6 ms·
Gas is actually astoundingly clean to burn, especially given how much energy it stores. It's why farmers use huge tanks of it to burn weeds before seeding / fo
by d33lio 6y ago
Gas is actually astoundingly clean to burn, especially given how much energy it stores. It's why farmers use huge tanks of it to burn weeds before seeding / forklifts use propane indoors as fuel.
Once you start looking at the emissions incurred by transmission loss, extra "peak" power purchased from states like Nevada and Oregon this stupid fantasy of electric everything solving the world's problems sans dealing with the production side fades quickly.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoAgree to disagree. Clean energy transmission losses are always preferable to more carbon emissions (as we're already over our carbon budget). Nevada has a lot of clean solar potential, and the PNW is mostly clean hydro. Enough sunlight hits the Earth in an hour to power all of humanity for a year; electrification of everything is therefore quite reasonable.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoAlso relevant: https://rmi.org/all-electric-new-homes-a-win-for-the-climate-and-the-economy/ https://rmi.org/all-electric-new-homes-a-win-for-the-climate... (All-Electric New Homes: A Win for the Climate and the Economy) "The new all-electric, single-family home has a lower net present cost than the new mixed-fuel home in every city we studied: Austin, TX; Boston, MA; Columbus, OH; Denver, CO; Minneapolis, MN; New York City, NY; and Seattle, WA." "In every city we analyzed, a new all-electric, single-family home is less expensive than a new mixed-fuel home that relies on gas for cooking, space heating, and water heating. Net present cost savings over the 15-year period of study are as high as $6,800 in New York City, where the all-electric home also results in 81 percent lower carbon emissions over the mixed-fuel home."