Comments on: US Electricity Consumption http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/ Mike Harding's Blog Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:21:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Joe me http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-38391 Joe me Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:37:54 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-38391 uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........ uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh……..

]]> By: Bart http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-36985 Bart Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:19:20 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-36985 Scratch that. My bad. Scratch that. My bad.

]]> By: Bart http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-36984 Bart Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:17:16 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-36984 I think you meant terawatt-hours, not petawatt-hours. I think you meant terawatt-hours, not petawatt-hours.

]]> By: Chapter 3: Windpower for Dummies « kavips http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-34199 Chapter 3: Windpower for Dummies « kavips Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:45:40 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-34199 [...] and trivial buffs the next levels upward are giga, tera, peta, exa.) For principals of scale, the entire US power supply is around 4 petawatts, up from 2.7 PW in [...] [...] and trivial buffs the next levels upward are giga, tera, peta, exa.) For principals of scale, the entire US power supply is around 4 petawatts, up from 2.7 PW in [...]

]]> By: mike http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-34136 mike Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:07:11 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-34136 Hi Pete, No, I don't know of a source. However, I have seen estimates that the "vampire load" which includes instant-on devices accounts for 5-10% of demand. In my own home, it was 9.8% before addressing the issue, now doing everything I can think of to minimize it, it's a little over 3%. Good luck! Hi Pete,

No, I don’t know of a source. However, I have seen estimates that the “vampire load” which includes instant-on devices accounts for 5-10% of demand. In my own home, it was 9.8% before addressing the issue, now doing everything I can think of to minimize it, it’s a little over 3%.

Good luck!

]]> By: Pete Martineau http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-34135 Pete Martineau Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:03:25 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-34135 Where can I find out how much national US power is used by all "instant on" devices? It seems like Western Europe doesn't use "instant on". Where can I find out how much national US power is used by all “instant on” devices? It seems like Western Europe doesn’t use “instant on”.

]]> By: Mike Harding’s Blog » Blog Archive » What is the environmental cost of a MWh? http://montaraventures.com/blog/2006/10/06/us-electricity-consumption/comment-page-1/#comment-240 Mike Harding’s Blog » Blog Archive » What is the environmental cost of a MWh? Thu, 12 Oct 2006 21:09:23 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=156#comment-240 [...] In previous entries we’ve discussed how much electricity the US is producing and consuming, what the sources of generation are, and how much it costs from a monetary perspective. But there are other costs. This entry will focus on the largest fuel source for electricity generation, coal. This is an ancient source that is well understood and drives a massive supply chain from real estate with mineral rights clear through mining and transportation and finally ending up in places like electricity generation. Without a doubt the technology for oxidizing (burning) coal to create heat which in turn is transferred to liquids which through phase change from liquid to gas pressurize and then drive turbines attached to generators, has improved dramatically. Back during the early days of the industrial revolution cities like Pittsburgh were covered in smog and soot. The state of the art today is that approximately 1,000 kg (~2,200 lbs) of carbon dioxide and approximately 13kg of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are emitted into the atmosphere for each MWh of power generated by burning coal. As is well known, carbon dioxide is a major contributor to global warming and the sulfur and nitrogen oxides are key ingredients to acid rain. This level of emissions is a vast improvement from the late 19th century, but still constitutes a problem. With 5% of the population of the earth, the US is responsible for 23% of carbon dioxide emissions on the planet (not just electricity generation, transportation has alot to do with that number as well.) (Source: US Environmental Protection Agency.) One of the key challenges in limiting emissions is the increasing demand for electricity. Right now, the demand is outstripping the new cleaner generation technology’s installation rate which means that older, less efficient, more polluting coal generation plants are staying in production longer than is desirable. Each time a new technology (be it natural gas or photovoltaics) is deployed, it either meets new demand or displaces older, less cost effective generation technologies. Given the increasing cost of fossil fuels, there is an opportunity to focus our attention more completely on the installation of renewable electric generation at a scale that makes the economics attractive in addition to exceeding the growth in electricity demand. That could have the effect of displacing less effective generation technologies and as a side effect, limit harmful emissions. Ohio State’s 2006 record: 6-0 Next up: @Michigan State 10/14 Tune: Use me by Bill Withers Technorati Tags: Energy | Pollution | Emissions | Mike Harding Blog [...] [...] In previous entries we’ve discussed how much electricity the US is producing and consuming, what the sources of generation are, and how much it costs from a monetary perspective. But there are other costs. This entry will focus on the largest fuel source for electricity generation, coal. This is an ancient source that is well understood and drives a massive supply chain from real estate with mineral rights clear through mining and transportation and finally ending up in places like electricity generation. Without a doubt the technology for oxidizing (burning) coal to create heat which in turn is transferred to liquids which through phase change from liquid to gas pressurize and then drive turbines attached to generators, has improved dramatically. Back during the early days of the industrial revolution cities like Pittsburgh were covered in smog and soot. The state of the art today is that approximately 1,000 kg (~2,200 lbs) of carbon dioxide and approximately 13kg of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are emitted into the atmosphere for each MWh of power generated by burning coal. As is well known, carbon dioxide is a major contributor to global warming and the sulfur and nitrogen oxides are key ingredients to acid rain. This level of emissions is a vast improvement from the late 19th century, but still constitutes a problem. With 5% of the population of the earth, the US is responsible for 23% of carbon dioxide emissions on the planet (not just electricity generation, transportation has alot to do with that number as well.) (Source: US Environmental Protection Agency.) One of the key challenges in limiting emissions is the increasing demand for electricity. Right now, the demand is outstripping the new cleaner generation technology’s installation rate which means that older, less efficient, more polluting coal generation plants are staying in production longer than is desirable. Each time a new technology (be it natural gas or photovoltaics) is deployed, it either meets new demand or displaces older, less cost effective generation technologies. Given the increasing cost of fossil fuels, there is an opportunity to focus our attention more completely on the installation of renewable electric generation at a scale that makes the economics attractive in addition to exceeding the growth in electricity demand. That could have the effect of displacing less effective generation technologies and as a side effect, limit harmful emissions. Ohio State’s 2006 record: 6-0 Next up: @Michigan State 10/14 Tune: Use me by Bill Withers Technorati Tags: Energy | Pollution | Emissions | Mike Harding Blog [...]

]]>