3 ms·

Are you taking into consideration the loss of energy in power transmission and distribution? (I also find the argument hard to believe, but I'd be interested i

• tomp 8y ago
  Well, yeah, that's basically equivalent to saying that you'd save money by running an internal combustion engine at home, rather than buying electricity from the grid. Sounds unlikely - although there are potential savings to be had if you take into account the heat generated, which is lost from the powerplant but a household could use it for heating - check out mCHP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_combined_heat_and_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_combined_heat_and_power
  • curlypaul924 8y ago
    It's more like saying that you'd save fuel by running an equivalent ICE at home. You'd be unlikely to save money, because of economies of scale.
    • tomp 8y ago
      But I imagine that fuel is the vast majority of the cost, at least operational cost... and the initial investment is also at least to some extent dependent on the resources used (energy, matter).