“with wind the single-biggest contributor… Power production costs have declined “by almost half” … And the clean energy sector has created 50,000 new jobs… Ask me what was the impact on the electricity sector in Uruguay after this tragic war in Europe — zero.”

  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Looks like that’s just the grid? I’m sure there’s more to go for transportation and eliminating the need for generators and gas, but this is a great start!

    • kameecoding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      does anyone ever assume that it’s anything other than the grid when it comes to some article like this?

      • Lancoian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        electricity is’t the majority of the energy consumed in nearly any country.

        it’s a easy way to keep confusing less vigilant people by calling electricity as energy.

        Just call things the way they are.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re right; 2/3 of worldwide energy is actually waste heat.

          image

          https://www.businessinsider.com/most-energy-still-comes-from-oil-2015-10

          Here’s the chart from 2007: Waste heat / losses are in the top right, although it doesn’t show the transport sector losses which are higher than for coal generation.

          image

          What this means is that when we fully electrify all sectors, by using renewable energy such as wind and solar, our total energy generation capacity will only need to be about 1/3 to 1/4 of what we currently produce today to fulfill our current energy needs. That’s huge.

            • thesorehead@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The reference to waste heat could include the heat from burning fossil fuels that isn’t turned directly into work. Which is a lot.

              So you’re right, there will still be some waste heat and the reduction in production needs won’t be that drastic. But it’s still a significant chunk of the total!

              • cucumber_sandwich@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes of course, but a lot of energy is currently also used for heating things in cooking steel, chemical industry, concrete, etc. Those processes need energy as heat and directly produce waste heat. I agree it’s probably still significant. It’s just wrong to reduce energy consumption to “making things move”.

              • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Converting energy to power will always produce at least one of heat or light (also radiant heat) in the process.

                There is no 100% efficient power.

                But, electric is the closest you could get. Especially compared to any petroleum products

            • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Changing your energy generation from burning something to turning a turbine with wind power, hydropower or geothermal power. Or just using solar, means that you have no waste heat for electrical generation.

              Waste heat is only created when you burn a fuel to boil the water.

              • cucumber_sandwich@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                If you heat things electrically you still generate waste heat. Think electrical stove and its bigger industrial counterparts.

            • Virulent@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No but electric motors and heat pumps are much more efficient so electfication helps reduce waste heat

          • Lancoian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            that’s not quite right and mixes couple things

            you have production losses and transmission losses. then you have waste heat used for household and industrial heating.

            now you would also have to produce that portion electrically.

            For instance in winter heating requirements of a typical house are 2x that of the electricity used.

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean I doubt any reasonable person would think that literally every household in Uruguay has replaced their gas stove with an electric/induction stove and that they use only AC/heat pumps and everyone has switched to an electric car and every bus has been converted to a trolley and or Battery/Hydrogen Electric

          and a bunch of other stuff.