This Blizzard Exposes The Perils Of Attempting To ‘Electrify Everything’
Feb 16, 2021 05:59:27 #
https://principia-scientific.com/blizzard-exposes-the-perils-of-attempting-to-electrify-everything/
The massive blast of Siberia-like cold that is wreaking havoc across North America is proving that if we humans want to keep surviving frigid winters, we are going to have to keep burning natural gas — and lots of it — for decades to come.
That cold reality contradicts the “electrify everything” scenario that’s being promoted by c*****e c****e activists, politicians, and academics. They claim that to avert the possibility of catastrophic c*****e c****e, we must stop burning hydrocarbons and convert all of our t***sportation, residential, commercial, and industrial systems so that they are powered solely on electricity, with most of that juice coming, of course, from forests of wind turbines and oceans of solar panels.
But attempting to electrify everything would concentrate our energy risks on an electricity grid that is already breaking under the surge in demand caused by the crazy cold weather. Across America, countless people don’t have electricity. I’m one of them. Our power here in central Austin went out at about 3 am. I am writing this under a blanket, have multiple layers of clothes on, and am nervously watching my laptop’s battery indicator.
This blizzard proves that attempting to electrify everything would be the opposite of anti-fragile. Rather than make our networks and critical systems more resilient and less vulnerable to disruptions caused by e*****e w*****r, bad actors, falling trees, or simple negligence, electrifying everything would concentrate our dependence on a single network, the electric grid, and in doing so make nearly every aspect of our society prone to catastrophic failure if — or rather, when — a widespread or extended blackout occurs.
This blizzard proves that we have not been taking our energy security seriously enough. The concept of energy security has many aspects. But the most fundamental one is that we all have enough reliable and affordable energy (of wh**ever type) so that we don’t freeze to death during cold spells like the one now wreaking havoc across the continent.
This blizzard proves that during e*****e w*****r winter, solar panels and wind turbines are of little or no value to the electric grid.
This blizzard proves that our natural gas grid is part of our critical infrastructure and that we shut it down at our peril. The natural gas network is essential because it can deliver big surges in energy supplies during periods of peak demand. In January 2019, U.S. natural gas demand set a record of 145 billion cubic feet per day. That record will be smashed during this blizzard, and daily volumes will exceed 150 Bcf. That is an enormous amount of energy. In fact, on the coldest days of winter, the amount of energy delivered by the gas grid is roughly three times as great as the energy consumed during the hottest days of the summer.
During peak cold events like this one, the gas grid delivers about 80 Bcf/d to homes and businesses. In energy equivalent terms, that’s roughly 83 trillion Btu, or the energy output of about 1 terawatt of electric generation capacity for 24 hours. Put another way, to equal the 80 Bcf/d of gas delivered during cold snaps, the U.S. would need an electric grid as large as all existing generation in the country, which is currently about 1.2 terawatts.
Thanks to excellent geology, a century of gas production, and a fully developed t***smission and distribution grid, the domestic natural gas sector can deliver surges of the fuel that are, in fact, lifesaving. That is due, in large part, to the fact that we can store vast amounts of gas and only tiny quantities of electricity. In short, our electric grid simply cannot deliver the massive amounts of energy needed during the winter to keep us from freezing to death. That means we need to keep burning natural gas. If you prefer to rely on batteries, be my guest.
It’s essential to note that the blizzard and blackouts that are paralyzing the country are occurring at roughly the same time that some of America’s most famous activists and politicians are saying we should quit using all hydrocarbons and dozens of cities across the country are imposing bans on the use of natural gas.
On January 22, Bill McKibben, the founder of 350.org and arguably America’s most famous environmentalist, published an article in the New Yorker in which he said if there is a “basic rule of thumb for dealing with the climate crisis, it would be: stop burning things” including natural gas. McKibben says we should shift our energy needs to solar and wind energy.
Six days later, on January 28, in his state of the city address, Mayor Bill de Blasio declared that New York City will “renounce f****l f**ls fully” and “ban f****l f**l connections in the city by the end of this decade, literally ensuring that our only choice is renewable energy.”
As I showed in a report last year for the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, dozens of communities in California have banned or restricted the use of natural gas. According to the Sierra Club, 42 California communities have now imposed bans. So has the city of Seattle. In Massachusetts, about a dozen towns have partnered with the Rocky Mountain Institute, which recently got a $10 million grant from the Bezos Earth Fund, to advocate for the right to ban the use of natural gas in homes and commercial buildings.
In addition to being bad for energy security, these bans are a form of regressive tax on the poor and the middle class because they compel consumers to use electricity, which costs four times more than natural gas on an energy equivalent basis. Despite these very cold facts, it is certain that the efforts to ban natural gas and electrify everything will continue.
I am pro-electricity and electrification. Over the past year, I’ve published a book (A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nations) and co-produced a documentary (Juice: How Electricity Explains the World) that spotlights electricity and why we need many terawatts of new generation capacity to bring the 3 billion people in the world who are now living in energy poverty out of the dark and into the bright lights of modernity. But more than being pro-electricity, I am pro-human. The ongoing blizzard is proving our vulnerability to e*****e w*****r events and it is showing that we can’t rely on electricity alone.
Events like the September 11 attacks, Superstorm Sandy, and the c****av***s proved that we need to must make our society more resilient to threats of all kinds. A robust natural gas grid helps our resilience. Electrifying everything will do the opposite.
The massive blast of Siberia-like cold that is wreaking havoc across North America is proving that if we humans want to keep surviving frigid winters, we are going to have to keep burning natural gas — and lots of it — for decades to come.
That cold reality contradicts the “electrify everything” scenario that’s being promoted by c*****e c****e activists, politicians, and academics. They claim that to avert the possibility of catastrophic c*****e c****e, we must stop burning hydrocarbons and convert all of our t***sportation, residential, commercial, and industrial systems so that they are powered solely on electricity, with most of that juice coming, of course, from forests of wind turbines and oceans of solar panels.
But attempting to electrify everything would concentrate our energy risks on an electricity grid that is already breaking under the surge in demand caused by the crazy cold weather. Across America, countless people don’t have electricity. I’m one of them. Our power here in central Austin went out at about 3 am. I am writing this under a blanket, have multiple layers of clothes on, and am nervously watching my laptop’s battery indicator.
This blizzard proves that attempting to electrify everything would be the opposite of anti-fragile. Rather than make our networks and critical systems more resilient and less vulnerable to disruptions caused by e*****e w*****r, bad actors, falling trees, or simple negligence, electrifying everything would concentrate our dependence on a single network, the electric grid, and in doing so make nearly every aspect of our society prone to catastrophic failure if — or rather, when — a widespread or extended blackout occurs.
This blizzard proves that we have not been taking our energy security seriously enough. The concept of energy security has many aspects. But the most fundamental one is that we all have enough reliable and affordable energy (of wh**ever type) so that we don’t freeze to death during cold spells like the one now wreaking havoc across the continent.
This blizzard proves that during e*****e w*****r winter, solar panels and wind turbines are of little or no value to the electric grid.
This blizzard proves that our natural gas grid is part of our critical infrastructure and that we shut it down at our peril. The natural gas network is essential because it can deliver big surges in energy supplies during periods of peak demand. In January 2019, U.S. natural gas demand set a record of 145 billion cubic feet per day. That record will be smashed during this blizzard, and daily volumes will exceed 150 Bcf. That is an enormous amount of energy. In fact, on the coldest days of winter, the amount of energy delivered by the gas grid is roughly three times as great as the energy consumed during the hottest days of the summer.
During peak cold events like this one, the gas grid delivers about 80 Bcf/d to homes and businesses. In energy equivalent terms, that’s roughly 83 trillion Btu, or the energy output of about 1 terawatt of electric generation capacity for 24 hours. Put another way, to equal the 80 Bcf/d of gas delivered during cold snaps, the U.S. would need an electric grid as large as all existing generation in the country, which is currently about 1.2 terawatts.
Thanks to excellent geology, a century of gas production, and a fully developed t***smission and distribution grid, the domestic natural gas sector can deliver surges of the fuel that are, in fact, lifesaving. That is due, in large part, to the fact that we can store vast amounts of gas and only tiny quantities of electricity. In short, our electric grid simply cannot deliver the massive amounts of energy needed during the winter to keep us from freezing to death. That means we need to keep burning natural gas. If you prefer to rely on batteries, be my guest.
It’s essential to note that the blizzard and blackouts that are paralyzing the country are occurring at roughly the same time that some of America’s most famous activists and politicians are saying we should quit using all hydrocarbons and dozens of cities across the country are imposing bans on the use of natural gas.
On January 22, Bill McKibben, the founder of 350.org and arguably America’s most famous environmentalist, published an article in the New Yorker in which he said if there is a “basic rule of thumb for dealing with the climate crisis, it would be: stop burning things” including natural gas. McKibben says we should shift our energy needs to solar and wind energy.
Six days later, on January 28, in his state of the city address, Mayor Bill de Blasio declared that New York City will “renounce f****l f**ls fully” and “ban f****l f**l connections in the city by the end of this decade, literally ensuring that our only choice is renewable energy.”
As I showed in a report last year for the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, dozens of communities in California have banned or restricted the use of natural gas. According to the Sierra Club, 42 California communities have now imposed bans. So has the city of Seattle. In Massachusetts, about a dozen towns have partnered with the Rocky Mountain Institute, which recently got a $10 million grant from the Bezos Earth Fund, to advocate for the right to ban the use of natural gas in homes and commercial buildings.
In addition to being bad for energy security, these bans are a form of regressive tax on the poor and the middle class because they compel consumers to use electricity, which costs four times more than natural gas on an energy equivalent basis. Despite these very cold facts, it is certain that the efforts to ban natural gas and electrify everything will continue.
I am pro-electricity and electrification. Over the past year, I’ve published a book (A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nations) and co-produced a documentary (Juice: How Electricity Explains the World) that spotlights electricity and why we need many terawatts of new generation capacity to bring the 3 billion people in the world who are now living in energy poverty out of the dark and into the bright lights of modernity. But more than being pro-electricity, I am pro-human. The ongoing blizzard is proving our vulnerability to e*****e w*****r events and it is showing that we can’t rely on electricity alone.
Events like the September 11 attacks, Superstorm Sandy, and the c****av***s proved that we need to must make our society more resilient to threats of all kinds. A robust natural gas grid helps our resilience. Electrifying everything will do the opposite.
Feb 16, 2021 06:28:56 #
From the WNYShooter test above: "They claim that to avert the possibility of catastrophic c*****e c****e, we must stop burning hydrocarbons and convert all of our t***sportation, residential, commercial, and industrial systems so that they are powered solely on electricity, ... A robust natural gas grid helps our resilience. Electrifying everything will do the opposite."
I recall having a gas-heated home and when the power was out, the control system did not work! Generally speaking, electrical energy is needed to take advantage of other energy systems. Well yes, my grandparents retiring into the Ozarks in the 50's burned wood and coal to keep warm and cook, and Kerosene to make light.
Robust Natural Gas System? Oh, just remembered, my aunt had an old house that had functioning gas lights, she cooked with gas and gas heaters in each room. A reminder of a hidden problem, "Radon** can be of concern in natural gas production because it will flow with the natural gas and potentially expose both workers in gas production facilities, and individuals in homes that use natural gas for heating and cooking." We could go [back] to that. Is that what you want WNYShooter?
** "Radon is a chemical element with the symbol Rn and atomic number 86. It is a radioactive, colorless, odorless, tasteless Epidemiological studies have shown a clear link between breathing high concentrations of radon and incidence of lung cancer."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon
I recall having a gas-heated home and when the power was out, the control system did not work! Generally speaking, electrical energy is needed to take advantage of other energy systems. Well yes, my grandparents retiring into the Ozarks in the 50's burned wood and coal to keep warm and cook, and Kerosene to make light.
Robust Natural Gas System? Oh, just remembered, my aunt had an old house that had functioning gas lights, she cooked with gas and gas heaters in each room. A reminder of a hidden problem, "Radon** can be of concern in natural gas production because it will flow with the natural gas and potentially expose both workers in gas production facilities, and individuals in homes that use natural gas for heating and cooking." We could go [back] to that. Is that what you want WNYShooter?
** "Radon is a chemical element with the symbol Rn and atomic number 86. It is a radioactive, colorless, odorless, tasteless Epidemiological studies have shown a clear link between breathing high concentrations of radon and incidence of lung cancer."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon
Feb 16, 2021 06:48:29 #
dpullum wrote:
From the WNYShooter test above: "They claim t... (show quote)
When my power goes out, it's out for approx. 20 seconds, then my generator kicks on and powers everything on my property, and I have power continuously until utility power is restored and stable, and all thanks to the NG which powers it. I have the same setup on all three of our houses.
Depending on your locale, radon also emitted from your water, the soil around your house, stone foundations, firewood stored inside, lumber your house is built from, cracks in your basement floor, sump pits, and etc. BTW, both our Canadian and WNY homes have radon vents in there basements, it's not all that hard to deal with buddy, but thanks for the fear mongering.
Feb 16, 2021 07:47:03 #
dpullum wrote:
From the WNYShooter test above: "They claim t... (show quote)
Sorry my friend but your post really does not offer any negatives to natural gas used with electricity. Natural gas where I live is much cheaper than electric power.
Dennis
Feb 16, 2021 07:49:14 #
Feb 16, 2021 09:38:53 #
Feb 16, 2021 09:52:23 #
Don't forget if you're driving your fully electric car in the winter and get stuck in snow or behind accident-caused traffic, using the heat will quickly make your environmentally safe vehicle, a cold useless hunk of steel and plastic that won't be going anywhere without a tow truck. If you commute in a cold environment in an all-electric car you need to have some way to keep warm without running the heater or you'll be stranded.
Feb 16, 2021 10:00:24 #
dpullum wrote:
From the WNYShooter test above: "They claim t... (show quote)
It only takes a small generator to run a natural gas furnace and you can also have ventless logs that are a great way to generate heat in a power failure.
Most Radon comes up through the foundation and is a regional problem where uranium is in a high concentration in the geology. You can't sell a house with a basement in my area without having a Radon mitigation system. Personally, I think the entire radon issue is just a way to generate income for a small number of licensed radon mitigation experts and home inspectors.
Feb 16, 2021 10:48:59 #
Mr. SONY
Loc: LI, NY
Frank T wrote:
Simple solutions from the simple mind.
OK if we're simple minded, how about you and you're complex mind explain what we should do.
Feb 16, 2021 11:03:36 #
Feb 16, 2021 11:51:41 #
"A robust natural gas grid" contributes to CO2 pollution, which contributes to g****l w*****g. The current behavior of the Polar Vortex is being affected, in part, by melting of Arctic sea ice.
For any of you still alive in 20 years, good luck. We are fast reaching the point of not being able to stop the damage.
For any of you still alive in 20 years, good luck. We are fast reaching the point of not being able to stop the damage.
Feb 16, 2021 13:38:39 #
Mid south Missouri . 6 in of snow and -7.. this morning.
My snow shovel is not electrified
My snow shovel is not electrified
Feb 16, 2021 13:43:51 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
"A robust natural gas grid" contributes ... (show quote)
May you live long enough to see how misguided that statement is.
Feb 16, 2021 13:55:34 #
InfiniteISO wrote:
May you live long enough to see how misguided that statement is.
Natural gas contributed less CO2 than other f****l f**ls but it is still a lot.
https://www.swarthmore.edu/environmental-studies-capstone/comparison-against-other-fossil-fuels
Feb 16, 2021 14:31:01 #
InfiniteISO wrote:
We were lucky to be able to reverse some of our bad practices a few decades ago, cleaning up water and air, returning some animal and bird species from the brink of extinction, learning that lead-based paint and asbestos wasn't real good for us. May you live long enough to see how misguided that statement is.
I don't know which part of my comments you consider misguided; however, scientists have been using satellite photos to document accelerating ice melt, including from Greenland's glaciers, for awhile now. Ice melt and rising ocean temperatures are a whole different kind of catastrophe from what we have experienced so far.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.