4 ms·

We haven’t switched because electricity (37 qBTU) is only a third (100 qBTU) of our energy production, and we don’t know how to triple the electricity grid. Of

We haven’t switched because electricity (37 qBTU) is only a third (100 qBTU) of our energy production, and we don’t know how to triple the electricity grid. Of our electricity production, 60% is fossil fuels (coal, gas, or petroleum). We have zero clue how to replace our total energy consumption (100 qBTU) with our renewable production (15 qBTU). This is all using official EIA numbers: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ Also, gasoline is 13 MJ/kg; normal batteries are < 1 MJ/kg. That’s a lot of density difference. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density_Extended_Reference_Table https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density_Extended_Refe...

leptons 3y ago
>We haven’t switched because electricity (37 qBTU) is only a third (100 qBTU) of our energy production, and we don’t know how to triple the electricity grid. Sure, because plenty of money went into oil refineries and not electric infrastructure over the last 100 years. >Of our electricity production, 60% is fossil fuels (coal, gas, or petroleum). There's plenty of alternatives that big oil has put its foot on. Nuclear and solar are absolutely great alternatives, but we've wasted the last 100 years spending on big oil infrastructure and jobs. >We have zero clue how to replace our total energy consumption (100 qBTU) with our renewable production (15 qBTU). We should have a clue. It's like spending all your time playing video games and then suddenly when your 50 looking back at the wasted time when you're getting kicked out of your parents basement. My point is that it didn't have to be this way.