You do realize you are much like the Jehovah Witness...you claim to have the truth but can no way "prove" it....we can duel sources all day long but at the end of said day your position requires as much "faith" as theirs
Energy-2007
Usage/Misusage/Global Warming/Ice/Solutions
And you really don’t want to know. You could stop reading now. Did you know that the engines in most automobiles are just 25% efficient? Did you know that all of the heat in your home leaks into the atmosphere and inevitably heats that atmosphere? Diesels and turbines are 30% efficient. Why would we want to know about this? If I said we only actually use about 10-15% of all the energy of the petroleum and natural gas we distribute and we waste the remainder as lost heat to the atmosphere, would that surprise you? You could counter with, “This writer is a card carrying moron.” A statement alluding to such extreme waste would be an indictment of the status quo of energy distribution and use. That is the point. The giant energy companies know this and work hard to make sure you do not. Per usual, it is about the money. Enough surprises, let’s suck it up and look at the facts.
First step in energy distribution is finding the energy at its source. This uses lots of energy. Next we must develop the energy at its source. This uses lots of energy. Next we must transport the energy from its source to its user or in the case of oil to its refiner. If it is Natural Gas and used for heating, then all of the energy (BTUs) content of the natural gas, except the amount used for transportation, is lost as heat to the atmosphere. The energy used for transportation may be considered lost as well. Natural Gas destined for a gas turbine generator operating at 30% efficiency only loses 70% of the energy content (BTUs) to the atmosphere. In some instances a co-generation facility makes hot water for heating from the waste heat and that still escapes to heat the atmosphere. In the generation of electricity 5 KWH must be produced to deliver 4KWH to the end user incurring another loss. If you generate this electricity with a gas turbine, 70% of the energy content of the natural gas went out the exhaust as waste heat. That leaves 30% for KWH generated and 4 units out of 5 used (80% * 30%) leaving 24% of the potential energy actually used. We have allowed nothing for discovery, development, and transportation of the natural gas to the generation facility. More losses. These figures indicate that something much more than 30% of the energy content (BTUs) of all Natural Gas is not useful power but waste heat to the atmosphere. If 90% of the world’s Natural Gas is used for heating purposes, then only 10% produces useful power and the rest heats the atmosphere of the planet. That would be wasted energy and could conceivably cause other problems. Two readily apparent problems would be Global Warming and picking the pocket of the local end users, because the resource is not usually of local origination. Very profitable for the energy distribution network that could also be the status quo of big money and I am sure they like this system.
How about Oil? Similar story. Use energy to find a source. Use energy to develop a source. Use energy to transport (tankers, pipelines, trucks, etc.) the oil. First, transport it to a refinery and use energy to refine it, and then use more energy to transport the refined product to its end users (cars, trains, planes, turbines, heating units, etc.), and these end users will operate at 25-30% efficiency and waste the remaining energy content to the atmosphere as waste heat. We have a 70-75% heat loss before we add the energy lost in transporting twice, refining once, and pumping losses. Optimistically, we might use 15% of the Oil as shaft horsepower. That leaves 85% as lost heat to the atmosphere. The positive side to this is that 60 times more heat is lost to the atmosphere by natural gas than by Oil. Could all this waste heat be symptomatic of something? If I left the heat on in my home it would get too hot. If I leave the heat on in my planet’s atmosphere, will the planet get too hot? This is too simple! Why would anyone object to the dissemination of this kind of information? Would the status quo of energy distribution suffer financially if energy efficiency were a pre-eminent objective of the locals that are the purchasers and organized misusers of this energy? Why would humans in their right mind want such a flawed system to continue? Could it be about money? Would a National Energy Program that concentrated on end-user efficiency be logical?
A National program could create energy conservation/efficiency jobs at the local end-user level in all areas of the country (shades of Jimmy Carter). The dependence on foreign supplies of energy would be minimized and a comprehensive approach to Global Warming mitigation initiated. It is win-win for the people, but the status quo of big energy and the big energy distribution network will fight this tooth and nail and with a big dollar lobbying political move (buy some politicians) and a big dollar big media attack (buy conglomerate media outlets) attempting to ridicule the program. Keep in mind that “Money talks and bs walks.” Return to sentence 7, “If I said we only actually use about 10-15% of all the energy of the petroleum and natural gas we distribute and we waste the remainder as lost heat to the atmosphere, would that surprise you?” It is a fact and clearly indicates the future of energy use. Mine the wasted energy for reclaimed energy, because over 85% of the world’s energy is going out some exhaust stack or poorly insulated structure. Let’s talk about Global Warming.
The calculations and conclusions that follow are an attempt to correlate the effect of exhaust heat and/or waste heat resulting from the combustion of Petroleum products and Natural Gas. Examples are exhaust on cars, trains, planes, ships, turbines, furnaces, heating systems, etc. and reflect the general overall inefficiency of combustion devices. The total annual waste heat is calculated as a percentage compared to annual Solar Insolation upon the Earth’s surface and that percentage is concluded to affect the average of the Earth’s surface temperature linearly in the same proportion.
The consumption figures for Natural Gas are for 2004 and the Petroleum for 2005. They are actual worldwide data and one needs only to follow the links to verify their accuracy. Natural Gas contributes more than 60 times the waste heat that Petroleum produces, and in combination their total BTUs contribute slightly more than 2/10ths of one percent compared to annual solar insolation (measured at an absorption rate of 70%) that maintains the Earth’s average surface temperature at 14 C or 57.2 F. The assumption is made that if a finite amount of energy maintains a status quo temperature, then any additional percentage of energy input would increase the status quo temperature by that same percentage. The waste heat is the additional percentage of energy input. The calculated percentage of waste heat input is .224156%. In degrees Fahrenheit the waste heat contribution is .128 degrees in one year, or 1.28 degrees every ten years. Carbon Dioxide is not relative to this study. Most important numbers are labeled as KEY DATA in the body.
Although the combustion of Petroleum may create gases that likely increase the Greenhouse Effect, the heat component contributed by combustion of Natural Gas is the more serious problem. The melting of Polar ice may be producing a non-linearity because of the change of state (solid to liquid) which requires 8 times the energy input to achieve what normally occurs with a one degree change. After all the ice melts, the air temperature will rise more rapidly.
Petroleum Data-http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tablec3.xls
Crude Oil-Average BTU per barrel worldwide = 6,000,000 btu/barrel
2005 Crude Oil consumption = 30 giga barrels = 30,000,000,000 barrel/year
BTUs from oil consumption = 6,000,000 * 30,000,000,000=180,000,000,000,000,000
Or 6*10^6 * 30*10^9 = 180*10^15BTUs
25% of BTUs to shaft horsepower, 75% lost as waste heat to atmosphere
180*10^15 * .75 (75% lost) = 135*10^15 BTUs lost as waste heat to atmosphere
KEY DATA
Natural Gas Data-http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/natgasconsumption.html
Natural Gas-Average BTU per cubic foot = 1150 BTU/cubic foot
2004 Natural Gas consumption worldwide = 99.7 Tcf (trillion cubic feet)
BTUs from gas consumption = 99,700,000,000,000 * 1150 = 114,655,000,000,000,000
Or 99.7*10^12 * 1.15*10^3 = 11465.5*10^15BTUs
30% of BTUs to shaft horsepower, 70% lost as waste heat to atmosphere
11465.5*10^15 * .70 (70% lost) = 8025.85*10^15 BTUs lost as waste heat to atmosphere-KEY DATA
BTU calculations = Waste Heat from Oil and Natural gas consumption
Total BTUs lost to atmosphere = 135*10^15 + 8025.85*10^15=8160.85*10^15
Or 8.16085*10^18 BTUs lost to atmosphere annually-KEY DATA
Solar Insolation Data-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_energy_budget
solar radiation (99.978%, or nearly 174 petawatts; or about 340 W m-2)
174 petawatts conversion--174 * 10^15 watts = 593.72106 * 10^15 BTUs/hour
593.72106*10^15 * 24 * 365 = Annual Btus from Sun = 5200996.4856 * 10^15
Or 5.2009964856*10^21 BTUs Annual from the Sun. Only 70% absorbed, see below
5.2009964856 * 10^21 * .7 (70%) = 3.64069753992 * 10^21 BTUs Absorbed annually from the Sun-KEY DATA
The total power (BTUs) from waste Petro/Natural Gas heat divided by the total power (BTUs) absorbed annually from the sun would equal the percentage contribution of waste heat to total annual heat from the Sun. That calculation follows.-KEY DATA
8.16085*10^18 BTUs /3.64069753992 * 10^21 BTUs = 2.24156 * 10^-3 = .00224156
or .00224156 Petro/Natural Gas waste heat percentage contribution to annual BTUs. As a portion of the contribution to annual temperature, one would multiply the average annual temperature (14 C or 57.2 F @ 2.5% water vapor) times the waste heat percentage and conclude that product to be the amount of temperature rise (F) due to the waste heat only. The calculations follow.
57.2 * .00224156 = .128217358 degrees F increase per year.-KEY DATA 1.28 degrees F each 10 years (.128 * 10) CONCLUSION-Waste heat from combustion of Petroleum and Natural Gas can potentially contribute 1.28 degrees to Global Warming every ten years at present consumption/combustion rates. The non-linearity of heat absorption of ice/water needs to be addressed and clarified. The predictable temperature increases to be caused by Global Warming will not follow a linear pattern. Whether the increases are caused by carbon dioxide, heat, or natural cycles, their impact is mitigated by the change of state energy absorption of ice in the present and water in the future. Ice absorbs energy and increases in temperature linearly until it reaches 32 degrees and is still a solid. It requires 8 times the energy that was required to make a one (1) degree increase in temperature to change the state of the ice to a liquid without an increase in temperature. After the change of state the temperature will again increase predictably with a specific amount of energy until 212 degrees is reached and another change of state from liquid to gas occurs with the same non-linearity.