ο»ΏOne of the problems I think there is with climate change, is it’s discussion has become fraught with self-evident truth. The assumption is that if you believe in the science of climate change, that itβs self-evident that you must believe in radical action to address it. You canβt be numb to human suffering after all, can you? Maybe so.
I am a believer in science, but at the same time, Iβm a practical person. Infrastructure take decades to evolve, and while we should do more to reduce the carbon intensity of our society, and ultimately work towards the goal of reducing emissions, I donβt think the necessary reductions to fully limit the worse impacts of climate change is even realistic. Instead of planning to do what we can do to limit the worse impacts of climate change, we should look more broadly at what we can do to reduce the harm more broadly both by reductions in emissions and adapting our infrastructure.
Many of the impacts of climate change are well studied. When we are upgrading or repairing damaged infrastructure we most certainly should look at the science and work to minimize future harm. We obviously should not be building new large coal plants, and building new renewable generation were ecologically appropriate. We should continue to improve the efficiency on new automobiles and appliances, and work to expand the electric automobile and transit fleet where practical.
Society needs a measured approach β not ignorance but also realistic goals and plans that can be adopted as we upgrade and continue to modernize our infrastructure.
The average yearly high temperature is the average of daily high temperature throughout the year in New York State. A cold weather climate state, the average high temperature is between 35 and 55 degrees depending on what part of the state you are in. It is on average 20 degrees warmer in New York City then in the High Peaks of the Adiroondacks. This interactive map can be zoomed in see the average temperature where you live in the state.
Data Source: This coverage contains data representing areas (polygons) of Average Temperature for the period 1971-2000. The data has been converted from grids to polygons. Purpose: Display and/or analyses requiring spatially distributed Average Temperature for the climatological period 1971-2000. From the The PRISM Group at Oregon State University. https://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/GDGOrder.aspx?order=QuickState
10,551 BTU or 3.1 kW of coal or 7,732 BTU or 2.3 kW of natural gas to produce 1 kilowatt of electricity, which is equal to 3,412 BTU.
With fossil generation, it takes quite a bit more kWh of the fossil fuel burned to turn into usable electricity. It took roughly 4.65 kWh worth of coal to make the 1.5 kWh of electricity, as it fossil fuels have significant losses due to the inefficiency in converting coal or oil into electricity.
How much does your 120 volt plug-in electric heater in your house use when it’s on? It doesn’t really matter whether it’s a $12 Walmart heater fan, or a $300 radiant heater in a fancy wood cabinet. All are same energy efficiency – when you apply resistance to electricity, 100% becomes heat, including the heat produced by the fan coils or indicator lights.
All 120-volt heaters are 1.5 kW or 5,118 BTU, because 120-volt wall outlets can only supply 12.5 amp constantly. In theory, you could make a space heater smaller then 1,500 watts but nobody does because electric coils are cheap to manufacture, and when you are warm, the thermostat just shuts off.
So every hour a heater heater is operating, it’s 1.5 kWh.
This map is based on a very popular Washington Post map of a few years back. Basically for all 84,000 or so US Census Tracts, it compares the method most common for heating.
As New Yorkers, we might think it's odd that electric heating is the most popular way to heat houses in great parts of country, and it's not just in warm climate south -- electricity is popular where electricity is cheap, like in the Northwest and much of Appalachia.
Oil is odd fuel, not widely used outside of the rural areas in the Northeast and Alaska. Propane dominates the rural Midwest, where it is cheap due to farms using to dry corn.
Heating with fuel oil, which is essentially dyed diesel, seems like an odd choice. Oil is expensive, but also is electricity in the Northeast.
In the 1940s through the 1970s, there was a big push to retire both coal power plants and coal heating for reasons of pollution and convenience, and oil seemed like a good drop in replacement, when oil was cheap. But the northeast relying on oil so heavily for power generation, caused electricity to spike in 1970s, which ironically caused some people to swap out electricity for fuel oil. Natural gas supply has traditionally been constrained in New England, which is another reason why the Northeast likes oil so much.
I find it oddly fascinating that in the split phase electricity system used in the United States, the only power that flows on the neutral wire back to the center tap of the pole transformer is the difference in amperage between the phases.
So if you have …
20 amp draw on the Phase A
30 amp draw on Phase B
You’ll have 10 amp flowing on the neutral, which is also referenced to the ground
If you disconnect the neutral from the center tap of the transformer, the 20 amp load will work okay but the 30 amp circuit will see its voltage cut by 1/3rd.
