Earlier quoted context omitted.
The conflict between Russia and the west is deeply rooted on the hegemony of rampant worldwide liberalism which creates the problems I described. It's a meat grinder which consumes not only excessive energy but people's livelihoods, too. It is certainly not a world I would want my son to live in.
The interesting thing isn't even your assesment of "west", but what values you assign to russia. They are absolutely wrong. It's (for someone, paradoxically) extremely individualistic slave nation with very deep hierarchies of power.
All poverty is energy poverty
231–240 of 466 posts
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> especially if look at the market share of renewables in total energy which includes not only electricity but also heating and transportation. You missed my point. If that existing non-renewable energy was used efficiently, like a Germany and UK that used heat pumps for domestic heating powered by the exact same gas they squander now in poorly insulated homes with a COP 1/5th what they otherwise could have, the ener…
I see your point, however, I've seen a lot of local renovation projects for energy efficiency and my conclusion is that while they should be done (because they're cost effective), that is the slow, long-term solution since that effectively requires reconstructing much of the housing stock, which is going to take decades - so that's not a plausible solution for any short term problems, filling the energy gap with more…
On Europe:
All the sensible responses to this crisis involved rolling out insulation in the short term.
REPowerEU: A plan to rapidly reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels and fast forward the green transition
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_22_...
> Energy savings are the quickest and cheapest way to address the current energy crisis, and reduce bills. The Commission proposes to enhance long-term energy efficiency measures, including an increase from 9% to 13% of the binding Energy Efficiency Target under the ‘Fit for 55' package of European Green Deal legislation
A 10-Point Plan to Reduce the European Union’s Reliance on Russian Natural Gas
https://www.iea.org/reports/a-10-point-plan-to-reduce-the-eu...
> 4. Accelerate the deployment of new wind and solar projects
> 7. Speed up the replacement of gas boilers with heat pumps
> 8. Accelerate energy efficiency improvements in buildings and industry
> 10. Step up efforts to diversify and decarbonise sources of power system flexibility ("A portfolio of options will be required, including enhanced grids, energy efficiency, increased electrification and demand-side response")
What does conflict in Ukraine mean for UK energy?
https://eciu.net/analysis/briefings/uk-energy-policies-and-p...
> Despite not importing much Russian gas directly, a drop in global supply – Russia is the second largest gas producer (17% of global output in 2020) – will affect the international gas markets that impact the UK.
> As a result, bills in the UK (and likely globally) will soar because of conflict in Ukraine, potentially up to £3,000 in October 2022, (a £600 increase from previously expected levels). However, some doubt that bills will get this high as there are still significant data gaps needed to forecast future bill levels.
> Energy efficiency is an obvious near term step, as it could reduce the UK’s total gas demand by 7-8% and imports by 15% while delivering bill savings to households.
On Africa:
if they don't have the energy now, they need to build it. What is the cheapest available source of new energy? What is the best way to make that energy go furthest? None of these basics things are discussed, because tha article wants to shill for fossil fuels, and actively make these problems worse in Europe and Africa.
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
See my other reply.
What other reply? You talk about refining. There's 10% lost in refining. X% lost in extraction and Y% lost in transmission (shipping, pipes, etc). Solar => Grid => Car Battery is less than 10% lost usually. Obviously it can vary a lot - so can oil extraction, shipping and refining... This means Solar => Grid => Car battery is >5x as efficient as Oil in ground => Pipes => Refinery => Pipes => Gas Station => Car. Once…
Solar and wind have so far not been nearly adequate to charge existing EVs, let alone what would be necessary if we all converted to EVs.
Given the reluctance to expand nuclear power, we're going to be charging EVs with fossil fuels for a long time.
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
What explains the big difference?
Cold air likes to go down. When you open a fridge door, the cold air pours out at the bottom. When you open a chest, it stays in the chest. Also, a freezer probably has better insulation than a fridge to begin with, since it's designed to hold bigger temperature differential.
Fridges should probably be designed with multiple sections rather than open shelves?
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
But only around 30% of the refined fuel’s energy transfers into useful work done with the ICE vehicle. If the BEV is running with their 2kw heating turned up full blast in addition to running down the road, and there was a heat loss of around 2-5% while charging the car then We’re still at around 3x more efficient in the BEV vs the ICE. Then there’s the electricity supply which ranges from 0 refinement loss and 50% t…
> But only around 30% of the refined fuel’s energy transfers into useful work done with the ICE vehicle. Right. Now factor in the losses in thermodynamic electric power generation to fuel the EV. > We’re still at around 3x more efficient in the BEV vs the ICE. Don't neglect the losses from generating that electricity, which is about 70%.
>> Don't neglect the losses from generating that electricity, which is about 70%
What? There’s 70% loss in the process of generating electricity? Where does that occur?
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. I was going to make the same post. I'm a huge fan of all of the mod-cons, but for most of human history people lived with pre-industrial-revolution levels of tech. And we still had rich and poor. Poverty is when you don't have a good place in society, lack of respect by your fellows, and no security for your physical safety or property.
I think this misses the point of the article. Yes, the world has had, and will always have, rich and poor. But to raise the poor up, what you fundamentally need is more energy . I think this article also does a good job in emphasizing country-level poverty is what's really important to think about. That is, in the US, since we already have the infrastructure of a rich country, even poor people can afford safe food an…
Right. Don’t confuse “poor”, ie relative poverty, with absolute levels of wealth ($ per household) and downstream claims about absolute levels of, say, child mortality.
In 1800, almost everyone was destitute by current standards, even prosperous merchants. Child mortality rates were appalling. And at the same time, there was a spectrum between relatively rich and poor, and merchants appeared “rich”.
The article is solely about absolute wealth levels, and is making empirical claims about energy requirements to get there. Concerns about wealth inequality are orthogonal to this set of claims. You could have incredibly equal or unequal societies, but none of them can (with current technology) produce low child mortality rates with very-low per capita energy usage.
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another way to fix the problem would be to help Ukraine a bit more and forcibly take the gas from Russia as reparations. At this point it’s obvious their military was all bluff. This doesn’t even change the final outcome, it just speeds it up - USA won’t allow Russia to become China’s asset, and there aren’t that many options to guarantee that.
> Another way to fix the problem would be to help Ukraine a bit more and forcibly take the gas from Russia as reparations. Nuclear weapons foreclose many options.
Why assume this one Russian weapon actually works, if all others turned out to be shit?
Seriously, can we really expect a country that can’t even manufacture cars to be able to refurbish nukes?
Not to mention that the assumptions of MAD doctrine might not have been true for quite some time now. Which means, even if those nukes left their silos, they might not get anywhere near the targets.
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#238This is not a good take. Look at Iraq or Venezuela. No lack of energy, but plenty of poverty nonetheless.
Energy is a necessary but not sufficient condition for wealth.
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
That makes sense. The definition might get a bit fuzzy when you have to account for the energy use of producing imported products, but I probably am getting a bit pedantic at this point. The overall point The article tries to make - poorer countries need more energy to get out of poverty - seems good.
Yeah, I think the whole thing about being modelled on Britain is deeply flawed - be like Britain, have a relatively small population in a temperate climate with lots of coast line for off-shore wind and tidal energy, and off-shore all your heavy manufacturing processes. Who is going to tell Floridians they need to be like Britain and turn off their AC?
We've over populated the planet, surely, we would otherwise have the option to readily move to an area with more suitable climate and plenty of space for refugees.
Re: All poverty is energy poverty
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
What other reply? You talk about refining. There's 10% lost in refining. X% lost in extraction and Y% lost in transmission (shipping, pipes, etc). Solar => Grid => Car Battery is less than 10% lost usually. Obviously it can vary a lot - so can oil extraction, shipping and refining... This means Solar => Grid => Car battery is >5x as efficient as Oil in ground => Pipes => Refinery => Pipes => Gas Station => Car. Once…
Solar and wind have so far not been nearly adequate to charge existing EVs, let alone what would be necessary if we all converted to EVs. Given the reluctance to expand nuclear power, we're going to be charging EVs with fossil fuels for a long time.
>> we're going to be charging EVs with fossil fuels for a long time
Even if you never used wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, etc. then you’d still be ahead in the BEV case.
An oil power plant has around 42% thermal efficiency. A gas one 50%+ an ICE is only up to 35% but in the US it’s significantly lower on average.
Neither of which have tailpipe emissions in populated areas unlike ICE.
But we do also use wind, solar, nuclear etc as power sources for BEV.