of moving them via drag and drop.

sebas wrote:by reducing the energy waste with an energy saving module you would in reality be reducing the heat for the furnace, which would hamper production.

Except that not all heat in an electric furnace goes to smelting. There's a fair bit of energy loss elsewhere. Think of it like adding a bunch of insulation or something.

On real world furnaces the kg Coal per kg ore (efficiency) and kg metal/kg ore (productivity) and kg/s metal per m² area(speed) have all been improved in the past significantly.
It's a lot about heat integration (use heat exchangers to cool down outflow and heat up inflow without external heat). There was a nice webpage to provide you with the data but it is been currently hacked by jimmy wales who has replaced all content by his face.

But back to the more important steel production:

--Without solar--
Steel Furnace has a higher product output and a lower coal consumption.

Consumption Calculation:
My current experiments did show that per 10 coal
63 iron or is smelted in the stone furnace
125 iron ore is smelted in the steel furnace
62 iron ore is smelted in the electric furnace(probably a small loss to heating up some water in the pipes.

Speed Calculation:
At the moment the coal run out at the electric furnace
25 ore were produced at stone furnace
71 were produced at steel furnace
62 were produced at electric furnace. (should be 71 because speed is the same as steel furnace... There's a small slowdown when electric energy dies but is not dead yet.. but the difference was visible long before..

So that's even more pollution per product by higher coal consumption.


Ilikemath.

I think that a baseline electric furnace should be a bit less efficient than a steel furnace. They can, afterall, be fitted with modules that improve efficiency or speed.

Well, it is, isn't it? According to the above posts.

Sting_Auer wrote:I think that a baseline electric furnace should be a bit less efficient than a steel furnace. They can, afterall, be fitted with modules that improve efficiency or speed.

Then again, they are much more expensive and need 3x3 space and not 2x2.

Steel Furnace has a higher product output and a lower coal consumption.

I have adjusted it for the the difference in coal consumption/mining pollution, but I have kept using the theoretical output.

Of course, you're talking about using steam here.

If you're using solar it's a no-brainer, generally. It means that you use much less coal, and hence have to worry about coal deposits running out that much less.

Sting_Auer wrote:I think that a baseline electric furnace should be a bit less efficient than a steel furnace. They can, afterall, be fitted with modules that improve efficiency or speed.

Electric furnaces currently are less efficient than steel furnaces. They use up 9 squares instead of the 4 needed for a steel furnace, they can smelt less ore per coal-burned than a steel furnace and produce more pollution than a steel furnace. Their only bonus without modules is ease of use. You don't need to run coal to them directly.

Only with modules do the electric furnaces come out ahead. They can be made less polluting, or faster smelting, or more output (productivity mods, but usually not a good investment).

Executer wrote:

Sting_Auer wrote:I think that a baseline electric furnace should be a bit less efficient than a steel furnace. They can, afterall, be fitted with modules that improve efficiency or speed.

Electric furnaces currently are less efficient than steel furnaces. They use up 9 squares instead of the 4 needed for a steel furnace,

You're forgetting about the need to get fuel to them. Takes an extra inserter plus some pieces of belt, making for a more complex setup and more space taken than the 4 you're going by (granted, since that fuel belt can be shared between opposite furances, it doesn't add up to 9 tiles, unless fuel is coming from a big distance, but still more than 4)

Boogieman14 wrote:

Executer wrote:

Sting_Auer wrote:I think that a baseline electric furnace should be a bit less efficient than a steel furnace. They can, afterall, be fitted with modules that improve efficiency or speed.

Electric furnaces currently are less efficient than steel furnaces. They use up 9 squares instead of the 4 needed for a steel furnace,

You're forgetting about the need to get fuel to them. Takes an extra inserter plus some pieces of belt, making for a more complex setup and more space taken than the 4 you're going by (granted, since that fuel belt can be shared between opposite furances, it doesn't add up to 9 tiles, unless fuel is coming from a big distance, but still more than 4)

Ah good point, I hadn't considered the belts and inserters. Likely 8 tiles per steel furnace then, 2 with belt and 2 with inserter/power pole or nothing.

And you forged the whole solar power thing. You can run a electric furnace on coal power (indirect) or solar power, but you can run a steel furnace only on coal. (Coal = coal + solid fuel)