The U.S. Is Not Ready For An All-Electric Future

[Meredith Poor + 883]

"The U.S. is woefully unprepared to handle “the electrification of everything,” as Amy Myers Jaffe, a research professor at Tufts University’s Fletcher School, describes the drive to electrify transportation and buildings and parts of industry in The Wall Street Journal."

Whoops.

WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch property. To get some idea of the objectiveness of such reporting, look at the Sky News reports about renewable energy in Australia.

If the assertions appear to be prejudiced, check the math.

[turbguy + 1,397]

Yes, it will be VERY hard to "electrify everything".

But, just think of the money that could be made...

I think I'll hold onto my block of GE.

Edited May 19, 2021 by turbguy

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

Yes, it will be VERY hard to "electrify everything".

But, just think of the money that could be made...

I think I'll hold onto my block of GE.

Think of all the money that can be scammed off of the average family in other words. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,130]

4 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

"The U.S. is woefully unprepared to handle “the electrification of everything,” as Amy Myers Jaffe, a research professor at Tufts University’s Fletcher School, describes the drive to electrify transportation and buildings and parts of industry in The Wall Street Journal."

Whoops.

WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch property. To get some idea of the objectiveness of such reporting, look at the Sky News reports about renewable energy in Australia.

If the assertions appear to be prejudiced, check the math.

Crude numbers time:

36% of NG used in USA goes for electricity for ~40% of USA total... that means the other 64% goes for heating at ~95%+ efficiency... 33% of which is industrial usage and there is no electrical substitute for most of this industrial use.  27% is used in residential/commercial heating/cooling and ~3% transportation. 

Lets just say we can all go with heat pumps(easily doable though most of those HVAC units currently run off of NG so... the below calculation is woefully off on the VERY shy side of things) for residential/commercial at a COP of 3 and call that 27% ~33%(due to above statement this is probably closer to 40% or 50% or greater).  This means the electrical energy needing to be produced during summer/winter is roughly speaking going up by 12%(see above, could easily be double this) nationwide and cannot be made via NG/Coal and be reliable at the same time.

12% of the Eastern Grid is ~600GW, so in crude terms, ~80GW or for solar in summer with ~8 hours sun a day =~ 250GW and for wind with ~50% cap factor in winter roughly 160GW.  Now reverse the numbers for solar winter with ~4 hours a day = 500GW and Summer wind of roughly 400GW.  Spring/Fall wind is much superior, but HVAC needs are much lower.  I rounded up for age etc and did not throw in efficiency drops in storing said power. 

In short, just for the USA commercial residential HVAC needs that currently NG fills, one needs roughly speaking 200GW solar distributed around(easily doable) and 200GW Wind distributed around(easily doable) when one accounts for efficiencies, clouds, shipping energy around.  Is this doable?  Yes.  Of  course as I stated above, this could easily be double this just for commercial/residential HVAC needs at current population levels.  Personally, I do not know how anyone has commercial/residential and does not have a HVAC unit powered by NG or electricity, yet according to statistics well over 50% do not.  Or only has AC but not HVAC...

Have not touched Transportation, Industrial use of NG, let alone industrial use of Coal or oil.   These all get several times multipliers due to inefficiencies of converting Electricity into NG or equivalent to be used in smelting/refining/cracking.  This usage dwarfs all electrical needs by a gargantuan amount. EDIT: Should probably be 25% higher if not 33% higher since have offloaded most of the "dirty" crap onto other developing nations by removing tariffs but not tying environmental laws to said lowered tariffs.  But ... I digress. 

 

Edited May 20, 2021 by footeab@yahoo.com

[markslawson + 1,042]

16 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch property. To get some idea of the objectiveness of such reporting, look at the Sky News reports about renewable energy in Australia.

If the assertions appear to be prejudiced, check the math.

In other words you cannot think of any counter argument to the professor's reasonable observation so you attack his credibility. This business about electrifying everything and running it all off renewables is an obviously impossible pipe dream. Instead of attacking people who point to the reality, why don't you sit down and think how many home owners would have to spend how much money, and how much additional renewable capacity would be required, and never mind the issue of power storage which really hasn't been solved. If even 10 per cent of this achieved by 2100 then I, for one, will be astonished.  

[Meredith Poor + 883]

4 hours ago, markslawson said:

If even 10 per cent of this achieved by 2100 then I, for one, will be astonished.

I hope you're astonished, since renewables make up more than 10% of the power generation capacity of the US already.

[Boat + 1,315]

If combined grids decided to persue cost savings vrs 100% reliability you could make a case for 100% renewables where it’s windy and sunny. Combining the south’s sun and the central states wind provides built in resilience. The summers AC consumption hump is no problem even with today’s grid batteries. The winters possible storms do not cover the potential 17 state grid if merged. Rolling blackouts that may happen every 10 years require some extra grid storage. 
The question is, how much would it cost for nat gas that sits idle for those 10 years vrs how much grid storage you can get for the same cost. 

[markslawson + 1,042]

7 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

I hope you're astonished, since renewables make up more than 10% of the power generation capacity of the US already.

Meredith - you're talking about 10 per cent towards NET ZERO - so you have to add in cars on road gas heating, all the industrial processes such as smelting, cement manufacturing, etc.. all those irritating details .. its this sort of silly misdirection or more kindly misunderstanding of the issue that adds to activism's bad reputation. And people claim that I'm a denialist..  

[RichieRich216 + 454]

The ONLY way this will happen is if the U.S. Government HUGELY subsidies the EV Industry! This will not go over well with the average Americans though! 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

21 minutes ago, RichieRich216 said:

The ONLY way this will happen is if the U.S. Government HUGELY subsidies the EV Industry! This will not go over well with the average Americans though! 

Dont let all this hyperbole concern you about EV's taking over the world, currently the EV is thee most heavily incentivized vehicle the world has ever known. Tesla's rank number 15 in top selling vehicles, if not for incentives up to 15,000 dollars these vehicles would be sold as anchors in a boat yard. While it is true the EU is seems to be moving agressivley..each of these little country's represent very small populations...hence the % looks quite large. To that point Tesla is finding quite a bit of resistance now by both Germany and China... Where is Tesla?

https://www.best-selling-cars.com/germany/2021-q1-germany-best-selling-car-brands-and-models/

Model	Q1/2021	Q1/2020	Q1/2019
1	VW Golf	26,593	35,878	50,895
2	VW Tiguan	19,399	16,620	20,709
3	VW Passat	15,426	16,244	12,688
4	VW T-Roc	13,330	10,585	15,500
5	Opel Corsa	12,770	10,671	11,950
6	Skoda Octavia	12,519	10,733	14,764
7	BMW 3-Series	11,406	13,155	8,649
8	Mini	10,996	9,604	–
9	VW Up	10,732	5,540	–
10	Fiat Ducato	10,389	8,011	–
11	Audi A6	9,526	7,896	–
	Source: KBA

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[ChrisK Shaw + 11]

It is hard to understand the logic of legislating change to effect a desired outcome when the system has severely weak links.  Electrifying any of the examples at the same time that the other OECD members are doing the same is a recipe for something.  If it were only the USA and only a given industry, and we had plenty of time and government subsidies and taxes were legislated not to change via a Constitutional amendment (to bring some certainty to the market), then I could imagine change could be possible.  One of the biggest issues with CCS(U) is that it is highly capital intensive... one of the risks will always be that CAGW ends up being less catastrophic as first thought and sunk costs are lost...the lack of settled science wrt the catastrophic part really makes change difficult

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

According to the Brokkings research papers,

"

"As Brookings, a nonprofit public policy organization, contributor Samantha Gross notes:

"The energy density of fossil fuels is particularly important in the transportation sector. A vehicle needs to carry its fuel around as it travels, so the weight and volume of that fuel are key. Electric vehicles are a much-touted solution for replacing oil, but they are not perfect for all uses. Pound for pound, gasoline or diesel fuel contain about 40 times as much energy as a state-of-the-art battery. On the other hand, electric motors are much more efficient than internal combustion engines and electric vehicles are simpler mechanically, with many fewer moving parts. These advantages make up for some of the battery's weight penalty, but an electric vehicle will still be heavier than a similar vehicle running on fossil fuel. For vehicles that carry light loads and can refuel often, like passenger cars, this penalty isn't a big deal. But for aviation, maritime shipping, or long-haul trucking, where the vehicle must carry heavy loads for long distances without refueling, the difference in energy density between fossil fuels and batteries is a huge challenge, and electric vehicles just don't meet the need."

Also "Over the 20th century, the energy system transformed from one in which fossil energy was used directly into one in which an important portion of fossil fuels are used to generate electricity. The proportion used in electricity generation varies by fuel. Because oil — an energy-dense liquid — is so fit-for-purpose in transport, little of it goes to electricity; in contrast, roughly 63% of coal produced worldwide is used to generate electricity. Methods of generating electricity that don’t rely on fossil fuels, like nuclear and hydroelectric generation, are also important parts of the system in many areas. However, fossil fuels are still the backbone of the electricity system, generating 64% of today’s global supply."