3 ms·
It's a little off IMHO to argue that energy storage affects fuel usage only in electricity. The most visible company in the business right now is Tesla which pr
by scythe 8y ago
It's a little off IMHO to argue that energy storage affects fuel usage only in electricity. The most visible company in the business right now is Tesla which primarily goes after transportation. Together, electricity and transportation account for 56% of US emissions:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...
Another large chunk of emissions come from burning fuel for heating, at least 11% (commercial/residential heating slice) but probably about half of the industry slice as well comes from local energy generation. This tends to be harder to replace with batteries because of the form of energy desired, e.g. you can't replace an acetylene torch with electricity.
If we very generously assume that most modes of transportation excepting airplanes and snowmobiles can be run on batteries, and gas heating can be replaced with electric heat pumps, the proportion of emissions affected by these two technologies could be around 60-70%. That's not a complete fix, but it is a big piece of the puzzle. However, the technology turnover is extremely difficult and expensive, which I think is the bigger problem hiding behind "renewables".
- AstralStorm 8y agoYou can replace an acetylene torch with gas electric arc welding and cutting. It is done, but is currently more expensive (not a whole lot mind you). The problem is not manufacturing but mostly smelting and refining. (Including recycling) You need huge sustained and peak energy input for that, renewables do not deliver it.