[Tanada]

Another way to think about it, one liter of oil at 100 C carries X quantity of heat while one liter of water at 100 C carries 2.5X quantity of heat, but this is the safe heating limit for water. By switching to oil and increasing the temperature of the oil to 250 C you can transport the same 2.5X of heat and with oil you can even raise the temperature to 300 C by choosing the right kind of oil without risk of boiling the fluid and transfer 3.0 X heat per liter of fluid.

The difference between 2.5 and 3 isn't that big, is it?

That is a question of what you are trying to accomplish with the heat For common purposes like household heating it is a difference that makes no distinction. On the other hand if you are using the heat to flash cook food you are running through your food processing plant then faster is better with potentially higher profit margins.

[Doly]

On the other hand if you are using the heat to flash cook food you are running through your food processing plant then faster is better with potentially higher profit margins.

If you insist on looking at it that way, my "food processing plant" tells me that most of the world isn't very energy efficient, for any meaning of "energy" that I'm aware of.

[Tanada]

On the other hand if you are using the heat to flash cook food you are running through your food processing plant then faster is better with potentially higher profit margins.

If you insist on looking at it that way, my "food processing plant" tells me that most of the world isn't very energy efficient, for any meaning of "energy" that I'm aware of.

That is a very true statement, most of the world is extremely energy inefficient. We like ICE engines because they send mechanical power to where we want it very quickly, but burning the same fuel in a Cheng cycle power plant would convert over 3 times as much energy into useful work from the same quantity of fuel and the waste heat could also be used for warming a greenhouse or district heating if we really wanted to make the system efficient. However efficiency comes from complexity and extra processing steps and most people want quick and simple.

[JuanP]

On the other hand if you are using the heat to flash cook food you are running through your food processing plant then faster is better with potentially higher profit margins.

If you insist on looking at it that way, my "food processing plant" tells me that most of the world isn't very energy efficient, for any meaning of "energy" that I'm aware of.

I consider more than 99% of energy used in the world today wasted. All of human civilization is built upon waste, and we have never been most wasteful as a species than we are now.

[vtsnowedin]

I consider more than 99% of energy used in the world today wasted. All of human civilization is built upon waste, and we have never been most wasteful as a species than we are now.

99%wasted? Hardly. The energy to heat a home in a northern winter .. Wasted? No. The energy used to plant and harvest a crop wasted? No, The energy to transport that crop in it's final form to your store wasted? NO. The energy to turn wheat into flour and then into bread or bagels wasted? NO. ETC.ETC.
Now a ICE car is about 30% efficient with 35% going out the radiator as waste heat and the other 35% going out the tailpipe as hot exhaust gasses. But you can't get the 30% that propels the car without releasing that other 70% so while you can label it wasted energy it really is just the cost of doing what you want to do.