The neighboring chart that tracks renewables since 1950 is also interesting. Growth in renewables really started around 2007 with growth in wind being the primary contributor. Growth in solar has made a smaller but significant contribution in the past decade or so.
I wonder, does nat gas release less CO2 per MWh or sth? Because coal is mostly carbon, which can only get burnt to CO2, but eg methane is one carbon, four hydrogens per molecule. Still mostly carbon by weight I guess...
Just an anecdote, but I once reported (by phone to the local gas company) a smelly local gas pipeline/junction that I noticed after cycling by on the road the next to it, so the leak could not have been all that small. I then reported it some weeks later because the smell was still just as strong (but still "faint" at the distance to the road).
Apparently no one cares about the little leaks everywhere (or they cannot be fixed cheaply). Later on I noticed that other gas pipeline junctions -- the type that are scattered around subdivisions -- often smelled faintly of gas. I wonder if these small leaks can be avoided with better engineering or if perfectly sealed pipe fittings in the outdoors are impractical.
According to 2019 EIA figures (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48296), Natural gas plants in the US release about 43% the CO2 per unit energy of US coal plants. This is both because of higher energy per unit CO2 (would be about 56% per MJ or Btu or whatever) and better conversion efficiency. The highest thermal efficiency possible from a modern CCGT plant running at its ideal output is something like 60%, as there is a second steam cycle capturing the heat from the exhaust of the first turbine for more electricity. The numbers given for the efficiency of the fleet of gas plants in that article translate to about 44%, and 32% for coal.
Yes, apparently natural gas emits almost 50% less CO2 than coal.
It is also cleaner. Emissions are pretty much pure CO2 whereas coal also emits other compounds, e.g. sulfur, and particulates. This even includes a level of radioactive elements. So it is very polluting.
It does. The gas often comes together with crude oil, which is getting burnt elsewhere anyways, so gas is not a saviour. It's more of a "subsidy" of oil.
> 2. We reached a consumption plateau also in 2007. Electricity use has been more or less level since.
What’s even wilder about this is the population of earth just hit an estimated 8 billion total. The US population isn’t 100% indicative of the whole planet, but one of the largest superpowers balancing out despite further planetary growth is a great sign.
“The US population isn’t 100% indicative of the whole planet” is an excellent point to keep in mind. The US economy has trended towards exporting services and importing goods, and the electricity used to produce imported goods does not contribute to domestic usage.
Crypto mining in the US consumes 1-1.5% of electricity [1]. This is very small to show on graphs like these ones.
If there is a downward trend on electricity consumption it probably just dampens it slightly.
Now, with EVs on the other hand, consumption will probably pick up a lot.
Because it's totally unsubstantiated, there is no law in the universe that says we can't have a much, much more sustainable and environmentally friendly economy and have consumption too. Obviously what people consume, the frequency etc will have to some what change, but there is no reason through innovation, incentives, education that we can't do it.
I think the idea that this is "impossible" and the only way to get there is to go back to the stone ages is actually the reason why we're not there yet.
Rather than spend time just improving things, we like to have a bitch about it.
> there is no law in the universe that says we can't have a much, much more sustainable and environmentally friendly economy and have consumption too.
Unfortunately there is. See [1] and [2] for an introduction to the topic and [3] for the concept of ecological overshoot. It’s simply not possible to have infinite growth in a finite world.
Humanity have first exceeded the annual carrying capacity of Earth in 1971, first year when Earth Overshoot Day happened.
Infinite growth is a sily idea and I doubt the majority of people really think this is a worthwhile / desirable thing to shoot for anyway goal anyway.
I don't see why we can't have tech, sustainable travel (more rail, even intercontinental high speed trains), renewable energy industries and innovation, and more driving a sustainable economy?
You're right, "We can't have infinite growth" meaning "We can't grow more sustainably/We should stop growth in order sustainable existence of human population" would make much more sense 50 years ago. We're far past sustainable thresholds at this point.
> I don't see why we can't have tech ...
The article I linked ("Overshoot: Why It's Already Too Late To Save Civilization") explains why we can't, there simply isn't enough resources on planet Earth now. If the humanity were to follow the platonic utopian ideal of strictly sustainable development of technology over past centuries, sure, why not? We could mine the asteroids and whatnot. There was enough resources and a sufficiently intact biosphere, atmosphere etc. to allow it. But the Earth-system at this point is simply fucked up beyond repair. Reread this last sentence. For a person who sees his purpose in this world and has hopes to achieve something in this world (read: most people in the West), this is the most depressing and hopeless thing he can ever think of, even more depressing than "I am mentally/physically fucked up beyond repair."
I am a Muslim, so everything I do is ultimately oriented for my afterlife, and all deeds (and sins) of mine are recorded and will be carried with me to the day of Judgement, where I will face God's absolute justice and hopefully mercy for all what I did. This world is no longer than a blink of an eye relative to my eternal life. Thus I am not depressed by the situation the world is in. What matters is what I do here in my time. YMMV based on your faith/beliefs/lack of them.
The article is a long but enlightening read, I even translated it to my native lang and published it even though I am no writer or translator.
The article I linked ("Overshoot: Why It's Already Too Late To Save Civilization") explains why we can't, there simply isn't enough resources on planet Earth now.
Tomorrow won't be the same as today, look at the advances in AI, which will likely benefit many aspects of science. More will be done with less.
so everything I do is ultimately oriented for my afterlife, and all deeds (and sins) of mine are recorded and will be carried with me to the day of Judgement
In my opinion this is why you hold such a bleak outlook on everything. Try changing that and it might feel a bit better.
Thus I am not depressed by the situation the world is in
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure you're being honest with yourself.
I don’t doubt this. But the technological advancements required to sustain the current population are either not even in the horizon, or are outright physically impossible. AGI leading hopefully rapidly to ASI can probably solve a lot of things with advanced materials science, but aside from that possibility the future does look pretty bleak. Please read the article yourself and you’ll understand, there’s just too many crises cornering humanity, each of them currently with seemingly no way to solve.
> I'm not sure you're being honest with yourself.
I’m sorry, no. The only reason I mentioned the relation with depression is because I know from experience (friends, sample size < 10) an awful lot ratio of Western people tend to get serious depression at least temporarily after seeing the current true situation of the world.
1. We reached peak coal in 2007. Coal generation has declined since.
2. We reached a consumption plateau also in 2007. Electricity use has been more or less level since.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-...
The neighboring chart that tracks renewables since 1950 is also interesting. Growth in renewables really started around 2007 with growth in wind being the primary contributor. Growth in solar has made a smaller but significant contribution in the past decade or so.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-...