I'll quote the following EIA page, hopefully it clears up the CO2/weight discussion.http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/co2_article/co2.html"Carbon dioxide (CO2) forms during coal combustion when one atom of carbon (C) unites with two atoms of oxygen (O) from the air. Because the atomic weight of carbon is 12 and that of oxygen is 16, the atomic weight of carbon dioxide is 44. Based on that ratio, and assuming complete combustion, 1 pound of carbon combines with 2.667 pounds of oxygen to produce 3.667 pounds of carbon dioxide. For example, coal with a carbon content of 78 percent and a heating value of 14,000 Btu per pound emits about 204.3 pounds of carbon dioxide per million Btu when completely burned.(5) Complete combustion of 1 short ton (2,000 pounds) of this coal will generate about 5,720 pounds (2.86 short tons) of carbon dioxide."
Hydrogen comprises only 10-14% of petroleum by weight, where carbon comprises 87%. The amount of resultant water vapor I believe is minimal. Coal, by way of comparison, is about 1% hydrogen.
Lastly, I promised a better spreadsheet that takes into account more factors. However, given that 50% of US domestic kwh is produced by coal, and the scarcity of data on the energy required to mine coal and refine petroleum, I've decided to publish the final spreadsheet with some minor tweaks and corrections.
When all is netted out, you can't get over the CO2 cost to ship from Saudia Arabia to the US. Perhaps if there was a closer source of oil, or you assume that HO is derived from domestic petroleum sources, you can get guilty about burning coal if you're CO2 biased.
I'd like someone in the shipping business to validate the supertanker fuel consumption and travel time, but outside of that, there's not much more I can do with the calcs. The data I used came from here http://www.epa.gov/OMS/models/nonrdmdl/c-marine/r00002.pdf
. As for me, I've satisifed my curiosity.
Thanks for the input.