4 ms·

Uruguayan here. Point 1 is wrong. The average Uruguayan house doesn't have the means to heat using wood. I think we can do it because we have a small populati

Uruguayan here. Point 1 is wrong. The average Uruguayan house doesn't have the means to heat using wood. I think we can do it because we have a small population, almost no industry, and neither summers nor winters get to extreme temperatures.

brucethemoose2 3y ago
That doesn't make it any less impressive. If a small industrial base can builds its own renewable infrastructure, then a larger, proportionally richer base should have less trouble doing it.
- kuhewa 3y ago
  In terms of ease and industrial base required it seems to me much will come down to how much of the renewable generation is hydro (and how much is possible given an area's hydrology) since that is so much 'easier' than modern renewables. That's largely orthogonal to wealth/population/industrial capacity. Although I suppose greater industrialisation and wealth would increase energy demand per capita. In the US it is 6%. For Uruguay electricity is 37% hydro. It is still impressive though. I reckon biomass is 'easy' as well but it is only so scalable.
  - brucethemoose2 3y ago
    Neither is very sexy because of hydro's environmental issues (and in some cases water supply inefficiency), and biomass burning being... biomass burning. The US has a lot of nuclear which I would call "renewable enough," and that's not very sexy either.
dhoe 3y ago
45% percent of households use wood as the main source of heating, electricity is 24%. https://www.ambito.com/uruguay/con-el-precio-la-lena-aumento-como-se-calefaccionan-los-hogares-n5724281 https://www.ambito.com/uruguay/con-el-precio-la-lena-aumento... And obviously this reduces the consumption of electricity, making it easier to cover the electricity needed with renewables. Doesn't take anything away from it, it's still great that this is happening.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- eternityforest 3y ago
  How does wood compare to gas/coal/etc? I always hear that biofuels are not great compared to other renewables, is wood somehow different? Doesn't it make lots of particulate if you don't have a high end modern stove?

brucethemoose2 3y ago

That doesn't make it any less impressive. If a small industrial base can builds its own renewable infrastructure, then a larger, proportionally richer base should have less trouble doing it.

kuhewa 3y ago
In terms of ease and industrial base required it seems to me much will come down to how much of the renewable generation is hydro (and how much is possible given an area's hydrology) since that is so much 'easier' than modern renewables. That's largely orthogonal to wealth/population/industrial capacity. Although I suppose greater industrialisation and wealth would increase energy demand per capita. In the US it is 6%. For Uruguay electricity is 37% hydro. It is still impressive though. I reckon biomass is 'easy' as well but it is only so scalable.
- brucethemoose2 3y ago
  Neither is very sexy because of hydro's environmental issues (and in some cases water supply inefficiency), and biomass burning being... biomass burning. The US has a lot of nuclear which I would call "renewable enough," and that's not very sexy either.

dhoe 3y ago

45% percent of households use wood as the main source of heating, electricity is 24%. https://www.ambito.com/uruguay/con-el-precio-la-lena-aumento-como-se-calefaccionan-los-hogares-n5724281 https://www.ambito.com/uruguay/con-el-precio-la-lena-aumento... And obviously this reduces the consumption of electricity, making it easier to cover the electricity needed with renewables. Doesn't take anything away from it, it's still great that this is happening.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
eternityforest 3y ago
How does wood compare to gas/coal/etc? I always hear that biofuels are not great compared to other renewables, is wood somehow different? Doesn't it make lots of particulate if you don't have a high end modern stove?