Andy wrote:If that diagram does not illustrate the potential for efficiency gains (particularly combined heat and power), then nothing will. Distributed electricity production utilizing waste heat can chop the waste from the electricity section from 26 quads to possibly 10. Of course, large central generating facilities are not very compatible with combined heat and power.
Look at transportation as well. Look at the percentage waste, it is the highest of all the fuel uses. This can also be cut by more than half eventually if we decide to favour more collective transport, smaller vehicles and scale down the use of the ICEV (Internal combustion engine vehicle), scale down air transportation and favour more steel wheel on steel rail transportation.
OldSprocket wrote:Another point the diagram show me is that non-fossil electrical energy is such a small portion of the current energy diet. There is NO WAY to expand it to cover for all fossil fuels. The U.S. needs deeper change.
JayHMorrison wrote:OldSprocket wrote:Another point the diagram show me is that non-fossil electrical energy is such a small portion of the current energy diet. There is NO WAY to expand it to cover for all fossil fuels. The U.S. needs deeper change.
I believe it is very possible to have non-fossil fuel cover the electric grid component of our energy usage. Expanded nuclear and wind energy also with some hydro and solar will get us most of the way there. France gets about 70% of their electric grid from nuclear and they are massive exporters of electric grid energy to Spain and England.
The example set by France regarding nuclear energy is just about the only thing I admire about that country.
The transportation component of our energy use is much more difficult.
OldSprocket wrote:It may cover the non-fossil electrical component, but the electrical component is still a small part of the whole energy picture. I think many people are looking for non-fossil energy to power hydrogen cars, residential heat, and other uses where electricity has been a minor component. I still think there is NO WAY to cover our wasteful diet without fossil fuels.
As with all estimates, YMMV.
JayHMorrison wrote:The electrical component is not a "small" component of the whole energy picture. The electrical component appears to be about 60% of the picture.
OldSprocket wrote:Are we looking at the same diagram?
The figures in the diagram at the start of this thread say electrical energy provides less than twenty percent of the energy used. Of the electricity generated, sixty-six percent comes from fossil fuels, or thirty-four percent from non-fossil. Multiply thirty-four percent by twenty percent and I end up with less than seven percent.
Less than seven percent.
Please forgive me if I was looking at the wrong diagram.
JayHMorrison wrote:I am projecting forward based on example of France (nuclear 70%), Denmark (Wind 20%) and Germany (Wind 8%). Those examples tell us that it is feasible to have our electric grid be almost 100% non-fossil fuel based.
JayHMorrison wrote:So I start off with 60% of our gross total power being mostly non-fossil fuel based.
JayHMorrison wrote:The challenge is to shift as much as possible of our daily transportation to the electric grid where nuclear, wind, solar and hydro can carry the load in a non-fossil fuel manner which is mostly ultra low CO2 emmission.
Devil wrote:I don't understand what OS is trying to say. The total energy used to provide electricity is 38.44% of all the energy used. This is hardly negligible. Unfortunately, 68.85% of it is lost.
OldSprocket wrote:My point is that trying to power every air conditioner, power lawnmower, and giant SUV is preposterous. Reducing the energy budget is far more practical than expanding non-fossil electrical generation by 15 times its current size.
I live with off-grid electricity. I cycle. I'm not sure that we disagree too much as long as you might agree that non-fossil is currently a small portion of U.S. energy and that slashing energy use is as important or more important than expanding non-fossil electrical generation by 15 times.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 164 guests