dagblog - Comments for "The Unbelievable Adventures"

But the supply of natural gas

Donal — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 18:48:45 +0000

In reply to It's not coal (in yellow.)

But the supply of natural gas has been propped up with hydraulic fracturing. What happens when those play out?

Then I read that electrical

Peter Schwartz — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 22:20:58 +0000

Then I read that electrical plants weren't throwing away quite that much power because some plants could be shut down quickly. But conversion losses from coal to heat to electricity dwarfed anything that a few EVs would use. And the EV-1s were being crushed.

Okay, so I see you wrote this, but I'm not sure what it means.

Just speaking for non-technical me, it would be helpful if you were more explanatory with your acronyms and some of your technical explanations. Pretend your reader is a dunce. You can picture me, if you like.

Um, perhaps I'm

Peter Schwartz — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 22:13:19 +0000

In reply to Is Only You Can Prevent

Um, perhaps I'm misunderstanding your point, then.

Or maybe you're misunderstanding mine.

Seems to me you're laying out two issues: 1) one to do with the dirtiness of power generation; 2) and another to do with how environmentally friendly EVs and hybrids are. The cleaner the power generation, the more environmentally effective the EV.

If I'm right about this, this seems fine to me and it's useful information.

But it's also a bit beside the point (I think) because I don't know anyone who buys a hybrid who also thinks that, Munchausen-like, he can clean up the environment simply by driving a hybrid. This SEEMS to be your primary beef.

Rather, most environmentalists I know are trying to do BOTH at the same time. This is what EYE mean by straw man in this case. I don't think it's like your Smokey the Bear example where you're reminding the guy to do what he knows he should be doing. Here, you're sort of encouraging him not to buy a Prius because he may have a dirty power generator.

In terms of effecting social change, I'm not sure it makes sense to delay hybrids until we have cleaner power plants. You want people involved and thinking and acting in a certain way as soon as possible. You don't want them thinking, "What's the use in buying a Prius, I'll just be creating more pollution by putting an extra load on our dirty power generator."

Especially as I'm not sure it's that easy for the individual to calculate the tipping point for his circumstances. IOW, maybe Vepco is too dirty; maybe not. How does he know? What does he do in the meantime?

And what if he installs solar panels to provide most of the power for recharging his car? You may have addressed this already, but if he powers during the night and uses energy that's going to be produced ANYWAY (and pollution that's going to be produced anyway), isn't he doing some good?

(I think you may have addressed this, but it's hard to go back from this screen and check...)

For capacity details

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 05:00:22 +0000

In reply to The Unbelievable Adventures

For capacity details see:

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=AEO2011&subject=0-AEO2...

For energy details see:

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/pdf/table2.1.a.pdf

It's not coal (in yellow.)

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:58:36 +0000

In reply to The Unbelievable Adventures

It's not coal (in yellow.) Far far far more natural gas has been added than coal, every year for 20 years.

And also, far more renewables than coal added, every year for a decade.

So, the net additions have a carbon intensity of 200-400.

Looks like PHEV's win on lifecycle GHG's, less than 1/2 that of conventional cars.

Who knew? Great news, eh?

Is Only You Can Prevent

Donal — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 23:01:00 +0000

In reply to With dirty power, the low

Is Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires a straw man argument against camping, since most campers are for fire safety?

Look at it this way: If you were deciding to heat your house, wouldn't you want to know the facts about the available fuels? Which cost more, which seemed to be available for the long term, which caused more CO2 pollution, particulate pollution, etc?

With dirty power, the low

Peter Schwartz — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:33:25 +0000

In reply to The Unbelievable Adventures

With dirty power, the low tailpipe emissions of PHEVs, and presumably EVs, become much less compelling.

Although Munchausen could defy gravity by the exercise of will, we can't lift ourselves out of a high CO2 future simply by driving low emission vehicles. Which future we get to depends on what powerplants we build, and how we build them:

But isn't this a bit of a strawman in the sense that environmentalists who advocate for these cars ALSO advocate for greener power generation? Who says that we'll clean up the environment JUST by driving greener vehicles?

I confess to not being technologically literate, but it seems like a lot turns on exact measurements. I don't know whether your chart or quotes supply these, but EYE, a lay reader, couldn't figure them out.

I'm left with (I think): The cleaner the power plant, the more EVs and PHEVs make environmental sense. But that could be a pessimistic assessment or a hopeful one, depending on where we are on that continuum and how easy it will be to improve given the current state of technology and political will.

In an anti-environmentalist's hands, this becomes an argument for doing less. It's cheaper to produce dirty energy and the dirtier the less sense enviro cars make. And since many of these cars are more expensive, it becomes a win-win-win for everyone to stick with the status quo.