113
All-electric homes are cheaper to build than fossil fuel residences
(commonwealthmagazine.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
113 points (97.5% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5244 readers
183 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sky is blue. Water feels wet. News at 11.
Electric has been cheap to install all my adult life. It may be cheap to install, but it has traditionally been more expensive for any appliances requiring heating. For energy intensive operations like heating water and air, much more expensive.
Use a reverse cycle heat pump they are very efficient to heat and cool your building. Heat pump to heat your hot water tank is also very efficient.
That's the future for sure, although still not quite viable if it gets decently cold and gas is still cheaper.
we need to be electrifying buildings today while we continue to develop and decarbonize the electric grid. also on all but the coldest days a heatpump powered by a natural gas power plant is more fuel efficient than burning the gas locally. technology connections did a few vids on the subject:
https://youtu.be/7J52mDjZzto
https://youtu.be/43XKfuptnik
https://youtu.be/MFEHFsO-XSI
I agree with you that electric is the future and maintaining two separate utility infrastructures to every building that can do the same thing is sorta silly.
Technology Connections is always fun, but it seems you might have glossed over where he discusses the drawbacks that mean a heat pump isn't a one-size-fits-all solution. It's just much better than most people realize and the technology gets better each year.
Where I live it gets too cold for a heat pump to work very well for weeks at a time in the winter so supplemental electric heat is a must if fully switching off the gas (and that poor heat pump will be having to defrost the coils a lot). The issue with that is natural gas is still a good bit cheaper than electricity (we use gas for water heating, and sometimes dryers too because of this). It is viable for a good chunk of people in many other areas though so moving in that direction is still worthwhile where is does work.
I'm not sure what you mean about burning the gas locally being less efficient though? Home furnaces are commonly around 95% efficient these days. Is a natural gas power generation plant (with transmission losses on top) operating at a level even close to that?
Natural gas (not bottled propane) is generally still much cheaper per net BTU in most of the US for heating. I had to make a choice back in ~2005 when I switched from oil heat. At the time - with NG near it's historical highs and my local electricity just 10c/hWh - they were on par, with electric having a theoretical advantage in ideal conditions and near parity in our coldest 2 months of the year. Of course since then electric has gone up 50% and NG has dropped by a factor of 3. To stich now would be prohibitively expensive, though, as the cost to extend the NG line has tripled (to around $15k or more). I'll never make that back in energy savings.