All poverty is energy poverty • Hacker News Board

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#291

Post by CraigJPerry » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 7:59 PM UTC

aidenn0 wrote: post #256

CraigJPerry wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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, nuc…

And you're going to get around 80% from your EV after round trip through a battery. EVs powered by oil power plants is not a good use of energy. Fortunately, that's not what we are doing. I just wish EV proponents would stop pretending it is. Is there a term for a self-inflicted straw-man?

>> around 80% from your EV after round trip through a battery

I didn't follow this part, there’s an energy loss in the process of charging the battery and there’s a loss in the process of converting from dc battery to ac traction motor, but it’s well shy of 20%. The high amperage involved in both charging and discharging mean losses are low (because if they were high, you’d generate so much heat as to make the system unusable)

>> EVs powered by oil power plants is not a good use of energy

It’s a huge step forward from ICE. You’ve cut disease rates in the population by moving tail pipe emissions away from population centres. You’ve swapped a circa 30% efficient process for a circa 40%-60% efficient process. Not to mention the emissions benefits of LNG over Gasoline or diesel.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#292

Post by cryptonector » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:01 PM UTC

_vdpp wrote: post #10

I’ve long suspected that currencies are really just units of measurement convertible to the joule (or calorie).

Yes, but more like power than energy. The main problem is that energy can't really be stored, so energy cannot be saved like money can (sort of). So it is really power that money buys, not energy, and only supposing power is available.

This is yet another reason that proof-of-work schemes are a disaster for society: they waste its most precious material asset!

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#293

Post by FooBarWidget » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:01 PM UTC

trasz wrote: post #237

golemotron wrote: post #166

Earlier 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. 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.

You want to play Russian roulette on nuclear weapons? Are you listening to yourself right now?

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#294

Post by danhor » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:02 PM UTC

bequanna wrote: post #105

danhor wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the case? The big issue in europe is that electricity is expensive, not unreliable. With more renewables the current price spikes in fossil energy wouldn't hurt so much (or, admittedly, more local production capability of fossil energy).

You sure about that? You can't replace base load with intermittent generation sources and expect fewer price spikes. Ya'll better get busy building those nuke plants like NOW.

> expect fewer price spikes.

No. But depending on what you're replacing with how much capacity, you can get cheaper electricity on average (for example removing coal). And the nuclear exit in europe, apart from germany, happened (and is happening) more to the lack of replacement capacity than expectation of direct replacement by renewables. In germany, the exit was more-or-less driven by fear. New NPPs are really (and I mean really) expensive and there is little expectation that with conventional NPP that can significantly change.

And stability & price are not the same.

> Ya'll better get busy building those nuke plants like NOW.

Have you looked at construction times in Western Countries, even pro-nuclear ones like france? That's like the worst idea. It'd take at least 20 years with conventional technology. Modular reactors aren't ready right now (and I'd be surprised if they solved the issues that are leading to the reduction in nuclear generation we're seeing around the world, but that question doesn't have a firm answer yet).

The solution is building out renewables and investing in storage. Hydrogen and P2G both don't have any fundamental difficulties, the will to implement them on a large scale just isn't there right now. Even regular electrochemical cells should be doable if needed. Due to wind turbines producing more in winter, you only have to bridge the normal day-night cycle and low-wind periods in winter across the EU.

We'd already be in a better position if we'd have invested more in electrifying stuff, since that usually improves the efficiency (even end-to-end when looking at gas power plants).

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#295

Post by joe_the_user » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:03 PM UTC

Ozzie_osman wrote: post #15

Interesting to see the comment thread digging into all sorts of criticism of the article (is it 2 kWh / fridge? Or 1.1? Should the author discuss renewable earlier or more seriously?) The main point I got from the article was a helpful reminder that a large part of the world doesn't have basic things that I take for granted (not just refrigeration, but you might also include air conditioning, transportation, etc). An…

It's good to remember how starved for resources some places are.

It's bad to take that resource starvation as the only/primary cause of poverty. The example I like using is that the life expectancy in counties in Alabama has been less than that in Bangladesh for a while. Here, individual's lack of access to resources which exist in the area is more the issue.

One of many articles on this: "Life Expectancy in Some U.S. Counties Is No Better Than in the Third World" https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/life-ex...

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#296

Post by osigurdson » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:04 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #206

bluetomcat wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When energy runs out, or becomes significantly more expensive, it's game over for developed countries. Western society is inefficient at a macro level, even though it may seem efficient from the financial perspective of a single company or an individual. People cover huge distances to work. Companies are moving goods, components and people from all over the world. People change jobs (losing focus) and their residen…

> even though it may seem efficient from the financial perspective of a single company or an individual The national highway system and 1950s’ surburbanisation are top-down policy choices, not emergent behaviour.

I suspect that is what people wanted as well (not only governments).

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#297

Post by bluetomcat » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:04 PM UTC

ptsneves wrote: post #207

bluetomcat wrote: post #200

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.

I guess the world you want your son to live in is one of planned economies and great leaps forward. I for one do not. I would rather that innovation and competitive forces lead into the future of societies. As Stalin used to say: no people no problem.

It’s not a planned central economy. It is self-reliant local communities within regional bounds, like a fault-tolerant distributed system. They would trade primarily with adjacent regions stuff that they don’t or can’t produce locally. Knowledge, information and education should flow freely everywhere, enabling peace. People should feel comfortable living in their birthplace and should have no motivation for economic migration.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#298

Post by 6figurelenins » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:05 PM UTC

bluetomcat wrote: post #163

ciconia wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting to see the comment thread digging into all sorts of criticism of the article (is it 2 kWh / fridge? Or 1.1? Should the author discuss renewable?) Hear hear. The point is, for those of us living in developed countries, is that all wealth is energy wealth. The western way of life is totally dependent on an abundance of cheap energy. When energy runs out, or becomes significantly more expensive, it's game…

> When energy runs out, or becomes significantly more expensive, it's game over for developed countries. Western society is inefficient at a macro level, even though it may seem efficient from the financial perspective of a single company or an individual. People cover huge distances to work. Companies are moving goods, components and people from all over the world. People change jobs (losing focus) and their residen…

> wasted resources and duplication

This is 19th century zeitgeist.

It failed to recognize fulfillment of human needs as an evolutionary process. "Waste and duplication" -- trial and error -- is necessary. You can't design for what you haven't discovered.

Here's a picture that always humbles me, representing one infinitesimal aspect of human thriving.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions#/m...

> You can decrease the energy consumption significantly without affecting the quality of life in case of adopting a new political philosophy

Does it involve telling people what constitutes "quality of life?" Why does this "new" political (in fact: economic) philosophy so often devastate so many lives?

Even if you presume to run human civilization as an ant colony (How dare you?), even with honest intentions, centralization is a bad idea. It lets you pretend you're making informed decisions based on a complete model, and not just running an experiment with global risk.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#299

Post by rglullis » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:05 PM UTC

nickpp wrote: post #252

bluetomcat wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better alternative would be to have localised production and localised consumption of food and most basic goods. Stuff like not having foreign-cuisine restaurants and not buying salmon from thousands of kilometers away. Cloth production should follow the same idea. People should feel more attached to their birthplace and the goal should be to develop their skills locally with one company preferably. Strong bonds wi…

You are describing a world of slaves. How many people are you willing to sacrifice to achieve you vision?

Is participating jn an Amish village "slavery"? An Israeli Kibutz?

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#300

Post by tomp » Mon, Sep 05, 2022, 8:05 PM UTC

bluetomcat wrote: post #163

ciconia wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting to see the comment thread digging into all sorts of criticism of the article (is it 2 kWh / fridge? Or 1.1? Should the author discuss renewable?) Hear hear. The point is, for those of us living in developed countries, is that all wealth is energy wealth. The western way of life is totally dependent on an abundance of cheap energy. When energy runs out, or becomes significantly more expensive, it's game…

> When energy runs out, or becomes significantly more expensive, it's game over for developed countries. Western society is inefficient at a macro level, even though it may seem efficient from the financial perspective of a single company or an individual. People cover huge distances to work. Companies are moving goods, components and people from all over the world. People change jobs (losing focus) and their residen…

Let me guess what your alternative proposal is: everyone should live how you want them to live.

Thanks but no thanks. Even ignoring the untold riches & quality of life improvements that free market capitalism has produced, it's just a more free and thus moral system.

Edit: also you don't need to be a philosopher or genius to see that. Pretty much everyone moving out of free Western societies is rich or getting rich (e.g. paid well tax free in Dubai), and most of them keep a backup plan (Western citizenship to be able to come back).