Fossil fuels account for the largest share of U.S. energy production and consumption

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Fossil fuels account for the largest share of U.S. energy production and consumption

 

 

Fossil fuels, or energy sources formed in the Earth’s crust from decayed organic material, including petroleum, natural gas, and coal, continue to account for the largest share of energy production and consumption in the United States. In 2019, 80% of domestic energy production was from fossil fuels, and 80% of domestic energy consumption originated from fossil fuels.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) publishes the U.S. total energy flow diagram to visualize U.S. energy from primary energy supply (production and imports) to disposition (consumption, exports, and net stock additions). In this diagram, losses that take place when primary energy sources are converted into electricity are allocated proportionally to the end-use sectors. The result is a visualization that associates the primary energy consumed to generate electricity with the end-use sectors of the retail electricity sales customers, even though the amount of electric energy end users directly consumed was significantly less.

 

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45096

 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 9/15/2020 at 9:16 AM, ceo_energemsier said:

Fossil fuels account for the largest share of U.S. energy production and consumption

 

 

Fossil fuels, or energy sources formed in the Earth’s crust from decayed organic material, including petroleum, natural gas, and coal, continue to account for the largest share of energy production and consumption in the United States. In 2019, 80% of domestic energy production was from fossil fuels, and 80% of domestic energy consumption originated from fossil fuels.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) publishes the U.S. total energy flow diagram to visualize U.S. energy from primary energy supply (production and imports) to disposition (consumption, exports, and net stock additions). In this diagram, losses that take place when primary energy sources are converted into electricity are allocated proportionally to the end-use sectors. The result is a visualization that associates the primary energy consumed to generate electricity with the end-use sectors of the retail electricity sales customers, even though the amount of electric energy end users directly consumed was significantly less.

 

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45096

 

Of note: this will continue to be the case until nuclear is cheaper than natural gas.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Of note: this will continue to be the case until nuclear is cheaper than natural gas.

Or until Demoncrats can't be evicted from government offices and turn this country into a one party state, which is their goal. Once there, they'll add sin taxes on fossil fuel until it becomes impossible to use, at which time 10% available solar panels will appear cheaper than natural gas. By then we'll be a Third World banana republic so no one will (dare) complain about continuous rolling blackouts and brownouts as the norm. Just like in banana republics, there will be the 1% ruling class and the 99% poor. Just the way they want it. 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

4 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Or until Demoncrats can't be evicted from government offices and turn this country into a one party state, which is their goal. Once there, they'll add sin taxes on fossil fuel until it becomes impossible to use, at which time 10% available solar panels will appear cheaper than natural gas. By then we'll be a Third World banana republic so no one will (dare) complain about continuous rolling blackouts and brownouts as the norm. Just like in banana republics, there will be the 1% ruling class and the 99% poor. Just the way they want it. 

The liberal birth rate hovers around 1.3 - far below the 2.1 necessary to maintain their numbers. Meanwhile, the education system they hijacked to spread their ideology is falling apart, with conservative families avoiding it like the plague, and 2nd generation immigrants along with other minorities are realizing they don't want to compete with 1st generation immigrants.

In short, we've reached peak liberalism. In the long run, they lose by demographics.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Good to hear there is hope...  

[0R0 + 6,251]

4 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Good to hear there is hope...  

The real hope is to convince them that their self inflicted suffering and guilt over the poverty they create can be traded for well being and joy of families and widespread prosperity.

Only hitch is their jobs in or sponsored by government would disappear.

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

2 hours ago, 0R0 said:

Only hitch is their jobs in or sponsored by government would disappear.

Therein lies the problem: they're not good for anything else.

Best to let them believe their dystopian fears so they don't reproduce...

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The real hope is to convince them that their self inflicted suffering and guilt over the poverty they create can be traded for well being and joy of families and widespread prosperity.

Only hitch is their jobs in or sponsored by government would disappear.

I think the only way this will happen is to let them reach middle age and see it for themselves.  There is no talking to them and they are not interested in history.  So, history will repeat itself for them.  It's damn near impossible to pass on knowledge and experience if they are not interested.  Someone has convinced them that any present societal injustice or inequality voids all actions of the past leaving them with (in their minds) no choice but to right the wrongs themselves, no matter how misguided their actions may be, IMHO.  Without historical context they have no chance of not repeating the same mistakes.  But in this day and age we have to remember that 1,000 "Likes" means they have succeeded, justifying all of their positions, not just one.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

23 minutes ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Therein lies the problem: they're not good for anything else.

Best to let them believe their dystopian fears so they don't reproduce...

Dude!  I like the way you think.

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

9 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

But in this day and age we have to remember that 1,000 "Likes" means they have succeeded, justifying all of their positions, not just one.

Fortunately for the rest of us, they also believe "Likes" matter - and that renders them incapable of effective action. They'd like to rebel, but they haven't the ability.

No one tell them. With luck, we can just ride this out.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

14 minutes ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Fortunately for the rest of us, they also believe "Likes" matter - and that renders them incapable of effective action. They'd like to rebel, but they haven't the ability.

No one tell them. With luck, we can just ride this out.

"Likes" provide short term feelings of success for short term thinking.  In my interactions with today's younger generations I find that they normally only think as far ahead as they have to.  If they receive positive feedback: job done in their minds.  It also makes them easily manipulated.  All one need do is explain what result a given action will produce, while leaving out any further consequences, and one can make people do some pretty stupid short sighted stuff.  The term "actions have consequences" is one they think they totally get, but they don't realize or even put much mental effort into figuring out the follow-on effects of their initial actions and therefore don't realize the long term consequences of their actions.  Gullibility is lost on them due to all the false praise society has given them, mostly from today's liberal education masters, which is then easily and readily transferrable into the political realm.

IMHO

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

11 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

"Likes" provide short term feelings of success for short term thinking.  In my interactions with today's younger generations I find that they normally only think as far ahead as they have to.  If they receive positive feedback: job done in their minds.  It also makes them easily manipulated.  All one need do is explain what result a given action will produce, while leaving out any further consequences, and one can make people do some pretty stupid short sighted stuff.  The term "actions have consequences" is one they think they totally get, but they don't realize or even put much mental effort into figuring out the follow-on effects of their initial actions and therefore don't realize the long term consequences of their actions.  Gullibility is lost on them due to all the false praise society has given them, mostly from today's liberal education masters, which is then easily and readily transferable into the political realm.

IMHO

I agree. I especially agree that public school indoctrination is the cause of all this.  Unfortunately, I don't see a way to salvage the public schools. Unless someone has a brilliant idea (Anyone? Buehler? ...  Buehler?), it's time to write them off as total losses.

The good news is that liberal incompetence once again creates an opportunity: when dealing with someone so short-sighted, I can support whatever opinion I want by properly "framing" the issue.  I can even build "common ground" by not actively opposing opinions they think are wonderful, but I know will destroy them. E.g. abortion.  I simply mention - without explicitly stating my support, as that would be a lie - the consequences they like (E.g. fewer children born into poverty; better job prospects for women) while failing to mention the consequences I like (E.g. they're killing their future). I don't even have to support their position. It's sufficient to make a few true statements; they'll excitedly scamper off to do the rest.

When they stumble into an issue I don't support, I change the subject to one I do - or nudge them in the right direction.  E.g. if they propose federal regulations, I'll extol state and local regulations as a more effective alternative. Again, I never actually say I support said regulations, as that's usually a lie; I merely make a few true statements about certain benefits. Their imaginations do the rest.  It's not possible to end the liberal's regulation fetish, but it's quite easy to direct it to our advantage.

Over time, useful ideas are reinforced and useless ideas abandoned. What I'm doing is equivalent to positive reinforcement for dogs: wait for and reward the correct behavior; ignore everything else. As you said, the reward need not be substantial; it's sufficient for them to feel rewarded. It's clicker training.

On occasion, I'll meet a smart liberal.  Usually younger, as their intellectual potential has not yet tempered blind hope - but with the right nudging, they get there quickly. I'll guide them on a long, wonderful adventure through appealing political ideas. At some point, they start to see the flaws I'm not mentioning - or they pick up on my suspicious grin. I applaud them for figuring it out and reveal my true motive: nudging them in my preferred direction. I'm ostensibly applauding them, but I know exactly how they'll react to this: utter horror. All that sweetness was a predator ruthlessly hunting them. That means the world may be full of predators, every sweetness a dangerous lie. Their fantasy crumbles. At this point, I've usually lost a potential friend - but I've planted an important seed of doubt. The trauma they've just experienced means they'll never see pie-in-the-sky political ideas the same way again. For them, there will always be doubt. Doubt triggers thought, and thought leads to conservatism.

There are some useful ideas in psychology. I wouldn't use them on someone I loved, but they're handy for dealing with the riffraff.  I started with "Nudge".  If anyone has additional suggestions, I'm interested in expanding my knowledge.