Comments Duggles has made

I have a few comments on the article. First, I see that the 2008 LLNL Energy Flow Chart that THOLLANDPE posted a link to appears to already answer the question, how much waste is there? The number given is 57.07 Quads out of ~99.2 Quads. This agrees fairly well with the numbers that you gave in your conclusion, 60 quads of waste out of 100 quads of primary energy. Good job on the analysis, Mr. Casten.

With regards to the inclusion of agricultural inputs in the Energy Flow Charts, it seems to me that the main energy inputs to agriculture would be diesel fuel and fertilizer. So the fertilizer should be accounted for under "Industrial" use, and the diesel fuel would most likely be accounted for under "Transportation" and "Industrial". The rest of the energy inputs for agriculture would be manual labor and environmental inputs, like sunshine and rain, and would not be considered in the chart.

As for the transportation wastes, my familiarity is with automotives, but it is very good to see that you are thinking of energy losses due to braking and tire replacement, and not just powertrain losses! From what I recall having learned about the subject, though, the issue of automotive energy efficiency is largely a matter of capital expenditures vs. operations and maintenance (o & m) costs. Unfortunately, there's not much "low-hanging fruit" left in the automotive sector. The technology exists to improve fuel economy (an o & m cost) in consumer automobiles, but the trade-off is that this increases the cost of the car (a capital expenditure). Obviously, when gas is cheap then few are willing to pay more upfront in order to save money on gas down the road (car pun ftw). This has been the case in the past, but there is reason to hope that this will change in the era of $4 per gallon gasoline. Anyway, my point is that the 20 quads of waste in the transportation sector is not an easy number to reduce, and thus not all of the 60 quads of waste is actually an "opportunity".

My complaints are mostly just a matter of chipping away at the edges of the argument, though. I agree that there ARE a lot of ways that our society can reduce waste, whether it be by cogeneration of steam and electricity, properly insulating our homes, recycling high-value waste like glass and aluminium, or even just (gasp!) walking or biking to your destination.

Wouldn't a robot cannibal be a robot that ate other robots?

2 little things

thebike45: You are largely correct that weight has reduced importance in a car with regenerative braking.  However, rolling resistance is a function of weight, so additional weight will result in additional losses.

biodiversivist: I believe that the tax credit is sized to match the Volt, not the other way around.On CMU study suggests GM has wildly oversized the batteries in the Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid posted 8 months, 3 weeks ago 37 Responses

Slightly off-topic, but,

carbon fiber is really expensive these days.On L.A. Times: 'Hydrogen fuel-cell technology won't work in cars' posted 9 months ago 77 Responses

With regards to the FCX Clarity et al.

All this talk of hydrogen fuel cells and such, and I'm a little surprised that no one has yet mentioned the Honda Civic GX, the passenger car that runs on compressed natural gas (CNG).  Given that Honda's website for the FCX Clarity mentions an optional home refueling station that uses natural gas as the feedstock, one can't help but wonder which car is going to give you the lower natural gas bill...On L.A. Times: 'Hydrogen fuel-cell technology won't work in cars' posted 9 months, 1 week ago 77 Responses

I agree with jabailo on this one.

Especially when it comes to non-CO2 emissions (ones regulated under the Clean Air Act), older plants are much worse polluters than newer plants.On EPA board freezes construction of new coal-fired power plants in U.S. posted 1 year ago 15 Responses

A quick lesson in science...

From my introductory cellular biology textbook,
Campbell, Neil A. and Reece, Jane B. "Biology (6th ed.)" 2002 Benjamin Cummings San Francisco

Let's briefly contrast photosynthesis with cellular respiration.  During respiration, energy is released from sugar when electrons associated with hydrogen are transported by carriers to oxygen, forming water as a by-product.  The electrons lose potential energy as they are pulled down the electron transport chain to electronegative oxygen, and the mitochondrion uses the energy to synthesize ATP (adenosine triphosphate).  Photosynthesis, also a redox process, reverses the direction of electron flow.  Water is split, and electrons are transferred along with hydrogen ions from the water to carbon dioxide, reducing it to sugar.  The electrons increase in potential energy as they move from water to sugar.  The required energy boost is provided by light.

So remember:  plants DO NOT break down CO2 into carbon and oxygen, they split water into hydrogen and oxygen and use the hydrogen to reduce CO2 to a sugar.  This has been proven by experiments that used O-18 as a tracer and showed that the emitted oxygen came from H2O, not CO2.On Scientists eye rock that converts CO2 to solid mineral posted 1 year ago 4 Responses

amazingdrx and everyone else

You guys do realize that the cooling water that goes into/comes out of a nuclear power plant doesn't actually run through the reactor, right?  They use heat exchangers to transfer heat from the water in the closed-loop system, to the water in the open-loop system.  It's the open-loop water that exits through the cooling towers, and all of the water actually going through the reactor and becoming radioactive stays inside the reactor.On The flawed economics of nuclear power posted 1 year, 1 month ago 106 Responses

Ah, yes, the quantum vacuum.

Interested in good old zero-point energy?  Wondering what potential it may have for us all?  Check it out at exit mundi:

http://exitmundi.nl/quantum.htm

(according to a wikipedia article that I did not write, the quantum vacuum is the same as zero point energy)

So it may be that MPI seeks to save the global village, by destroying the global village (and the universe)!

j/kOn 'Global warming comes from within'--Is heat at the Earth's core the real cause of global warming? posted 1 year, 1 month ago 10 Responses

Are there any working examples of CCS yet?

I'm not trying to be smarmy, I'm genuinely curious, because I thought the death of FutureGen signaled the death of CCS, for all practical purposes.On Solar industry aims for grid parity in eight years posted 1 year, 1 month ago 10 Responses

Hmm...

To be honest, I'm often willing to say anything as long as I think that the response will amuse me.  In this case, it did prove to be amusing. It also gave me some insight into how people who have opinions that differ from my own think.

However, I do see how this can distract from the quality of the discussion of the topic at hand.  In the interest of not contributing to the cesspool-like nature of discussion on the Internets, in the future I shall attempt to avoid making posts that are not constructive.On Town hall again reveals just an anti-science, out-of-touch McCain posted 1 year, 1 month ago 10 Responses

I'm surprised...

..that I have not yet heard anyone mention accelerator-driven nuclear reactors on this site.  Seems like the idea's been researched for use in transmuting nuclear waste and producing a little bit of energy (output of the reactor provides energy to drive the accelerator, with a little excess energy left over).  
Is it too immature to be taken seriously, or is it too obscure?  Or has it already been covered in discussions on grist and I just missed it?On McCain mystified by Obama's concerns over nuclear posted 1 year, 1 month ago 28 Responses

And then...

You have people who take the view of "Why should I have to give stuff up just because the greenies say so?"

Quite simply, not everyone buys into the precautionary principle.  With that in mind, I wish you good luck, sir.  You may need it.On The moral argument for curbing climate change posted 1 year, 1 month ago 4 Responses

In response to Mr. Salmony

What kind of economy can function without adequate resources and ecosystem services only the Earth provides?  

(Guess I'm just a cynic)On Al Gore on the climate and financial crises posted 1 year, 2 months ago 12 Responses

EREV

I find that the designation of the Volt as an Electric Range-Extended Vehicle is a good way to describe it.  The 40-mile thing is because most people drive less than 40 miles on a roundtrip commute.  It will be a hybrid, sure, but it will be a series hybrid, which is different from the parallel hybrid Prius.On Chevy Volt not so revolutionary posted 1 year, 2 months ago 22 Responses

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you, Sean.

DISCLAIMER: Admittedly, I have not read the actual language of the bill, but I have been loosely following it's path through the state legislature.  Anyway...

For number 1, the 90% guarantee:
Today, independent power producers make up, what, 3% of the electricity production in Michigan?  I know it's not more than 5%, whatever it is.  So it's not like any current competitors are going to be shut out by this.
Mind you, what kind of power plants have those independent producers been building?  Peakers, not baseload plants.  This brings me to my next point, which is that we need new baseload power plants in Michigan.  The Lansing Board of Water & Light and Consumers Energy (I don't know about Detroit Thomas Edison) are both looking to retire coal plants in the next few years, because the existing fleets are very old.  The 90% guarantee is necessary to secure funding for new power plant construction (credit crunch, anyone?).

For number 2: If you are against socialism, then this one should be an absolute bonus.  The truth of the matter is, businesses have been subsidizing electric costs for the residential sector for a few decades.  Subsidizing electricity is not a good way to get people to conserve, is it?  They're not seeing the actual cost of the electricity they use, so they don't get the full benefit of conservation on the residential side.  Certainly, making businesses pay higher than the actual costs may make them want to conserve more, but in the end it's still unfair.

For number 3:  This one makes me nervous.  I don't think that anything which (in my eyes) weakens the Public Service Commission is a good thing.

For number 4:  This Renewable Portfolio Standard is part of Michigan's strategy to attract green industry jobs and manufacturers to Michigan.  I am curious to know whether or not the final version allows conservation to be counted towards the standard (some early versions did, some did not).

In the end, I personally think that this legislation is an overwhelmingly good thing for the state.  By not guaranteeing the customer base of CE and DTE it will be difficult, more likely impossible for them to secure funding for new plants.  These are going to be REPLACEMENT plants, meaning that even though they will not be environmentally squeaky-clean, they will be better for the environment than the extant plants.  The alternative is to retire the old plants anyway, and watch as electric rates go through the roof because the utilities will have to buy electricity on the open market.

Additionally, Consumers Energy alone is going to be investing billions of dollars (4 or 5, I believe) in Michigan for their proposed new coal plant.  Michigan has 8.9% unemployment, so the state can't afford to say, "No" to new energy legislation and the jobs that it will bring to the state.

Lastly, it sounds like you are in favor of fully deregulating the utility industry.  Am I correct in inferring that?
Electric deregulation hurts ratepayers.  If you do not believe me and would like me to take the time to look it up, I will gladly provide evidence to back up this claim.

As for your last point, that this will create a link between the RPS and increased rates, I disagree that that will be the outcome.  I think that if the RPS works as expected to bring green jobs to Michigan, it will make people equate green energy with job creation.  Would you prefer that the bill not include a Renewable Portfolio Standard?  Good luck trying to pass a stand-alone RPS.

I am sorry that this is not the most cogent post, but I am fully willing to discuss and clarify my points over the next few days if you would like.On Bad policy ideas in Michigan posted 1 year, 2 months ago 10 Responses

TE isn't really a cure-all.

Like most things in life, thermoelectrics are not going to solve all of your problems.  Clearly it's an avenue worthy of research, but I'm certainly not going to put all of my eggs in its basket, especially when you look at the delta-T necessary for efficient operation of TE for power generation.

I'd say give it a few years, and maybe you'll see it show up in the hybrid vehicles, where you have exhaust gas that is of sufficient temperature to get your high delta-T.

As a random aside, I actually had Kanatzidis for freshman chemistry.On The one clean-tech breakthrough that could lead to a core climate solution: Thermoelectricity posted 1 year, 2 months ago 10 Responses

Yes, but...

Wouldn't that just give the Republican competition an opportunity to say that he's being influenced by tree-hugging hippies?

Remember: An accusation doesn't have to be true, it just has to have some believability.  That's politics.On Wired: Two top Obama science advisors are tied to Monsanto and Amgen posted 1 year, 2 months ago 8 Responses

Thank you for your answer, Gar.

On A purely local approach would double or triple costs posted 1 year, 2 months ago 23 Responses

As an aside...

What does it take to connect a low-voltage DC source to a high-voltage DC transmission line?  I'm kinda curious as to how you distribute the power output of a solar array that's putting out sub-1kV power?On A purely local approach would double or triple costs posted 1 year, 2 months ago 23 Responses

I second Russ's comment.

I, too, don't really understand what you're saying here Michael.

Here in Michigan (from http://www.dsireusa.org):

Any customer net excess generation (NEG) is carried over to the customer's next bill on a monthly basis, at rates which vary by utility. A 2007 PSC Staff Report summarizes the different billing methods currently used by state utilities. Any NEG remaining at the end of a 12-month billing cycle is awarded to the utility, and the value of these credits will be used to offset program costs. Customer-generators retain ownership of all renewable-energy credits (RECs) associated with the generation of electricity.

So in regards to the "loss of revenue" in Michigan, is it the customer-generator who is losing revenue?

Furthermore, is the

(hidden) subsidy for net metering com[ing] from other power users who compensate the power utility for lost profits from the sale of electricity to those self-generating customers

So, does that mean...

...that John McCain considers only those who are politicians to be Americans?On Giuliani parses McCain on 'Meet the Press' posted 1 year, 2 months ago 3 Responses

Energy knowledge?

McCain's claim that "She knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America" makes me wonder just how much HE knows about energy.On She knows 'more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America' posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

Glares ( >:-[ )

j/k
:-POn We need some qualified public leaders posted 1 year, 2 months ago 4 Responses