Peak Oil News

 

  Login or Register
 
Menu
 News
 Search
 Topics
 Stories Archive
 Submit News
 Discussions
 Code of Conduct
 Forums
 Forums Search
 Last 24 Hours
 PO 24hrs
 Peak Blog
 Resources
 About Us
 Downloads
 Web Links
 PeakWiki
 PeakPortal
 Focus Search
 Peak TV
 Peak Oil Boston
 Members
 Your Account
 Members List
 Ignore List
 JOIN!
 Private Messages
 
google
 
PeakSpeak
NICKNAME

Download TeamSpeak
What is PeakSpeak?
Peak Oil on IRC
 
Photo Album
Submit Photo
Peakoil.com is You!


member photos
 
Light Sweet Crude Oil
 
Member Quotes
If "it's bunker time" why the fark do you care about the price of gold? You evolved some enzyme that lets you digest the stuff?

Narz

Suggest Quote

 
aspo08
 
ICM
Cisco & Net App Training
 
Peak Oil News: Forums

Peakoil.com :: View topic - The sheer magnitude of inefficiency!
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The sheer magnitude of inefficiency!
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly version    Peakoil.com Forum Index -> Conservation & Efficiency
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
yesplease
Fission
Fission


Joined: Oct 03, 2006
Posts: 2282

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:36 pm    Post subject: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

There are about 100 million households in the US[1] and each uses electricity at around 900kWh/month[2]. Given that the average US household uses around 9%[3] of it's consumption for lighting, widespread use of CFLs[4] would result in savings of around 75 billion kWh of electricity per year.

To put this into perspective, the Aptera Typ-1e has a 10kWh pack that takes it around 120 miles per charge[5]. The average vehicle in America is driven more than 12,000 miles per year today[6]. Since there are about 245 million passenger vehicles in the united states[7] we travel around three trillion miles per year. Widespread use of CFLs would free up enough electricity to power vehicles similar to the Aptera about a trillion miles per year. A single passenger variant would likely travel 1.5-2 trillion miles on that energy.

We've got energy problems alright, we can't find ways to waste it fast enough! Wink

P.S. This thread isn't about whether or not we would have enough raw materials to actually produce X amount of N type batteries, or vehicle safety, etc... It's just to illustrate the inefficiency we've all come to accept as common place. I would appreciate it if posts were on the topic of efficiency. Smile

[1]http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
[2]http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ind_assumptions.html
[3]http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/reps/enduse/er01_us.html
[4]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp
[5]http://www.aptera.com/details.php
[6]http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/saving/efficiency/savingenergy.html
[7]http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_11.html
_________________
Professor Membrane wrote:
Not now son! I'm making...TOAST!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dooberheim
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Aug 07, 2005
Posts: 302
Location: Columbia, MO

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:50 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Merely unplugging and turning off unused appliances and lights would save even more than that.

I don't know the Aptera, but assume from the small battery pack that it is a small, light car. Small and light haven't penetrated the US driver's thinking yet - I'm hoping that Chavez will cut us off for 6 months or something similar. Then we might get somewhere along these lines.

DK
_________________
Carpe Scrotum!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yesplease
Fission
Fission


Joined: Oct 03, 2006
Posts: 2282

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:01 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

It's classified as an enclosed two seat motorcycle for emissions purposes, but some just call it a sperm on wheels. Very Happy

Definitely aimed at the fringe. They are a few grand more than a Prius but are way more efficient. Smile
_________________
Professor Membrane wrote:
Not now son! I'm making...TOAST!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kingcoal
Expert
Expert


Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 2330
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:34 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

I agree, Internal Combustion Engines used for vehicles are a fantastically inefficient use of energy. Unlike an electric motor, an ICE is, at best, about 40% efficient and that figure is based on highway driving. Most engines are well below that figure. In addition, that figure is based on highway use, around town I wouldn't be surprised if an ICE was below 10%

Electric motors are in excess of 90% efficient under almost all operating conditions. Also, unlike an ICE, the motor does not need to idle at stop lights. When you’re moving, it's on, when you’re stopped or coasting, it's off. Electric cars can be recharged at night, when the grid is mostly just idling. We will have fully electric cars in the future, unless there isn't enough oil to build them.
_________________
"That's the problem with mercy, kid... It just ain't professional" - Fast Eddie, The Color of Money
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pixie
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Sep 05, 2006
Posts: 344
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:22 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Hey, I know you said you just wanted to use this thread to bitch, but I have been distracted by the shiny you pointed out to us: http://www.aptera.com/details.php That thing rocks and I want one! Why, if we could switch our car fleet over to stuff like this we could double or even triple the lifespan of our way of life!

Wait, maybe that's not a good thing.
_________________
Just another tofu-munching bike-riding Rambo(/Rambette)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yesplease
Fission
Fission


Joined: Oct 03, 2006
Posts: 2282

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:49 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Kingcoal wrote:
In addition, that figure is based on highway use, around town I wouldn't be surprised if an ICE was below 10%
It's around 15% based on what I've seen, but that is only because it's pushing around thousands of pounds of SUV. For instance the ICE in a Chevy Corvette may not run as efficiently as the same thing in a Suburban, because the vette doesn't require as much energy as the burb, even though it gets better mileage. Less load on the engine usually translates to lower engine efficiency even if it does mean better mileage.

Pixie wrote:
Why, if we could switch our car fleet over to stuff like this we could double or even triple the lifespan of our way of life!

Wait, maybe that's not a good thing.
Define 'way of life'... Wink
_________________
Professor Membrane wrote:
Not now son! I'm making...TOAST!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SolarDave
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: May 19, 2005
Posts: 380

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:48 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Speaking of lights, efficiency and materials....

There are something like 5 separate breakers in my breaker box, meaning five separate circuits - each wired separately with 14 gauge copper wire - to run the lighting in my house.

And yet - my built-in lights (the only ones using those circuits) total under 1,000 Watts for the entire house. I am wayyy past CFL's. In the ceiling "cans" I have 10 (1) 2.5 Watt (!!!) LED Par 20 lights. I have CFL's everywhere else.

I laugh at the fixtures that say "Warning! Use 100 Watt or less bulb" as I screw in 2.5 Watt bulbs. But I still have the copper wiring for 100 Watts everywhere.

I wonder when we will start thinking differently.
_________________
Posted from a Solar/Pedal Powered Computer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kingcoal
Expert
Expert


Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 2330
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:16 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Remember that it's peak oil, not peak coal - yet. We're running out of hydrocarbons, 70% of oil goes into transportation, so that's the emergency right now. We have to solve our transportation problem before anything else.
_________________
"That's the problem with mercy, kid... It just ain't professional" - Fast Eddie, The Color of Money
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patience
Expert
Expert


Joined: Jan 04, 2008
Posts: 1504

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:31 am    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Kingcoal, Yep! And from high school physics, Force = Mass x Acceleration. If we reduce the mass, the required force is less. Nothing new here. It's easy enough to do. Lighter car requires lighter udercarraige, reduces the mass further, and requires even less power. The smaller engine is lighter, too, etc.

All you have to do, in practice, then, is to 1) Pay for tooling up, and 2) SELL it, to pay for tooling and make a profit.

In 1978, I was a tool designer at GM when they had a Chevette on the test track in Warren , MI, that got 78 mpg, using a small 3-cyl. Japanese diesel engine. It met emission standards, but it had one problem. THEY COULDN'T SELL IT. The technology is there. Notice, this was 30 years ago!

The problem has always been, and will always be what the majority wants to buy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patience
Expert
Expert


Joined: Jan 04, 2008
Posts: 1504

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:39 am    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

For a look at why we have this consumer attitude, read on old book by Vance Packard, "The Satus Seekers", explaining the massive ad campaign that exploited the low self esteem of blue collar people by telling them they could BUY staus, via a new car with bigger body, tailfins, engine, etc., ad nauseum.

Let's put the blame where it belongs, an unholy alliance of corporate greed, ad men, oil men, and politicians that started it all, and supports it to this day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PhebaAndThePilgrim
Expert
Expert


Joined: Jul 29, 2005
Posts: 252
Location: Show-Me State

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:42 am    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Good day from Pheba, from the farm:
Last year we were using about 900 Kwh per month to fuel our farm and home. We are now using about 450 Kwh per month.
We only changed a few things.
First, our home is 9 years old, and was built without any central or window air conditioning. During the summer we keep all windows closed during the heat of the day, and turn the attic fan on after the outside temperature drops lower than the inside temperature. The house never gets over 85 to 87 degrees, even on the hottest day., and once the attic fan comes on the house cools down very nice. We have a lot of trees around the house, and three years ago I Planted a tree on the hottest side of the house, the east side.
I have a large laundry room with a clothing rack. I take clothes out of the washer, and pop them in the dryer for about 5 to 10 minutes. This is just long enough for some heat to remove wrinkles, I then hang the clothing up wet in the laundry room. I am very creative at hanging up clothing to dry in the laundry room. My husband put up a drying rack for small items.
The two most expensive items to dry are bath towels, and blue jeans. We have a two story home, and sheets and blankets get hung on the 2nd floor banister over the stairs. Putting a bath towel in a dryer is stupid. Why use power to dry an item that you plan on getting wet again. it makes as much sense as watering a lawn so you can mow it.
We put in the new type of light bulbs. We turn off all lights, and we use surge protectors to turn appliances off and on, especially our large television set.
We do not use a surge protector on the microwave or radio. Constant turning off and on seems to totally mess them up.
I once had a computer person tell me to leave my computer on all of the time. That goes against everything I believe in. The computer is always turned completely off when I finish using it.
Oh, another thing, and this is personal. I use a large bath towel to dry my body, and I hang it back up to use again. I then use a new small washcloth each time to dry private parts. I can launder a ton of washcloths for the energy used to launder one bath towel.
I have also cut my monthly auto mileage in half. I have done this by stopping silly trips, and I combine trips. If I have a physician appointment in our big city, which is 26 miles away, then I make sure I run several other errands on that same day.
Pheba.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pixie
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Sep 05, 2006
Posts: 344
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:56 am    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

patience wrote:
For a look at why we have this consumer attitude, read on old book by Vance Packard, "The Satus Seekers", explaining the massive ad campaign that exploited the low self esteem of blue collar people by telling them they could BUY staus, via a new car with bigger body, tailfins, engine, etc., ad nauseum.

Let's put the blame where it belongs, an unholy alliance of corporate greed, ad men, oil men, and politicians that started it all, and supports it to this day.


Yeah, we could sell small cars if the admen focused on making them sexy. Remember all those little two-person sports cars? If the Honda Insight had had a decent ad campaign focusing on how sexy the slick lines and high technology were, they could have sold it.

They'd have to get to people at Consumer Reports on their side. CR, and all the other car reviewers out there, have to stop judging cars on their acceleration. Acceleration is only useful if you think of the freeway as a race track. Any car that can get to 65 in the length of an on-ramp is as fast as it needs to be.
_________________
Just another tofu-munching bike-riding Rambo(/Rambette)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dooberheim
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Aug 07, 2005
Posts: 302
Location: Columbia, MO

PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:30 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Pixie wrote:
. Any car that can get to 65 in the length of an on-ramp is as fast as it needs to be.


The Suzuki Swift of 1990 meets those guidelines. 50 mpg on the highway, on gasoline. Dammit, why can't we go back to this?

DK
_________________
Carpe Scrotum!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tyler_JC
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: Sep 25, 2004
Posts: 4530
Location: Boston, MA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 5:10 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

dooberheim wrote:
Pixie wrote:
. Any car that can get to 65 in the length of an on-ramp is as fast as it needs to be.


The Suzuki Swift of 1990 meets those guidelines. 50 mpg on the highway, on gasoline. Dammit, why can't we go back to this?

DK


We can!

That's the great part about higher prices, it creates consumer demand for more efficient vehicles.

The cost to retrofit the entire US auto industry to produce super efficient plug-in hybrid/electric vehicles is somewhere in the neighborhood of $60-80 billion.


And guess what, Americans spend roughly a trillion dollars a year on new automobiles.

Retool your entire business at a cost of only one month's revenue. Rolling Eyes

It's too bad that car companies are too stupid to do the basic calculations.

Fortunately, I'm capable of doing math.

Kia Motors to build $1.2 billion auto plant in Georgia

At a cost of $1.2 billion, Kia Motors will be able to build 300,000 cars per year.

Assuming they wanted to pay off their entire factory's construction cost in one year, what would the cost per vehicle be?

$1,200,000,000 divided by 300,000 is $4,000.

That's right. Four thousand dollars per vehicle in order to pay off the investment in only one year.

And considering that car companies don't plan on shutting down the factory after only 12 months of operation...

Smile

I hope I've just proved that the "WE CANT RETOOL THE FACTORIES!!!" argument is complete and utter fantasy.

But wait. What would it cost to retool the entire US auto-manufacturing capacity to build all of the cars we need in a year?

16,000,000 cars times $4000/car is:

$64 billion.


Want to build enough factories to replace the entire US autofleet in one year?

240,000,000 cars times $4000/car is:

$960 billion.

Now of course, that figure is useless because we don't need (nor would anyone want) the capacity to replace the entire US auto-fleet every year.

Would anyone like to challenge my calculations?

Even if I'm underestimating the cost by $100 billion, I'm still proposing a solution to our transportation problem that is as cheap or cheaper than the current bailout proposed by the Bush Administration.
_________________
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Tanada
Expert
Expert


Joined: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 3625
Location: West shore Lake Eire, MI, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:28 pm    Post subject: Re: The sheer magnitude of inefficiency! Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Tyler, I promise nobody is supplying that KIA factory with free raw materials and free labor for the year! Or any other factory for that matter! Even slaves add expenses, they have to receive minimum food, water, shelter etc etc....

As for the raw materials those have gone through the roof thanx to $90.00 oil and the building boom in China.
_________________
Oxygen: - An intensely habit-forming accumulative toxic substance. As little
as one breath is known to produce a life-long addiction to the gas, which addiction invariably ends in death.--Isaac Asimov
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly version    Peakoil.com Forum Index -> Conservation & Efficiency All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Atom News FeedRSS 1.0 News FeedRSS 2.0 News FeedRSS Forums Feed